In last week’s post I talked about my top three grammar peeves. This week I don’t even remember what they were, but now I sure know what yours are! I asked in my post for you to let me know about your grammar peeves . . . .
The floodgates opened, especially from the LinkedIn groups I share my posts with who are particularly interested in the English language — namely, those who teach it to either native speakers or English language learners.
The part about the pet peeves was fine. But then, as would happen, the verbal weapons began to emerge as the descriptivists and prescriptivists said their respective piece(s). I have talked about these two terms before, but let me review . . . .
Prescriptivists believe that there are grammar, punctuation, and usage rules that should be followed. I stand mostly with this group.
Descriptivists believe that the way people really use the language helps it to evolve, and they do not like the word rule at all. They prefer standard conventions.
Honestly, I think that both beliefs must coexist, and that language really is a combination of both. There are rules, many of them from Latin . . . . and someone didn’t just make them up recently. No, they are not written in stone like the laws of physics or the multiplication tables, but they still exist in all the grammar and style books that are around.
Yes, of course, there are also regional dialects, colloquial language, and spoken language that often differs from formal writing. And, yes, language does evolve. But should we get rid of the difference between who and whom because people can’t figure it out? I don’t think so; and many people can figure it out. Should we say “Me and him have went to the movies,” just because many people say it that way? I don’t think so.
Talk any way you want to your friends. But if you are making an important speech to the faculty at Harvard Medical School, or you are writing an essay to get into college, or a resume, or a cover letter, I think it is better to stick closely to the “rules.”
That said, I have pages of your grammar peeves. Many of them were expected; however, there were many quite unusual ones, which I will get to in future blog posts (yup, you will have to keep reading . . . .)
Here are the ten that seemed to be the most popular:
1. Misplaced apostrophes. This one includes its and it’s and your and you’re, the two most popular peeves. People mentioned seeing things like “your cute” on Facebook, and I must agree. I rarely see you’re on Facebook! Is it that much trouble to put in an apostrophe? It’s and its are pretty easy to remember: All contractions (two words shortened into one) have apostrophes (I’m, don’t, we’ll), but possessive pronouns never do (yours, ours, his). One person said, “You wouldn’t write hi’s, so don’t write it’s!” Someone else remarked about a lawyer who writes a column for him using its’ as a possessive . . . . this one is not a word at all, but I have seen it being used lately.
2. Well, this one isn’t a surprise. The confusion between subject and object pronouns:
Between you and I. He gave it to him and I. NO-NO-NO-NO-NO-NO-NO!
It is between you and me. He gave it to him and me. Just like “he gave it to me.”
One of the people who responded said she heard between you and I on a television program said by lawyers who are supposed to have gone to Harvard. Another said a student of hers said that since she heard between you and I on television that it was right. The teacher told her that if she wrote it on her paper, she would flunk.
3. Less and fewer was a popular peeve. Use fewer for items you can count: Ten items or fewer. (This cookie has less sugar.)
Someone who wrote to me said a Columbia University professor on CNN said, “. . . .less arrests and less incarcerations.” She added, “My husband had to pull me from the ceiling!” I got a good chuckle out of picturing that one!
4. I could care less. Well, if you could care less, then you do care, so why are you even saying it? It should be I couldn’t care less.
5. Using a pronoun after a noun: Mr. Jones he is going. The teachers they are talking. The authors they are writing. You get the picture. You don’t use both the noun and the pronoun.
6. Confusing that and who. Who is used for people. That is generally used for things.
The boy that made the basket was the MVP. It should be who made the basket. (By the way, animals are considered that, even though we all want to call them who.)
7. Should of and could of and would of. This is still pretty common error — actually very common. It is have, not of.
You should have told me, not should of.
8. Where are you at? I am told this is more of a Midwestern thing. Although it is pretty much okay to end a sentence with a preposition these days, it is not okay to end a sentence with the preposition at. Where are you is good enough.
9. These ones instead of these. This one sounds like something kids tend to say. And . . . . why is this one okay, but these ones not okay?
10. This one is surprising, but more than one person mentioned it: The use of be.
It bes really good.
These cupcakes be like the bomb!
