Bad Grammar

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

If I EVER end a sentence with a preposition again, I will not be responsible for the wrath I bring forth. Or something.

How do you cure such things? Is there a book? Aversion therapy? Shock treatment? What grammatical faux pas cheese you off? Am I being excessively anal?

― David Raposa, Wednesday, 3 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

And why does "Bad Grammar" conjure images of a hair metal band?

― David Raposa, Wednesday, 3 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

what is a preposition? I hate parts of speech

― Mike Hanle y, Wednesday, 3 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Ending a sentence with preposition is not always bad, David. It's one of those 'rules' that grammarians invent. Sometimes not ending with one results in a stupidly contrived, stilted sentence. I believe Churchill came up with a very good example once.

There are plenty of grammar and style guides online. See here for example. I particularly like its section on 'that' vs. 'which'.

― Nick, Wednesday, 3 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I agree with Hanle y, I never listened to my English teacher, we had a mutual hate thing going on, which is a shame as I'm sure I would have enjoyed the subject otherwise.

I care not for grammar, but I always write my sms messages out fully.

― chris, Wednesday, 3 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I think Churchill's one was "This is the kind of grammar up with which I will not put."

― Sam, Wednesday, 3 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

As the board's senior grammarian, haf to say i WUV strings of preps at sentence end: three-four-five bring em on

the function of grammar is clarity of meaning

― mark s, Wednesday, 3 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

there's a really friendly english-usage FAQ here

the preposition at end stuff is almost half way down

― Alan Trewartha, Wednesday, 3 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

The preposition issue, if I remember correctly, is a holdover from the period when English grammarians, in an attempt to claim some dignity for their "vulgar" linguistic pursuits, tried to pattern everything after Latin grammar. The old Churchill saw = amazing.

― Nitsuh, Wednesday, 3 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I WUV Mark's answer. That said, I've been known to unwittingly obfuscate with my sentence structures & haphazard metaphors - I'll blame my school teachers for enforcing their antiquated grammatical dogma, thereby stifling my linguistic creativity. I don't need no education, damn it.

― David Raposa, Wednesday, 3 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

why even bother saying "the" ?

― Mike Hanle y, Wednesday, 3 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

My grammar is not that great.

― jel, Wednesday, 3 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

David: I think you came up with a better hair metal band name than "Bad News". (Anyone own this gem of a CD?)

― Brian MacDonald, Wednesday, 3 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

There was a hair band called Bad English. It had John Waite in it.

― Kim, Wednesday, 3 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

descriptive not prescriptive.

― ambrose, Wednesday, 3 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Except when reciting jokes, quotes and suchlike I NEVER use any form of "to be" (am, were, was, and others like this - mainly contractions like wasn't, I'm, etc.) and I do not use "the".

― Kodanshi, Wednesday, 3 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

The only place I learned grammar beyond "this is a noun, this is a verb, and this is an adjective" was in Latin class, but it didn't affect my use of prepositions in English. I use semicolons all the time now, though; I never used to.

― Maria, Wednesday, 3 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Despite my pedantry, I love to abuse the English language, create new words that sparkle from the flow- recently my main habit has been playing with suffixes. Ahhh, evilitude, nudosity...

― emil.y, Wednesday, 3 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

The name of the hairmetal band is BAD GLAMOUR, surely...

― mark s, Wednesday, 3 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Yes, but I think they meant a Japanese version of Bad Glamour...

― Kodanshi, Thursday, 4 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Do prescriptive grammarians exist anymore anyway?

― alix, Thursday, 4 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

It would appear so.

― Richard Tunnicliffe, Thursday, 4 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Though exactly the opposite should hold true, I feel like a dumbass on the occassion during which I speak properly. Um, was that just such an occasion? I can't hardly tell no more.

― Nude Spock, Thursday, 4 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I am the editor of a very small county newspaper. Most of the writers are over 90 and the grammar and syntax are quite terrifying. I fear becoming a lazy writer having to read them daily.

― 1 1 2 3 5, Thursday, 4 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

one year passes...

Grammatical question: Help me! Help me! Help me!!!

