You may think it is a cheap shot, riding on the coattails of a bestselling book and movie . . . but how could I resist? And I am certainly not the first! Anyhow, we will cover 25 shades today and the other 25 in Part 2, next week.
I have been collecting comments on your pet peeves, unusual things you hear, etc.; the Fifty Shades of Grammar posts will be an entertaining (I hope) hodgepodge of some of those comments you have provided to me. So let’s get going, shall we?
Shade 1. One peeve I received was “people who have grammar peeves, and prescriptivists.” We prescriptivists are those grammar conservatives who believe there are rules to be followed (control freaks), as opposed to the descriptivists, who believe language is formed and changes according to how people talk; there are standard conventions, maybe, but not rules.
Shade 2. Some people are bothered by those who say “a myriad of” instead of just “myriad.” There are probably myriad reasons why.
Shade 3. This one is mine, although I have heard others mention it. It is so weird. You have heard it a zillion times, and you have probably used it: a whole nother. Since when is nother a word? I think it means “another whole” or “a whole other.” But that’s a whole nother story.
Shade 4. I always thought the saying was “all of the sudden.” Then, I edited some things that said “all of a sudden.” Which one is it? Most people say it is “all of a sudden.” I stand corrected. How about just suddenly?
Shade 5. Do you know how to spell out BBQ? I don’t think I did, and it was someone’s pet peeve. Barbecue. There is no q at all.
Shade 6. People using anxious when they really mean eager was a peeve. Anxious involves some fear or discomfort. Eager is ready to go!
Shade 7. Confusing chastity with celibacy was mentioned. Apparently priests have a vow of chastity, not celibacy.
Shade 8. There is a word converse. There is a word conversation. There is no word in between: conversate.
Shade 9: Women have been noted to do this more than men do. Maybe not so much anymore. Women tend to end their statements as if they were questions?
Shade 10: Here is a rather unusual way of saying something. Here again, let me make it clear that we are not making fun of anyone, and that many of these pronunciations and ways to say things are regional, cultural, or whatever you would like to call it: Explain me instead of explain it to me. I think I have heard this one.
Shade 11. When someone says “Good for you?” are they really saying “I couldn’t care less what you are doing”?
Shade 12. Some people had a negative thing about grammar checkers. I personally have a negative thing about autocorrect.
Shade 13. Goed. Apparently more common among students. And I would think, young ones at that.
Shade 14. Lots of us loathe this one: Have went coming from educated people (it’s have gone.)
Shade 15. If someone does a complete turnaround, he or she did a 180, not a 360 (a 360 would mean they are at the same place as they were, doesn’t it?)
Shade 16. Misplaced prepositional phrases like “He was shot in the car.” Is that near the arm or the leg? And of course, misplaced participles. Here is a restaurant review someone saw: “Sitting on a bed of mashed potato, served with vegetables, I would have been impressed with that alone.” The commenter said he indeed would have been impressed seeing the reviewer sitting on a bed of mashed potatoes!
Shade 17. “I might could go.” Sounds like people from somewhere say this, but I don’t know where. Does anyone know?
Shade 18. This one is weird to me. I don’t know where it is said, but not in the United States: “I was sat in the chair” instead of “I was sitting in the chair,” and “I was stood in the corner” instead of “I was standing in the corner.”
Shade 19. “It begs the question” used instead of “It raises the question” irked someone.
Shade 20. Leaving out the article, which I know is British(??). “We visited him at hospital” instead of “at the hospital.” Does anyone know any rules about this one?
Shade 21: Meteorologists seemed to receive a lot of criticism about their speech. Here is one: “Let’s get a check on the weather” or “Let’s get a check of the weather” instead of just “Let’s check the weather.”
Shade 22: Starting a sentence with More important, rather than More importantly. More importantly can be a transition word, but more important is a comparison.
Shade 23. Revert back used by “professionals who should know better.” Can you revert forward?
Shade 24. You can “Save up to 50 percent and more.” 49? 50? more than 50? 49 and more than 50?
Shade 25. Schools using the word release instead of dismiss. I know this one to be true. We have early release days. Release, however, apparently applies to incarceration (and murder if you have read or seen The Giver, who coincidentally lives in a society that is only shades of gray.)
