If It’s the Same, Then It’s Exact

Posted on June 13, 2008 by languageandgrammar

How often do we hear people say things such as This is exactly the same problem as the one we had the last time or I have the same exact shoes or Why do politicians use the same exact words every time they give speeches? (Well, maybe that last one is repeated ad nauseam only at our house.)

If something is the same, it’s already identical; that is, it’s already exact. Adding the word exactly or exact is redundant—-so don’t do it. If we have the same problem as the one we had last time, then we  have a problem that is exactly as the one we had the last time. If we have the same shoes as someone else has, then we have shoes that match exactly to that person’s shoes. It’s either the same, or it isn’t; sticking an exactly in front of it doesn’t make it any more exact or any more the same.

It follows, then, that we should be saying This is the same problem (not exactly the same problem) as the one we had the last time and I have the same shoes (not exact same shoes); and around our house, we should be constantly talking about how politicians use the same words (not exactly the same words) every time they give speeches.

Sherry

Posted in grammar, language | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on If It’s the Same, Then It’s Exact

As You Like It: Like Versus As

Posted on June 12, 2008 by languageandgrammar

If you thought that I was going to talk about Shakespeare, then prepare to be disappointed. I’m going to talk about the use of like versus the use of as. It’s not nearly as stimulating, but it’s still necessary.

The like/as grammar error in English is so often repeated that I doubt most people even know that it’s a grammar error. Interpretation: I might be fighting a losing battle, but I’ll make my stand anyway.

Choose the correct sentence:

a. SpongeBob loves his spatula like he loves his friends.

b. SpongeBob loves his spatula as he loves his friends.

I hope that you chose (b).

When introducing an independent clause, use as. (An independent clause is a group of words with both a subject and a predicate, and it can stand alone; I’ll talk more about the different types of clauses in another post.) When introducing nouns or noun clauses or phrases, use like.

In the above sentence b, he loves his friends is an independent clause: the subject is he and the predicate (the simple verb with all of its accoutrements) is loves his friends. (The simple verb is just loves.)

SpongeBob feels like a soggy, squishy sponge. Here, we use like because we’re just introducing the noun phrase soggy, squishy sponge.

Sherry’s Grammar List

Posted in grammar | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

What Is Breaking News

Posted on June 11, 2008 by languageandgrammar

In my recent mock news report (Olbermann Predicts Daring Clinton Heist), I used the term breaking news. I used it incorrectly, but that was part of the intended humor of the post; in the world of actual news reports, however, it’s more disturbing when breaking news is used incorrectly.

When a story is breaking, it’s a developing story. Only part of the story can be reported now since the final outcome of the story has yet to be determined. Examples of a story that might be reported during a legitimate breaking news story include an ongoing wildfire in which homes are in danger, the story of a hostage situation while negotiators are on the scene, and a report from a helicopter during a car chase. Now, we could have a discussion about what constitutes actual news (a car chase is hardly news), but it’s not hard to determine what is breaking news and what isn’t.

On a major national news network, the reporter said something such as Breaking news: so and so is dead. There is nothing breaking about this story; the person was dead, and he was going to stay that way. The station and the reporter might have had more to say about the person’s death–reaction to it, details about the death, and a summary of his life; however, there was nothing breaking about the story–unless it was the second coming.

We’d have to ask the producers and reporters from the network to know whether the phrase breaking news was used as a way to make the story sound more gripping than it actually was or whether they just don’t know the difference between a breaking news event and the reporting of a story that already happened. Either way, it’s not a positive report about the state of journalism.

–Paul

Paul’s book–Literally, the Best Language Book Ever

Sherry’s Grammar List

Posted in language, writing | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

The Age-old Question: Is It Due to or Because Of?

Posted on June 10, 2008 by languageandgrammar

Some writers, editors, and dictionaries don’t care about the interchangeable use of due to and because of. Is that, perhaps, because of a lack of grammar information, or is that, perhaps, due to a lack of grammar information? Others (and I count myself in this category) adhere to the established rules for their respective uses because it’s otherwise ungrammatical; that is, it’s an English grammar error.

Use due to when you can replace it with caused by; this usually occurs when a form of the verb to be (is, am, was, were, are) is used by itself.

  • Some would say that the rising price of gas is due to corporate greed.