Is a building - such as The Pentagon - a place or a thing?

Would the correct question be:

-Where did Primal Scream want to bomb?
or
-What did Primal Scream want to bomb?

I know my grammar is atrocious, and I often get confused as to UK/US grammar, but one of those sentances looks right to me and the other one looks glaringly WRONG. Could someone please resolve this for me?

― kate, Tuesday, 1 April 2003 13:45 (twenty-two years ago)

However, if this query spoils or gives away the answer to a contest we're running and you win, you have to take me along as your date!

― kate, Tuesday, 1 April 2003 13:45 (twenty-two years ago)

why not ask 'why did primal scream want to bomb the pentagon?'?

either if fine, I think. I'd choose 'what...'

― RJG (RJG), Tuesday, 1 April 2003 13:53 (twenty-two years ago)

'What'

― oops (Oops), Tuesday, 1 April 2003 13:55 (twenty-two years ago)

Another vote for "what."

― Nick A. (Nick A.), Tuesday, 1 April 2003 14:05 (twenty-two years ago)

I'd say 'what' since it is the name of the building, not the name of its location.

Ha, I notice Mark claimed to be "the board's senior grammarian". I note that I am older than he is, and I used to be an editor, and being good at grammar is one of an editor's key skills. He's been an editor longer than me, though. And I bet he's better at it. Damn.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Tuesday, 1 April 2003 17:02 (twenty-two years ago)

The main rule of grammar is to:

Eschew obfuscation.

Oh, rats...

― Skottie, Wednesday, 2 April 2003 00:03 (twenty-two years ago)

What. Even if it were a country: "We're bombing Iraq." "What, what did you say we're bombing?"

― Chris P (Chris P), Wednesday, 2 April 2003 01:10 (twenty-two years ago)

http://www.nationalpost.com/commentary/story.html?id={11764CDF-7EAC-46C8-AFB5-372D5A511475}

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Wednesday, 2 April 2003 17:37 (twenty-two years ago)

Yeah, heaven forbid the leader of the free world should learn to pronounce THE hottest of hot button words correctly. Far better for him to flaunt that Southern tenacity rather than acquiescese to pleas for competency. Or at least the illusion of it.

― mark p (Mark P), Wednesday, 2 April 2003 17:50 (twenty-two years ago)

haha did you read the article or just the headline?

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Wednesday, 2 April 2003 18:06 (twenty-two years ago)

At my most cynical, I think to myself that Bush says "nucular" deliberately, because it provides an easy and comparatively superficial target, so that people can satisfy their need to criticize him without actually addressing his policies (this isn't an effective strategy NOW, but if his First Presidentiary hadn't involved a war...)

― Tep (ktepi), Wednesday, 2 April 2003 18:11 (twenty-two years ago)

Could someone post a phonetic spelling for what they think is the "correct" way to pronounce this word? The dictionary I'm looking at lists two options and it's hard for me to figure out if one might be the pronunciation people are calling "incorrect". (Due to my Southern tenacity and all).

― That Girl (thatgirl), Wednesday, 2 April 2003 21:16 (twenty-two years ago)

NOO-klee-ur

― jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 2 April 2003 21:20 (twenty-two years ago)

...whereas Bush sez: NOO-kya-lur.

― jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 2 April 2003 21:22 (twenty-two years ago)

Okay, answering my own question. I have three different dictionaries in my classroom and all list two pronunciations for "nuclear". The Webster's Collegiate, however, adds this note:

usage. Though disapproved of by many, pronunciations ending in \kyeler\ (first e upside down) have been found in widespread use among educated speakers including scientists, lawyers, professors, congressmen, US cabinet members, and at least one US president and vice president. While most common in the US, these pronunciations have also been heard from British and Canadian speakers.

Ah, our mutable language! I guess from now on I'll tell those pedants who call the second pronunciation incorrect to 'kiss mah grits!'

― That Girl (thatgirl), Wednesday, 2 April 2003 21:24 (twenty-two years ago)

Interesting. There's also the point to be made that it isn't so surprising that so many people mispronounce "nuclear" -- because there are no other words structurally similar to it in the English language. And yet the language abounds with "molecular," "avuncular," "spectacular," etc., so it's tempting to make "nuclear" into one of them.

― jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 2 April 2003 21:30 (twenty-two years ago)

Cement = Sea mint

― Millar (Millar), Wednesday, 2 April 2003 21:31 (twenty-two years ago)

because there are no other words structurally similar to it in the English language

linear?

― oops (Oops), Wednesday, 2 April 2003 21:32 (twenty-two years ago)

Lin Ee Er.

In high school when we discovered the UROTSUKODOJI: LEGEND OF THE OVERFIEND series of freakish anime videotapes at the cult section at one of the local movie rental shops, I had one friend who would always mispronounce it "You Rot Sockem A Dojee" which I think was double-grebt and very Alabama of him (he was an import from Ohio).

― Millar (Millar), Wednesday, 2 April 2003 21:35 (twenty-two years ago)

Ah, our mutable language!

POXY FULE! It is WROTE and TALKED "MUTUALBLE"!

― OleM (OleM), Wednesday, 2 April 2003 21:57 (twenty-two years ago)

Ancient mark s post said
As the board's senior grammarian, haf to say i WUV strings of preps at sentence end: three-four-five bring em on

on is there more adverb than prep, innit?

― OleM (OleM), Wednesday, 2 April 2003 21:59 (twenty-two years ago)

linear?

I think the key is to extend the structure to "...clear" -- since that's what gets confused with those "cular" words I mentioned. But this is all someone else's theory, anyway (I forget who).

― jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 2 April 2003 21:59 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm going to start saying "Shakespeller's 'King Yooler'"

― Millar (Millar), Wednesday, 2 April 2003 22:02 (twenty-two years ago)

I think bush does end the last bit of the word with an empahized "clear". I don't do this. But I definitely say "nyoo"

what's wrong with sea-mint?

― That Girl (thatgirl), Thursday, 3 April 2003 04:07 (twenty-two years ago)

one year passes...

Revived in tribute to the write-up of tomorrow's Buffy on Sky 1 Mix: "Buffy and gang come across a nest of Vampires, they seek help from Jonathan, whom makes Buffy feel incompetent." That's a run-on sentence and a stupid misuse of whom in one 'sentence'. Why does anyone not sure how to use 'whom' ever use it? No one but the worst pedants (= even worse than me) care about 'whom' in anything but the most extremely formal writing.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 19:33 (twenty years ago)

Bad English! Wasn't Neal Schon in that band? Was Tommy Shaw as well or was he in Damn Yankees?

Gar, now I have "When I See You Smile" in my head.

― sundar subramanian (sundar), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 19:39 (twenty years ago)

Thanks a lot, so do I now!

― Leon Czolgosz (Nicole), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 19:40 (twenty years ago)

Part of my job is to proofread pamphlets and stuff that my company puts out, and my boss has this crazy idea that if, in a sentence, you are listing things, you put a comma between the first and second thing, but NO COMMA between the second and third thing. Like: "Today I woke up, went shopping and came home." I spent a month putting commas in sentences and having her take them back out, but now I just do what I want. She is insane about commas.

― n/a (Nick A.), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 19:41 (twenty years ago)

I think both uses are OK: with or without the final comma.

Yup, Neal Schon was in Bad English. Tommy Shaw was in Damn Yankees with Ted Nugent and a dude from Night Ranger.

― sundar subramanian (sundar), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 19:45 (twenty years ago)

But without the second comma, the last two items become one item! Every grammar book I've seen says to put a comma between every item in a list.

― n/a (Nick A.), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 19:46 (twenty years ago)

Nick, the comma is an alternative to and, so she was right, you don't need the second one. Sorry dude.

― Markelby (Mark C), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 19:47 (twenty years ago)

yeah without the last comma makes it mean "I went came home."

― oops (Oops), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 19:48 (twenty years ago)

xpost

― oops (Oops), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 19:48 (twenty years ago)

I woke up, went shopping and bought fruits and vegetables.