There you have it. Twenty-five shades of gray grammar this week, and twenty-five more shades of gray grammar next week. Have a colorful week!
Regarding Shade 18 – “I was sat in the chair” and “I was stood in the corner.”
This may be a southern expression, perhaps said by a misbehaving child. In the South, if a child needs punishment, we ‘sit them down in a chair’ or ‘stand them in a corner.’ We do this usually by grabbing their ear and pulling them across the room. It’s called ‘time-out.’ Painful and embarrassing, but effective. It may not be done as much in today’s politically correct society.
I think the person who mentioned it said it came from somewhere across the Atlantic. However, you are right. It would be used by a misbehaving child….when we could still discipline!
Number 20 (hospital), What I know is ” someone in hospital” means that he/she is a patient. ” someone in the hospital” means, he/she is working there. Number 20 might be the same. What do you think?
I agree that that is the explanation – or something very close to it.
Move to Georgia and you’ll be able to write book 4 of Fivety Hues of Graymatter. I’m from New Jersey and my wife of 20 years is a Geogia Peach. Never had a fight ’cause we don’t understand each other. For example, “Honey, want to go out to dinner tonight?” Answer: ” I don’t care to.” It took me five years to figure out that meant “I’d love to!” “Bubba” expressionsare a language in their own write (or is that “right?).
Two usage questions came to mind today, one as I was writing a comment to you a few moments ago. I wrote, “I may dig further into this independently.” Should I have used “might dig”?
This is similar to the other thought I had from something I recently read. It sounds very polite when someone says, “How MAY I help you?” and I’ve become accustomed to that. (Politeness is welcome in any form!) I have always used “may” in connection with permission: “May I help you?” “May I sit in this chair”? For the original question, I used to say, “How CAN I help you?”, also quite polite. But “can” implies ability: If it’s in my power, how can I help you?
Looking forward to your–or anyone else’s–response if you CAN clarify. Definitely not “if you MAY clarify”!
“May” implies permission. However, its other use is close to “might.” May is used when something is more likely. I think this is correct. I know it is in my new workbook!
I may go the movies this weekend.
I was so worried when you went mountain climbing in the blizzard because you might have been killed in an avalanche!
Then what is the rule for “might”? Specifically, when is that used instead of “may”? It’s this type of situation that makes me want to convert to “descriptivism.” (Would I get a party and gifts? :-))
Might is a possibility, but not as possible as may! Clear as mud! You’re going to convert???Yes, if you convert, I believe you will get a party – after the ceremony!
Clear as mud is right! About the conversion, MIGHT I have to give a speech? If so, I already know its last sentence: “Today I am a descriptivist!” (I sure hope you’re getting where my humor is coming from. I mean, I sure hope you know from where my humor is coming. Enough already!)
You are correct. The distinction between may and might is muddy at best when it cones to the
“probability” distinction. I think this is part of it, however: If you were worried about something, but it didn’t happen, you say, “You might have gotten hurt doing that!” You don’t say “may” there. Otherwise, I think “May” fits in most anyplace with possibility. And of course, permission is always “may” not might.
I had a law school professor who used to say “a whole nother” all of the time. He was aware that he was saying it. He would follow it with, “that’s a legal term you haven’t learned yet.” 🙂
Love his explanation!
Shade 22 – more important/more importantly: This is one about which I have wondered. You say, “More importantly can be a transition word, but more important is a comparison.” However, “more importantly” is comparing SOMETHING to SOMETHING ELSE by virtue of the word “more.” And I can’t see why both phrases are not transitional. Years ago, I remember reading something about this very topic The problem is I can’t remember WHAT I read or where.
This law is more important than the other one. More importantly, I think this law will easily pass.
“More importantly” than WHAT? I may dig further into this independently.
Shade 20: I have heard similar right here in L.A. in medical offices. For example, “Doctor will be with you shortly” or “I’ll ask Doctor when he/she is off the phone.”
That sounds a little odd to me, but I have heard things like that too.
Shade 4: “All of the sudden” doesn’t really make sense. This would be similar to “on the hunch” instead of “on a hunch.” However, in this example, the first implies the hunch is specific as in “I went to his office on the hunch he would be there.” For “all of the sudden,” I can’t think of any examples that would make comparable sense.