Is is a form of to be that is being used by itself, and caused by would make as much sense as due to, as in Some would say that the rising price of gas is caused by corporate greed.

Use because of after other verbs; you can usually substitute on account of for because of to test it.

  • Some would say that the price of gas is rising because of corporate greed.

Here, we do not have a form of to be by itself; even though we have is, we have it with the verb rising. If we substitute on account of for because of, the sentence does, indeed, make sense, as in …the price of gas is rising on account of corporate greed.

Here are another couple of examples:

  • The meeting started (verb other than to be) 30 minutes late because of a late delivery of doughnuts.
  • The postponement was (form of the verb to be by itself) due to a late delivery of doughnuts.

Sherry

Posted in grammar | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on The Age-old Question: Is It Due to or Because Of?

Olbermann Predicts Daring Clinton Heist

Posted on June 6, 2008 by languageandgrammar

I have breaking political news to report, and I’m not talking about another live report of the empty Washington D.C. home of Hillary Clinton while she talked to Senator Barack Obama in another location (Clinton, Obama talks held without aides present). This time, it’s big.

Keith Olbermann, on his Friday Countdown show, reported that Hillary Clinton will commit a daring crime in broad daylight on Saturday. He quoted no sources, and I have not yet seen coverage of this upcoming heist on other cable network news sources (perhaps they’re still waiting for Obama to emerge from Clinton’s home or are still on Obama’s plane); however, if the evidence is strong enough for Keith Olbermann to report, then I’ll repeat it here.

For some reason, Keith Olbermann believes that Senator Hillary Clinton, soon-to-be former presidential candidate, is going to “take the stage at noon, literally” on Saturday. You heard it here first (second, if you watched Keith on Friday)–Hillary Clinton is literally going to take the stage on Saturday at noon. I don’t know where she’s going to put it. I don’t know if she plans to take it apart in pieces or if she and her campaign workers are going to carry it away in one piece. I don’t know if she’s done this before–although there was no visual evidence that her Washington D.C. home was filled with other stages. I don’t know any other details. All I know is that she is going to literally take the stage at noon.

You have to admit that the woman knows how to make an exit.

–Paul

Paul’s book–Literally, the Best Language Book Ever;

Sherry’s Grammar List

Posted in humor, language, politics | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Stainless Steel Appliances

Posted on June 5, 2008 by languageandgrammar

I almost feel like a lawyer as I head into this mostly off-topic post since I have to begin with the question: How do you define clean?

Stainless steel appliances have become more popular than yawns during a major league baseball game, and since people seldom admit to the fact that they want to be part of the latest trend, the most popular reason given for wanting stainless steel appliances seems to be that they are “easy to clean.”

If by easy to clean you mean either “unlikely to stain” or “easy to wipe away grease and other spills from,” then stainless steel appliances certainly meet that definition–although I have never had any serious cleaning issues, I mean, problems with my standard appliances. When I lived in an apartment with an old-fashioned porcelain white sink, I had problems with staining. Normal appliances, meaning those made within the last 30 years, are easy to clean and maintain.

If by easy to clean you mean “free of annoying fingerprints,” then stainless steel appliances are impossible to keep clean–much harder to keep clean than the standard appliances. We have a large stainless steel refrigerator at work, and it has more fingerprints than the entire fingerpainting wing of the Museum of Kindergarten Art.

The point is not that we shouldn’t want to have stainless steel appliances in our kitchens but that we should be honest about the reason for wanting them. It’s not about cleanliness. It might be because we want what’s trendy, or we like the way they look. Perhaps it’s because we want to be able to use the finger printing dust from our detective kit. Those are perfectly fine reasons. We should just be honest about it.

–Paul

Paul’s book–Literally, the Best Language Book Ever

Sherry’s Grammar List

Posted in humor, off topic | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Stainless Steel Appliances

Is It Gonna or Going To?

Posted on June 4, 2008 by languageandgrammar

I remember that in fourth grade, a friend of mine showed me an essay she’d written. I couldn’t tell you anything about it—not the subject or the class or the length of the essay–except that within this masterpiece of childhood narrative, she’d written the non-word gonna. Even at that age, I was physically shaken to see such a horrendous error written right there in front of me, for all the world to see. I assumed, in my naiveté, that this was a one-time deal, that nowhere else would I ever see this blemish on the English language. Oh, how wrong I was all those years ago. 