Certainly, this use of be is more common in those whose native language is not English and in some dialects. The odd thing is that it is actually an almost-correct use of the subjunctive, which hardly anyone uses correctly! The subjunctive is used for things that you wish were true but aren’t, or for demands:
I wish I were rich. . . . not I wish I was rich. That is the subjective.
She demanded that I be there for the meeting.. . . .not that I am there. That is also the subjunctive.
So, I be there is unusual , but He asked that I be there is correct!
So there you have it! Your top ten grammar peeves. Oh, but there are a whole lot more . . . . so stay tuned and read next week’s blog post!
This is something my mom does all the time. Whenever she uses the word “incident” in the plural, instead of “incidents”, she says “incidences”, which is actually plural for “incidence”.
Thank you for the comment! My students were all very confused about these words!
Arlene – You have really provoked some discussion with this topic. Of course, that’s what makes English so interesting. It’s always developing into a new form, much like the evolution of life.
I noticed you said “…it is not okay to end a sentence with the preposition at.” I was always told that if you don’t use a verb it’s okay, as in “Where you at?” Calm down! I’m just kidding! Really! Have a great day and keep up your fantastic work! 🙂
I think that when you use “at” at the end of the sentence, it generally follows a verb. Yes?
As an English learner, I was taught that who is for people, which is for things and that can be used for both, according to ( English Grammar for Learners) book.
You are correct, but that is generally also used for things and who can be used for either restrict ve or nonrestrictive clauses.
Thanks Arlene,
I have a couple of queries:
1- As we read from left to right, why do we place the dollar sign ($) before the amount as in: $ 5 ?
2- I was taught that we can not shorten “have/has…etc.) when they are used as main verbs as in 🙁 I have a car) but I have seen it many times shortened even in respectable dictionaries ( I’ve a car). From what I know (I’ve a car) is wrong. Please explain.
3- The word (couple) is sometimes used to mean 2 and sometimes more than two. When can we tell if the speaker means 2 or more?.
Thanks again
Good questions: If only I could answer them. If anyone can, let me know!
1. Don’t know, but we do put the cents sign after the number, although it isn’t often used.
2. I would say I’ve a car is wrong. Have can be shortened into a contraction when have is a helping verb, such as I’ve seen you before, but not when it is stye primary, or main, verb. That is my take on it.
3. Couple generally means 2. If it more than two, use few or several.
The unnecessary addition of “up”, “down” and “out” after verbs where there is no movement just to make the action sound like something more substantive than it is; swap out, draft up, select down, etc.
As for people using jargon to make the mundane seem complex, try “a multiparty interactive electronic voice forum” – a conference call.
I agree with you on those adverbs used as part of the verbs. I have heard swap out used many times. Jargon – Yuck!
A common example is “listen up.”
and clean up, maybe….
At least when writing for the internet many people seem to think that the word “than” is spelled “then.” I could write “richer than Midas” and these people, oddly enough, would write “richer then Midas.” It happens so often that it seems to be a misunderstanding, not merely a typo.
Ver common mistake, often just a typo, and I have done it! And I DO know the difference!
And there is another typo!
<>
Small case of cross-over error…
‘was’ is the ‘past tense indicative’. ‘subjective ‘ is the case of the subject, ‘I’.
Seems to me that ‘Where are you at’ is a so-called ‘portmanteau’ (Americans would call it a ‘telescope word’, as we do in the Netherlands): ‘Where are you’+ ‘What are you at’=’Where are you at’
One of my peeves is the (mis)use or abuse(?) of the verbs ‘lie’ and ‘lay’. ‘lay’ is one of the so-called ‘causatives’, so ‘lay’ really means ’cause something/somebody to lie’. These verbs are always transitive, so they need an object. ‘I’m going to
lay in bed’: NO! ‘I’m going to lay my child in bed’: YES! Problem was possibly caused by the past tense, from which all these verbs were derived originally. With some changes, of course: ‘rose’-> ‘raise’; ‘drank’ -> ‘drench’ and so forth.
Other ‘peevies’: ‘ain’t’, ‘gonna’, ‘wanna’, ‘we was’.
Lay and lie is a real tough one for many! Yes, likely further confused because the past tense of lie is lay — and who ever heard of lain anyway!