I don’t know why – I just grew up saying it that way! Glad I know better now. Learn something new every day.
Well, here’s a surprise: http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/193468?redirectedFrom=sudden#eid
Of a sudden, all of a sudden, of the sudden, and all of the sudden are all about the same age in English, coming in from Middle French to Middle English a bit before Chaucer’s time. In all cases, sudden is an adjective being used as a noun (for something like “the sudden event” or “the sudden moment” — similar to “you take the blue bicycle and I’ll take the red”).
“Of” in this case is the old (down through the 18th c.) meaning of “within that time” and “all” simply means “accomplished completely” — “It was a romance all of a summer’s day” = a romance that lasted a single day from meet to dump; so “all of a sudden” means “it had all happened before the surprise was over.”
Thank you for this explanation. So I can still use “all of the sudden”????
THEM THINGS
THEM OTHERS
THEM WAS
THEM THERE
THEM BE
THEM GOT
THEM HAS
THEY HAS
THEY WAS
THEY IS
THEY KNOWS
THEY GIVES
THEY NEEDS
THEY SAYS
THEY (verb)S
THIS ARE
THIS BE
THIS DO
THIS GO
THIS SAY
THIS (verb) unconjugated
Thanks for those!
We BE
I BE
He BE
She BE
They BE
They all BE
And for those!
how about For Sale vs. On Sale?
One is less expensive than the other!
If you liked this post, you’ll probably also enjoy my daily post of something amusing or informative about writing, grammar, usage or language. To see all such recent posts, go to http://on.fb.me/14rsDZX (Facebook) or http://linkd.in/1uG6pPt (LinkedIn), which you are cordially invited to like/follow.
I mentioned earlier that I used to live in Altoona, where a number of Pennsylvania Dutch linguistic habits crept into the language, including, “Throw me down the stairs a pair of socks.” We also used to “close the lights” instead of turning them off. And for some reason, even though I’ve been in New York for over 50 years, I eat an “arange,” but a tangerine is “orange.”
Can’t wait for your next set. Wondering if using the word “penultimate” to mean the ultimate ultimate rather than the one before the end, will be number 49? Or number 51;-)
My grandfather used to say “close the lights” and he wasn’t Pennsylvanian nor Dutch!
My “pet peeve” is when people say, “At the end of the day”. Suddenly, virtually everyone will end a statement with “at the end of the day”. How about “finally” or “in conclusion, let me say this”, anything but “at the end of the day”!
Amen! And I am so tired of “awesome”!!!
Good article, and fun. Here are my two cents ($1.50 accounting for inflation.)
# 2 I found this on http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/myriad
Usage Discussion of MYRIAD
Recent criticism of the use of myriad as a noun, both in the plural form myriads and in the phrase a myriad of, seems to reflect a mistaken belief that the word was originally and is still properly only an adjective. As the entries here show, however, the noun is in fact the older form, dating to the 16th century. The noun myriad has appeared in the works of such writers as Milton (plural myriads) and Thoreau (a myriad of), and it continues to occur frequently in reputable English. There is no reason to avoid it.
#8 but there is ‘conversant’
#9 I read an article on this once. The author felt that women tend to do this as a way of deferring (subsconciously) to others (men specifically), so as not to appear too assertive, specifically in business situations. Don’t you think?
#15 180, I agree.
#25 Hmm, the students might agree with ‘release’!
My husband’s pet peeve is when I say ‘bettered’ as in “You’d bettered clean your room!” I think it should be ‘you had better’? Don’t know where I picked that one up!
Thank you for the comments, and the information on myriad. Or should I say “and the information on myriad?”
Actually, growing up in Altoona, PA, I heard “bettered” quite often. I always thought it was “better’d” a contraction of “better had” As in, “You better’d finished your homework by the time I get back.” Still not grammatically wonderful but at least it explains its origin.
He seems to think he bettered you on that expression.
I have heard quite a few northerners say, “I will borrow her five dollars,” or “I borrowed her the car for the weekend.” I always wanted to correct them and say, “No, she will borrow it. You will loan it.”
Not North easterners, I hope! I am one of those, and I never heard it.