Gonna is not a word; it’s merely a verbal laziness of going to. It’s certainly an arrangement of letters, but so is laxcfpoaweuooooxjrogfnae. Merely an arrangement does not a word make.

We often hear I’m going to finish this memo tomorrow said as I’m gonna finish this memo tomorrow or He said he’s going to be late on Thursday as He said he’s gonna be late on Thursday.

While this is usually a pronunciation error, I have seen it as a written grammar error with more frequency over the years. How did this non-word make the transition from spoken to written error? Maybe we should blame the record industry since every artist from Bessie Smith to Blondie to U2 to Gnarls Barkley has drummed this mispronunciation into our collective head. No, I don’t think that we can blame them for this one.

Regardless, gonna is not a word—it’s merely a pronunciation gone wrong.

Sherry

Paul’s book–Literally, the Best Language Book Ever;

Sherry’s Grammar List

Posted in grammar | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Is It Gonna or Going To?

Efforting

Posted on June 3, 2008 by languageandgrammar

Two of the most popular trends in language are: 1) turning nouns into verbs and 2) making the argument that common usage is all that is needed in order for a word to become accepted. The non-word efforting is a good example of both.

Effort is a noun, meaning (for this discussion) an exertion of strength or power either in a physical or mental sense. Examples include it was an effort to mow the lawn and solving that math problem was quite an effort. Effort is not a verb meaning to exert an effort, so statements such as I’m efforting to get the project done on time is an incorrect way to use the word effort. 

Many nouns that have been misused as verbs have quickly gained acceptance, especially by online dictionaries. That’s how nouns such as dialogue have become commonly used verbs. Effort, though,  has not yet appeared on dictionary.com as a verb, so as long as we effort, I mean make an effort, we can avoid at least one noun being incorrectly used as a verb before it appears in most dictionaries.

–Paul

Paul’s book–Literally, the Best Language Book Ever;

Sherry’s Grammar List

Posted in grammar, language, writing | Tagged , , , | 3 Comments

This Is Definitely an Error

Posted on June 2, 2008 by languageandgrammar

Definitely has quickly become one of the most commonly misspelled words on the Internet. In fact, hardly a web page scrolls by where I don’t see it spelled definately.

Again, the correct spelling is definitely. Think of the other words contained within it, such as definite and finite (not definate and finate), or other words that are so closely related, such as definitive (not definative).

I am now definite that this should definitely put a definitive stop to misspelling it as definately.

Sherry

Paul’s book–Literally, the Best Language Book Ever;

Sherry’s Grammar List

Posted in grammar | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on This Is Definitely an Error

Guilty As Charged

Posted on June 1, 2008 by languageandgrammar

On a call-in radio show on Wisconsin Public Radio on Memorial Day, where I was the guest, a caller had the audacity to say that I had used the phrase the simple fact is that on three or four occasions during the hour-long show.

He made a good point about the phrase, stating that it’s often used as a way of attempting to make an opinion sound as if it were a fact. The example he used was It’s a simple fact that NPR has a liberal bias when that is not a fact but, rather, an opinion of the person making the statement. Not everyone would agree with the statement. The caller believes that the phrase should only be used in situations in which a fact has been stated, such as The simple fact is that I was not at home when the UPS truck came since that is an accurate description of the event; it’s a fact, not an opinion.

I couldn’t agree more. The caller made an excellent point, so imagine my surprise when I listened to the archived broadcast of the show (it was a good discussion overall, so if you’re interested, then listen to the archive on their Web site–May 26 at 6 a.m. with host Joy Cardin) and found out that he was correct. I had said the simple fact is on a few occasions.

I wasn’t doing so in an attempt to be manipulative, but it, apparently, is one of the phrases that I use without thinking. Now that I’m aware of it, I will be more careful. In this case, I’m an example of why I wrote the book. I didn’t write it as a way to mock those who use phrases inappropriately, but I make fun of the phrases, themselves, so that people have the opportunity to become more aware of what they’re saying and how it’s perceived.

The simple fact is that I say the simple fact is too often!

–Paul

Paul’s book–Literally, the Best Language Book Ever;

Sherry’s Grammar List

Posted in language, writing | Tagged , , , , , | 2 Comments