The GC Has Hobgoblins, Too: More Language Indiscretions Spotted by the Grammar Curmudgeon
Feb 05 '03 (Updated Mar 06 '03)
The Bottom Line Alright, there are alot of you out there who think you're the most unique writers on the Web, but everybody isn't unique!
Buried deep on a low shelf in a little-used bookcase in a rarely-entered room of my house there sits a strange, dusty little book by the unlikely title of Miss Thistlebottom's Hobgoblins*. It has not a whit to do with Halloween sprites, and Miss Thistlebottom (delightful though she may be) will never grace the pages of the "Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition" (although maybe, just maybe, "National Geographic's"). No, Miss T is everybody's sixth-grade English teacher, and her "hobgoblins" are those nit-picking** rules of English composition that she attempted to pound into our twelve-year-old head so long ago. You remember them, right? Rules that explained such arcane points as why "Winston tastes good, like a cigarette should" is grammatical heresy.
You don't?
Oho! The Grammar Curmudgeon rides to the rescue! And in his saddlebags, he carries a few hobgoblins of his own. In fact, these are little grammatical booboos that I see 'round these parts on a daily basis:
You Can't Say That!
Quick, tell me what's incorrect in the following sentence:
I have to see aman about adog.
Did you catch it? It was there twice: the indefinite article "a" was somehow epoxied onto the front end of the words "man" and "dog." That doesn't make any sense, right? There's no such word as "aman" or "adog," right?
If you agree, then ponder for the moment the common misspelling "alot." If you were in the market for some land where you could build a house, you wouldn't be searching for alot, would you? If you found the exact space you wanted to buy, you wouldn't tell some real estate agent that, "This is thelot for me," would you? Then you also cannot say "I saw alot of people at the concert," because you're still pasting two words together - the article "a" and the noun "lot."
Or This, Either:
Writers who like to concatenate words are also fond of the construction "alright." Yes, it appears in some dictionaries (and the Epinions spellchecker allows it to pass) - but it's almost always defined as a "common misspelling of all right." There are parking lots throughout the country that are managed by a company named "ALLRIGHT PARKING," but get this straight: there is no word "alright." 'Nuff said?
A Question of Black and White
The English language has certain words that are considered absolutes (not to be confused with a brand of vodka). Among them are the words "correct" and "unique" ("pregnant" is another). These are absolutes because:
* Something is either correct or it is not. Unlike "truth" and "justice," which concepts seem to vary from person to person, "correct" does not change, as anyone who's ever argued a test answer with an algebra teacher can attest.
* "Unique" may only be applied to a thing or concept that is the sole representative of its kind, since it is rooted in the word for "one" (as is the word "unity"). Some have proposed that there be words such as "twonique," meaning that there are only two in the world, but this seems rather facetious to me.
An absolute cannot be extended, therefore constructions such as "most unique" (no matter what bad advertising copy-writers might think) are to be avoided. Attempting to modify the word "unique" reduces it to a mere synonym of "unusual" or "distinctive," thereby cheapening the language.
As for degrees of pregnancy, it, too, is a binary condition: you either are or you aren't. Most writers, however, are quite content with the jocular usages "very pregnant" and "a little bit pregnant."
Is You Is or Is You Ain't Ambiguous?
Consider for a moment the sentence,
"All the blocks on the table are red."
It's a fine little eight-word sentence, containing both a subject and a predicate (words of dread for many of us forced to diagram sentences back in the days when blackboards were black and chalk was white and dusty). It makes a simple statement: if you were to choose any block from that table and examine it, there is a 100% probability that the block's color is red.
It is of course possible that some of those blocks are red and some are another color (No, I don't care what color... Oh, all right, the rest are blue). Now, using only a negative and the eight words contained in the sentence above, express this latter condition. Many of you might construct the sentence,
"All the blocks on the table are not red."
Is this correct? Many writers - including the Grammar Curmudgeon -- find this sentence ambiguous: it can either mean that there are red blocks and blocks of another color on the table, or it can mean that no block on the table is red. A careful writer avoids ambiguity, and so would recast the sentence so as to make an unambiguous statement:
"Not all the blocks on the table are red." Some of 'em are red, some aren't.
"No block on the table is red." I looked, and they're all blue.
As a general rule, when using generic nouns such as all, everyone, and everybody; the negative must come as early in the sentence as possible to avoid ambiguity. For instance,
"Everyone in Denver isn't a Broncos fan," would be more clearly stated, "Not everyone in Dallas is a Cowboys fan."
Caveat Lector
As is often the case, spoken English is far more forgiving (and forgivable) than written English. Besides, it's darned near impossible to tell the difference between "a lot" and a lot" or "alright" and "all right" when spoken aloud. There are, though, plenty of people who squirm at the sound of a "most unique" and get lost trying to puzzle out the precise meaning of an "everybody isn't." In fact, there are many people - sometimes the kind of people who control purse strings and promotions - who believe that what you say and what you write are indicative of the level of attention you give to everything you do. We all know brilliant people who can't write their way out of a wet paper bag, but (sadly?) poor presentation often means your audience stops listening to or reading your information long before you're done talking. The extra effort can pay off!
Keep on writing!
This is the third of a series of notes from the Grammar Curmudgeon, an irregular series of... what, "diatribes"? "rants"? "suggestions"? on improving the quality of your writing - not just here on Epinions, but every time you create a sentence, a paragraph, or even a book. Feel free to suggest further topics (I already have a generation's worth up my sleeve) by emailing me or leaving a comment.
See the Next Grammar Curmudgeon Rant at Mrs. Malaprop
See the previous Grammar Curmudgeon Rant at Apostrophes
* Copyright 1971, Theodore M. Bernstein
** "hobgoblins" is a direct reference to a famous Ralph Waldo Emerson quotation, "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.