I hear that phrase all the time on the Court shows that I watch and each and every Judge will correct the person, but they say it again LOL! I am a Northerner (New Jersey) and I’ve never used the phrase.
I don’t know, I think that the education system is failing – I tried my best with my son’s education – private schools, private college
Interesting about your son’s education. Other subjects aside, does he speak English correctly? If so, a good deal of credit must also go to what he heard at home. Unfortunately, the same is true in reverse.
“Might could” is Midwestern, specifically Indiana. One of my pet peeves.
Thanks for that info!
Many of the peeves cited are actually lexical, not grammatical.
I have a few peeves of my own. The most salient is the ever increasing use of the analogical ‘on accident’ instead of the more pointed ‘by accident’. This analogical ‘flattening’ obscures the most important of moral distinctions: the difference between an intentional and an unintentional act. One of the most important uses of the latter preposition is its use to mark the (optional) ‘demoted’ active subject in a passivized construction. Similarly, the use of ‘by’ underscores the
non-intentionality of the actor/subject. While analogy is a vital and productive force in language, such a significant distinction should not be lost to what is essentially intellectual laziness. It is especially irritating to hear professional interlocutors who make obscene amounts of money (news anchors, sportscasters) perpetuate this error.
In this same vein, since when did ‘scuffle’ (a concrete transitive verb) come to replace the broad, intransitive ‘struggle’?
I first heard my daughter say “on accident” and then a younger colleague of mine also. I think it is something the younger generation picked up, but I have no idea where.
Here in the south, people say…’Will you carry me to the store?’ It should be…’Will you take me to the store?’ I always picture in my mind trying to carry a 300 pound person thrown over my shoulder and walking to a store. I don’t think so, not today.
The south still has many colorful sayings which makes one smile when they hear the unusual ways of expressing the English language.
That is weird, Sondra! Does that mean drive me to the store???? Like carry in the car?
How about a explaining the correct use of the “would have” “could have”. “Should have” tense. Not mixing nominative and objectives.
Thanks
Done them both in past blogs. Do you mean not should of??? And I and Me, etc.?
These are not tenses, but rather moods. English has three: factive/indicative (is), deontological (should), epistemic (might). These latter two are traditionally conflated into ‘subjunctive’, an imprecise term.
If I called subjunctive a tense, I apologize. I know it is a mood!
Hospital, without the article. It does appear to be a British construction, as I’ve only heard it from those who have been immersed among English speakers of British background or training. Always seems cringeworthy to me, but there are a lot of British variations, particularly involving activities or technologies that were first common long after the United States was formed. (e.g. automotive things seem to have a lot of variations between the old country and the new.)
An east coast vs. west coast thing has to do with waiting. I hear New Yorkers talk about “standing on line,” but on the west coast I usually hear someone talk about “standing in line.” When I visited Hong Kong (many years ago) I discovered that people there would “form a queue” or “queue up.” Indeed, at busy taxi stands and bus stops (adjacent to the ferry terminals that connect Hong Kong island to the mainland (Kowloon)) there are metal ratings, much like you’d see at an amusement park that manages the queue. At least I didn’t have to worry about whether I was standing “on” or “in” line.
Someone actually explained the difference between using the article and not using it — British usage because we use it — but I don’t remember what they said. We Bostonians stand in line, not on line.
I was born and raised in NJ, educated in New England and spent most of the life in the East. I’ve never heard anyone say “on line” in the context of a queue.
Barbecue…
The city of Lockhart, Texas, claims to be the “Barbecue Capital [of Texas/the World].” Located about 25 miles south of Austin, Tx, they have three highly regarded restaurants specializing in Texas-style barbecue:
Smitty’s Market. Their sign reads “barbecue.”
Lockhart Bar-B-Q. Their name says their “take” on the spelling. A second sign on their building reads “Bar-B-Que”…
Kreuz Market. Their sign reads “barbecue.”
Smitty’s and Krewz are actually owned by members of the same family. A “falling out” between various factions resulted in a split (with loyalties of customers creating some interesting social situations throughout this small town).
I have had “barbecue” at all three locations. Each has it’s advantages and each has it’s disadvantages. As a dining experience, I can’t say that one is significantly better than any of the others, though I preferred the ambiance of Kreuz to the other two. Incidentally, the term “market” in the restaurant names reflects that they started as ‘meat markets” selling a variety of meats. Indeed, I’ve purchased some excellent (raw) steaks at Smitty’s that we “grilled” on what I used to think was a “barbecue grill.”