― oops (Oops), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 19:49 (twenty years ago)

I don't follow you, Markelby, are you saying that if you have a second comma, you don't need the word 'and'? That would make it: "I woke up, went shopping, came home." This is an incomplete sentence, isn't it?

― n/a (Nick A.), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 19:51 (twenty years ago)

I'm saying it fulfils the function of an and, but when grammatic form requires an and (as you've correctly suggested it does in this context), it doesn't need a comma as well.

― Markelby (Mark C), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 19:54 (twenty years ago)

I mean, in a list, the comma just means and anyway, only shorter and neater. "I woke up and went shopping and came home" is grammatically fine, but it's not pretty. So the comma is the substitue; the and is the default.

― Markelby (Mark C), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 19:55 (twenty years ago)

Can we abolish "myself" from the English language?

― Dan Perry '08 (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 19:57 (twenty years ago)

i don't like the extra comma before the "and" ... it feels like too much to me.

― kelsey (kelstarry), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 19:57 (twenty years ago)

No, a comma seperates two clauses, as I attempted to illustrate with my last post.

― oops (Oops), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 19:57 (twenty years ago)

According to The Gregg Manual: "When three or more items are listed in a series and the last item is preceded by and, or, or nor, place a comma before the conjunction as well as between the other items. NOTE: Some writers prefer to omit the comma before and, or, or nor in a series, but the customary practice in business is to retain the comma before the injunction."

These are business documents.

― n/a (Nick A.), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 19:57 (twenty years ago)

This is a transatlantic difference, I think: Americans put in the comma after the penultimate item and before the 'and', Brits don't.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 19:59 (twenty years ago)

ie you need that comma there so the reader knows what follows is not connected to what came before.

― oops (Oops), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 19:59 (twenty years ago)

I woke up, went shopping and bought fruits and vegetables.

That's considered proper British form then?

― oops (Oops), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 20:01 (twenty years ago)

Dan why did you have to ask when you can just abolish it yourself?

― ken c (ken c), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 20:01 (twenty years ago)

or would the final comma only be necessary in cases like that one?

― oops (Oops), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 20:01 (twenty years ago)

Fowler says the commas earlier in the list replace the word 'and', so it is redundant to use both before the last term - unless the last term has an 'and' in it, e.g. if you are listing law firms. I only use the comma then, except when I want to make more of a break, for the sense of rhythm or to hint at a time lag.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 20:02 (twenty years ago)

this thread clearly needs a grammar book, this thread, and, RJG.

― ken c (ken c), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 20:06 (twenty years ago)

If I hear someone say "So-and-so and myself blah blah blah" or "Blah blah blah from so-and-so and myself", I will be stabbing people in the face.

― Dan Perry '08 (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 20:07 (twenty years ago)

So the comma thing is pretty clearly another wacky "England and the US do it differently" thing.

― n/a (Nick A.), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 20:09 (twenty years ago)

THAT'S BAD GRAMMAR Sep 14 2004

ROAD bosses have been offered spelling lessons after an embarrassing blunder on a school sign.

Instead of directing motorists to the nearby grammar school in Keith, Banffshire, the new signpost points them towards the 'grammer' school. Bear Scotland, who are responsible for the sign, owned up to the mistake and pledged to sort the bad spelling.

Area engineer Ralph Newlands said: 'The lads in the sign shop are really embarrassed.'

Rector John Aitken joked: 'We would be more than happy to teach them how to spell.'

― Onimo (GerryNemo), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 20:09 (twenty years ago)

dan i hate that too. if you didn't do it i would have done it for you myself.

― ken c (ken c), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 20:11 (twenty years ago)

it just makes no sense!

― ken c (ken c), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 20:11 (twenty years ago)

But but but "Thank You For Lettin' Me Be Mice Elf Again"!

― n/a (Nick A.), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 20:12 (twenty years ago)

That's grammatically correct though, if you sort out the spelling!

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 20:16 (twenty years ago)

Myself would say it's a worthy sacrifice to get rid of all of the asshatty ways that people misuse the word.

― ARGH ARGH MDK (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 20:18 (twenty years ago)

Allow myself to introduce...myself.