There is one exception to the fewer or less/more rule, and it is explainable by circumstance. “There are fewer big fish in the lake this year.” But: “We have more fish in our nets off the coast during the pacific inversion.” In the first case fish are regarded as individuals; they are sought, caught, and recorded as such. There are limits on the number of fish legally taken, for example. In the second, fish is a substance, like liquid, not counted, but weighed or measured by volume. “The hold is full of haddock.” Not, you will note, of “haddocks.”
Another similar quantitative oddity is trees and lumber. One is countable by individuals and sometimes by density. But taken as commodity, we see logs, in rafts and stacks, and lumber in board feet.
Our language is weirdly wonderful!!
Interesting distinction. Thank you! Definitely weirdly wonderful!
I have always used ‘who’ in place of that but sometimes, as Ruth stated, it does sound awkward. I must admit that when I read the first paragraph and saw the obvious error I was a bit put off, but realized we are all prone to mistakes 🙂
There is nothing wrong with using who for people; it is correct.
Hello Arlene,
I love your website! The second sentance you write ” This week I don’t even remember what they were, but now I sure now what yours are!”. Should the second “now” be written as “know”? Such as “but now I know what yours are!”
Great article!
Oops! So embarrassing to be in my line of work and have such a typo! Thanks!
Hi, Arlene:
I really enjoy and learn from posts such as this.
I have another typo for you and two questions.
The typo: “I wish I were rich. . . . not I wish I was rich. That is the subjective.”
Question 1: Each time you used ellipses, there were four (five in one sentence). Why?
Question 2: I thought when a semicolon is used between two independent sentences, there is no coordinating conjunction. However, please see your “I don’t think so; and many people can figure it out.” I would have treated that as a compound sentence and used a comma in place of the semicolon. Would you please clarify?
That subjective thing was autocorrect. I corrected a couple of them, but I guess I missed that one or autocorrect snuck it back in! There shouldn’t be five ellipses dots. There are four at the end of a sentence if one is to be the period. As I said, I don’t like ellipses because they confuse me! About the semicolon. You don’t need the conjunction there. I don’t think I would make that a compound sentence because the parts don’t seem related enough. However, using the semicolon isn’t really any different because it is merely a compound sentence without the conjunction. I have both, as you noticed. I cannot clarify so that it makes any grammatical sense. I was really making two sentences that I thought were close enough to put a semicolon between. (that sentence makes no sense)….and I added the conjunction. Go figure.
Yes!
Grammar changes. Example: the shift from ‘try to’ to ‘try and’ as in ‘I’ll try and do it tomorrow.’ Technically – no! Present and future tenses seem to work OK. But experiment with synonyms and other tenses to reveal the ‘error’:: ‘I tried and did it,’ ‘I was trying and doing it,’ ‘I will attempt and do it.’ Yet every day on top radio and TV programmes you hear ‘try and’. We all can try and stop it, purists can try to stop it, but it’s here for keeps, sneaking in from speech..
Must be like the new one “on accident” instead of “by accident” sneaking onto the language by the younguns. Hey, I am surprised no one has mentioned that one!
Wanted to point out that the “should of” “would of” confusion does not come from should have and could have; it comes from should’ve and could’ve which sound like “of.” (By the way, why does “of” sound the way it does? Shouldn’t it sound like uff in a language with sound rules of sound? Just wondering.)
Thoughts about some of the “pet peeves” of grammar from your readers:
1. Misplaced apostrophes. I’ve been guilty of this more than I’d like to admit. However, it only has occurred in email messages or postings (like this one). It’s mostly a matter of “finger memory” rather than making an error in grammar. Over the years I’ve discovered a painful multitude of typos (from my viewpoint) that others may think are inelegant errors. The worst aspect of this problem is what I call the “I know what I thought I typed” situation. Even re-reading a posting just after writing it does not reveal these errors, as I see what I thought I typed! However, such errors are often painfully visible (to me) when re-reading my posting after some time delay (usually when someone made a snippy remark about an error in this category. Yes, “your” instead of “you’re” and “it’s” instead of “its” are annoying errors — but sometimes we should give participants in online society just a little bit of leeway. I note that in more formal writing, I rarely make those mistakes — or (if my fingers just typed the “wrong” iteration) I catch them before finalizing it. Unfortunately, with the Internet, it’s mostly one click and it’s gone.