As a native Californian, I though of “barbecue” as being a cooking method, using a high temperature fire beneath a grill. It tuns out that cooking method is actually “grilling” and the resulting meat is not “barbecue” in the sense of Texas-style barbecue. (Note, there are also other barbecue styles, with strong advocates. For example, Kansas City (Mo.) has Kansas City-style barbecue and several other southeastern states also make various claims as having the “world’s best barbecue” that are prepared in cooking styles at variance from the Texas-style product.)
Texas-style barbecue does not involve “barbecue sauce,” though the meat is given a “rub” with various spices before going into the barbecue oven. The cooking is done with moderate heat for many hours, often involving a high-humidity. (The meat is given indirect exposure to steam, not soaked or placed in water.) The result is very tender meat from cheaper cuts of beef, such as brisket. The more expensive cuts are also close to “melts in the mouth” tender, such as prime rib. But the cheaper cuts are the most popular among diners at these establishments in Lockhart.
While both Smitty’s and Kreuz primarily prepare beef and sausages, Lockhart Bar-B-Q also offers chicken prepared in the Texas barbecue style. Lockhart Bar-B-Q also has “barbecue sauce” set out for those who wish to use it as a condiment. Such may be present at Smitty’s and Kreuz, but our host (on my initial visit to Kreuz) stated that its use was “frowned upon.” Bottles of sauce may have been available near where one collects the eating implements and supply of paper napkins.
Part of the experience is that these restaurants are extremely casual. Smitty’s and Kreuz serve on sheets of “butcher paper,” while Lockhart Bar-B-Q uses typical dishes. (All are arranged for cafeteria-style selection of meat and side dishes.) Kreuz, with the newest building, also has sinks along the main entry hallway where you can wash your hands before and after eating. (Eating with the hands is encouraged.)
I once visited a “Kansas City” style barbecue restaurant when traveling through St. Louis, there, barbecue sauce was involved. But the years (and single exposure) has left most of that encounter lost in the dustbin of my recollections.
You sure know your barbecue, which I thought was spelled barbeque!
Oops–grammatical error in Mr. Masterson’s sixth or seventh paragraph (depending on how paragraphs are counted in his comment). I guess a comment like this could be considered a pet peeve to him. 🙂
As I have shared with many friends, 50 Shades of Grey is a mediocre work, which made E.L. James buckets full of money, and I applaud her for that. If a truly great editor was allowed to clean up the grammar and fix the glaring plot point mistakes, It just could turn into a classic. To be read by the 18+ crowd.
That said, when you complete the list, please send it to my e-mail. I will share with both of my critique groups. These are great, bad examples.
I enjoyed the book (50 Shades), in fact all three of the series. I also enjoyed the movie. I don’t even remember finding all the grammar errors that are apparently in the book! If you get my posts regularly, you will get the next list next week.Otherwise, it’s on the website under blog. Thanks for sharing it!
Double-check on that chastity vs. celibacy thing. My understanding is that celibacy specifically means not marrying, while chastity refers to sexual purity in general. Nuns and monks take vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience. For them, chastity means no sexual relations, since they do not marry. But a married couple who is faithful can also be considered to be chaste though of course they do have sexual relations. But a married couple is not celibate. I have heard that priests can commit sexual sins and be forgiven, no problem, but if they marry, that’s when they are in big trouble, because as long as they are married, they are breaking their vow of celibacy.
Thanks for the comment. Can anyone clarify? This came from someone else; I am not an expert on this at all.
According to Roman Catholic Canon Law #277 §1: “Clerics are obliged to observe perfect and perpetual continence for the sake of the kingdom of heaven and therefore are bound to celibacy which is a special gift of God by which sacred ministers can adhere more easily to Christ with an undivided heart and are able to dedicate themselves more freely to the service of God and humanity.” Basically they are required to remain unmarried, but also “continent” meaning completely chaste–making even masturbation a no-no. I suppose even wet-dreams would require a trip to the confessional, although, certainly, that would be a venial rather than mortal sin.