― Leon Czolgosz (Nicole), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 20:19 (twenty years ago)

me, myself & irene was a clever film title though. you have to say

― ken c (ken c), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 20:20 (twenty years ago)

So the comma thing is pretty clearly another wacky "England and the US do it differently" thing.

And being a bastard Canadian, I'm used to both ways and just think anything goes!

― sundar subramanian (sundar), Thursday, 16 September 2004 03:29 (twenty years ago)

Nick: I'm sure I've posted about this before, but ... when I was growing up, I was taught serial commas (the way you prefer). It makes a lot of sense to me, and it looks nicer, too. BUT within the world of journalism, omitting the last comma is STANDARD PRACTICE. Look at most newspapers and magazines, and the serial comma is much more rare. Since I work in educational publishing, I usually have to find out what style is preferred before I edit something.

― jaymc (jaymc), Thursday, 16 September 2004 04:06 (twenty years ago)

Yeah, accepting the omitance of the serial comma before 'and' was due to journalism - the issue of fitting everything into narrow columns. This is also why we've adopted only using one space after a period instead of two spaces (as in manuscript typing). And probably the reason for some other alterations that I can't think of right now. Grammar is so affected by form and since form is constantly changing (esp due to new communication technologies). On one hand it's sad, but on the other hand Embrace the New World (non)Order.

― rrrobyn (rrrobyn), Thursday, 16 September 2004 04:31 (twenty years ago)

My favourite grammar comment was made by a prof whom a friend of mine was TAing for (and therefore saw the comment). He wrote on a first-year English student's paper: You sprinkle commas as if they were chocolate chips.

― rrrobyn (rrrobyn), Thursday, 16 September 2004 04:34 (twenty years ago)

for whom a friend of mine was TAing

― ex-jeremy (x Jeremy), Thursday, 16 September 2004 04:53 (twenty years ago)

kidding!

― ex-jeremy (x Jeremy), Thursday, 16 September 2004 04:53 (twenty years ago)

haha, but this is the thing - on the interweb I tend to write like I talk, so y'know, ending in prepositions is no big deal when talking. Ah, talking, the ruin of grammar. hahar.

― rrrobyn (rrrobyn), Thursday, 16 September 2004 18:57 (twenty years ago)

Ending a sentence with a preposition is perfectly okay in English. It's one of those old superstitions fostered by those who think English should be like Latin. Separating the preposition from its verb by very far is generally far worse. The other great example is the split infinitive. It's worth knowing these non-rules, and whenever they arise (when you have time to ponder), try the different ways of saying it, and see which says it best.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Thursday, 16 September 2004 19:08 (twenty years ago)

Thanks, Martin, for the ammunition - I will use it against the strict grammarians I know (who also know Latin, yeah, which explains a lot). I've been copyediting for several years now and am also a writer, so am familiar with the "rules" and how they can vary, but I've always felt a certain instinct with grammar and style and tend to go with that. Of course, saying "it just sounds right" isn't always what people want to hear as an explanation. I like the idea of grammar as guide, but not the be-all, end-all. Grammar isn't a science - there's a lot of imagination in language and grammar does, eventually, adapt. (Of course, this doesn't stop me from shuddering at split infinitives.)

― rrrobyn (rrrobyn), Thursday, 16 September 2004 19:34 (twenty years ago)

Nothing wrong with splitting an infinitive. The famed Star Trek example is the best phrasing of that thought, far better than Enterprise's rejigging. (And my editing career included a very short stint helping out on a Star Trek magazine, just to link things up...)

Fowler's Modern English Usage is the place to go for the most widely accepted authoritative guide to the language.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Thursday, 16 September 2004 19:39 (twenty years ago)

anyway, it's poor grammar.

― pedant, Friday, 17 September 2004 04:29 (twenty years ago)

grammar what ain't right, surely?

― darraghmac, Friday, 17 September 2004 04:32 (twenty years ago)

I don't understand why 'bad grammar' is in any way incorrect.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Friday, 17 September 2004 10:04 (twenty years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.