7. Should of vs. should have. This is one of those errors that are mostly a result of silent verbalizing of language while writing. The word, “of” is pronounced “ov” (with a distinct “v” sound). Spoken rapidly, “have” has a very similar sound. This is a brain wiring issue. Indeed, a common “test” offers up a paragraph filled with words including the letter “f” … and the reader is asked to count the number of “fs” they see. Almost inevitably many readers miss many instances of “of” due to the v-sound it has.
10. Misuse of “be” — read up on “Ebonics.’ Both Wikipedia and Urban Dictionary have interesting discussions of this concept.
While writing this comment, I notice a more recent source of typos. My computer (iMac) has a built in spell checker that corrects misspellings as I type. Unfortunately, it sometimes turns an intended word into something unintended. While the spell checker makes temporary “signals” (a squiggly blue underline) when it corrects a word — I don’t always see the correction if I’m typing quickly. While I could turn this feature off, I find that it does help me to type faster — though I’m not certain that’s a good thing.
Thank you for your astute comments, Pete! Speaking of spellchecker, and in this case, autocorrect, I was typing on my phone the other night — trying to simply type the word “men,” and suddenly the autocorrect had written Mennonite!
I am going to say you are right, but we also have to teach that which is generally for nonrestrictive clauses and that is for restrictive: comma or no comma. Who is generally used either way. I still prefer who with people and which and that for things — I believe I learned that “that” can be used for groups of people: The tribes that lives in . . . . .
The way I learnt it: “He’s a man that never gets on in the world.”; “Newton was one of the greatest men that ever lived.”; “Ask John, or any other boy that was there.”; (and from the nursery rhyme: “This is the house that Jack built”, turned into a song by British singer Alan Price and, of course, Aretha Franklin).
‘that’ is especially used with reference to persons in clauses that are distinctly classifying.
I would actually use who with those first couple.
Dear Arlene,
About the difference between who and whom, would it be alright to say:
I’m going to visit my friend whom I haven’t seen for over two years or would who suffice, please?
BTW, yes, you are right, many people can figure out the difference between the two but many people are still confused about it (sigh).
Blessings,
A.
You are correct. Many people are still confused about who and whom, and it is pretty confusing unless you know the tricks — which sometimes work. In the example you give, whom is correct. One trick is to substitute he or him and flip the sentence around. In this case you would use him: I haven’t seen him in over two years. If you would use him, you would use whom. Also, if you have a preposition preceding it, whom is right: to whom, for whom, with whom, etc.
Brilliant! Thanks ever so much, Arlene.
More blessings,
Alecs x
Thank you so much, Alecs!
I was taught that if the word after who/whom is a subject as in the example above then you use whom. Is that correct?
That’s a good hint and seems to work. I teach that is all the verbs in the sentence already have subjects, use whom, but your way is much easier! Thanks!
Hi Arlene!
Thanks for your tips. I agree with your advice except for tip 6.
You state: “Confusing that and who. Who is used for people. That is generally used for things.”
I disagree. Both ‘who’ and ‘that’ can be used to refer to people, are generally interchangeable. and can sometimes be avoided. ‘That’ is used for things, whereas ‘who’ isn’t. .
Sometimes one of these pronouns sounds better than the other or sounds clumsy. I would never, for example, say. “The people who(m) I’m inviting round this evening are all local.”
I’d either say, “The people that I’m inviting round this evening are all local.” or simply “The people that I’m inviting round this evening are all local.” Your suggestion of ‘who’ is much more awkward – try it! Your lips have to move much more.
Let’s keep in touch 🙂
Ruth
See Agnes’s comment. You seem to be in the majority!
Responding to Ruth: Why not simply omit the word “that” in your two preferred sentences? It’s not necessary, and your lips can move even less! (I never thought about that when writing! Exercise is good for us!) 🙂
I endorse Diane’s comment about omitting ‘that’ and Arlene’s general position on who/that.
I usually like to include that….just me…