To return to the home page, click here.
To go to the bookstore, click here.
Grammar and style guide by Laurent Grenier,
author of the book A REASON FOR LIVING
Press on the End key on the right of your keyboard
to see my references at the bottom of this document,
and press on the Home key on the right of your keyboard
to return to the top of this document.
Listed below are keywords or key groups of words that can be used to launch a search with the function Find (Ctrl+F). Such keywords as “compound” and “punctuation” will yield many results; just keep pressing Enter on your keyboard to jump from one result to another until you hit upon the one that is relevant to your particular grammatical or stylistic problem (note that any of the following keywords or key groups of words can be used effectively, if sometimes less narrowly, as fragments; for example, instead of launching a search with “quotation” or “farther and further” you can launch it with “quotat” or “farther a”).
1) Words and expressions: adverb, such as very – after and before – among – and, or, or nor – all – antithetical contrast – be – begin with "but." – between – can I, will you, or should we – each – each or every – earth, moon, and sun – east – either ... or and not only … but also – emphatic conjunctions such as however and therefore – ever and never – every other – even – farther and further – fewer – for example, that is, or namely – get – "he or she" – "he wondered" locution – however – if and whether – if-clause – if-this-then-that statement – in the event that – less – -ly adverbs – more, most, and least – more than one – much – myself – neither – nonparallelisms with rather than – or or nor – providing – sentences with that omitted – synonyms for "he said." – than is a conjunction – that and which – that and who – that which – the "he said" locution – the object of to, between, or any other preposition – the subjective whoever or the objective whomever – "there was" constructions – therefore, however – together with, along with, as well as, in addition to, or plus – too-clause – use who to refer to – west – what is – what may be used in – who and whom – wish – yes, maybe, and no
2) Convention and punctuation matters: acronym – abbreviation – address – amount – attribution – bracket – capitalize – century – city – colon – comma – compound – contractions – dash – date – decade – decimal – decisions – define a word in text – dialogue – ellipsis – elliptical – exclamation – figures or spelled-out numbers – foreign phrases – fraction – generic term – historical period – holiday – holy day – hyphen – hyphenation – initial – instruction or command – interjection – interruption – italics – kinship term – list – multiple question marks – name – names of governmental and judicial bodies – number – paraphrased quotation – paraphrased statement – parentheses – parenthetical – percentage – period – popular name – punctuate – punctuation – request – question – quotation – quoting speech – raised-eyebrow quotation marks – semicolon – setting off words under discussion – slash – state – temperature – time of day – title – treating a given compound consistently – vowel combination – weights and measures – well-known proverb or saying – years
3) Grammar matters: alternate subjects – a noun to be modified by another noun – apposite – case – clause – collective noun – conjunction – conjunctive – dangling participial phrase – defining constructions – end with preposition – error of agreement – error of parallelism – faulty parallelism – good usage – grammar – gerund – infinitive – introductory – linking verb – noun – object complement – omission – omit – one-idea subjects – phrase – plural and singular – possessive – predicate – preposition – present progressive – pronoun – relative pronoun – relative times – sentence – singular idea – spelling – standard word order – subjunctive – syllepsis – tense – the implied subject of the introductory phrase – time clause – unchangeable condition – universal truths – verb
4) Style matters: 1 + 1 = ½ – a clear English sentence – active verbs – active voice – abstraction or vagueness – abstract – adjectives and adverbs – adjective that exists solely as decoration – amateur – ambiguity – amusements – a respect for words and a curiosity about their shades of meaning – a strong, distinctive, authoritative writing voice – avoid – background information – balance between dialogue and beats – banality – beat – breaking up a very long paragraph into more manageable chunks – break your writing up on a larger scale – breathing space – bring your ear into play – chance to breathe – characterization – clumsiness – clumsy and wordy past perfect tense – clichés – composition – condescending – consistency – connotation – constant interruptions – creation of characters – define the action without overdefining it – definite assertions – describing your character's emotions – explanations – dialect – digression – don’t overstate – draft – enthusiasm – exposition in disguise – fiction – figures of speech – first person, third person, and omniscient – flashbacks – flatness – flourish – flowery, poetic figures of speech – formality – four articles of faith: clarity, simplicity, brevity and humanity – freshness – fresh words and images – generalities – giving us your character's views of the world rather than your views of your character – good editor – good style – good writing – hack's favorite constructions – how to sell – immediacy – irritating the reader – lecture – less is more – manageable chunks – memoir – monologue – mix it up – multiple meanings – narration and description – narrative – obscurity – opportunities for misreading – over-explaining – passive verb – passive voice – patronize – perspectives and tones – pet interests – physical action – physical description – pointless, distracting, clichéd – precise verbs – profanity – proportion problems – putting some distance between yourself and your manuscript – redundancy – redundant phrases – repetition – resist the urge to explain – revision – rewriting – running commentary – sales – short sentence – short words – show rather than tell – specific detail – split infinitive – squinting modifier – step by step – stick to what you know – stiffness – strained or forced or awkward – strip every sentence to its cleanest components – subtle approach – summarizing – surprise – turn readers off – unity – vague words – varying the rhythm – verbs that can say exactly what you want – when you fill in all the details – white space on the page – wordy phrase
STYLE GUIDE
Use among if more than two items are discussed.
Incorrect: She had to choose between three options.
Correct: She had to choose among three options.
You may use between in referring to three or more people or things if each is considered singly and separately.
Correct: Tensions between Canada, Mexico, and the United States eased following the implementation of the NAFTA agreement.
Capitalize the first word of all sentences, including sentences within sentences.
- The rule is, Never run near the swimming pool.
Also capitalize a complete sentence that follows a colon.
- He had only one goal: He was going to become president of the firm.
You should not, however, capitalize a sentence that is enclosed within parentheses and inserted within another sentence.
- Ellie slipped on her velvet heels (she at last had a reason to wear them) and left for the club.
Capitalize the first word of a direct quotation even if it is not a complete sentence.
- When I asked Mr. Wilson where he was going, he said, “To the mall.”
Capitalize holidays and holy days, including the word day when it is used as part of a holiday’s name.
- Labor Day
- Fourth of July
- Ash Wednesday
Capitalize popular names for historical periods, but do not enclose them in quotation marks.
Incorrect: the “dark ages”
Correct: the Dark Ages
Position a colon following a question after the question mark.
- What do you really mean?: It was a question she often asked herself while talking with her father.
Place a comma before a coordinate conjunction (e.g., and, but, or, nor) when it links two independent clauses. (A clause is independent if it could stand alone as a sentence.)
- Mitchell spent a fortune on his computer, but his desk was a bargain.
Use a semicolon instead if a comma appears within one of the clauses.
- Mitchell spent a fortune on his computer; but his desk, which he found in a thrift store, was a bargain.
If the clauses are short and closely related, you may omit the comma between them.
- Mother talked and I listened.
In a list of three or more things linked by a conjunction, you should place a comma after each item except for the last. Be careful not to omit the serial comma – that is, the comma before the conjunction.
Incorrect: We need a hammer, saw and screwdriver to finish the project.
Correct: We need a hammer, saw, and screwdriver to finish the project.
If a comma appears within any of the items in a list, use semicolons instead of commas to separate the listed items.
Incorrect: Our best players are Bobby, the shortstop, Joyce, the catcher, and Becky, the left fielder.
Correct: Our best players are Bobby, the shortstop; Joyce, the catcher; and Becky, the left fielder.
If a list ends with etc., insert a comma after the abbreviation.
- Bring your tent, sleeping bag, backpack, etc., to the ranger’s station.
To alert readers that something has been omitted, insert a comma in place of the missing words.
- Yancy was awarded the trophy for first place; Cynthia, for second place.
In a short sentence with a simple construction, however, the comma can be left out if the missing element is obvious.
- The wind was cold, and the sky dark.
A comma belongs inside a closing quotation mark, even when it is not part of the quotation.
- “He never had a chance,” the soldier muttered.
If the quotation was a question or an exclamation, the question mark or exclamation mark at its end would replace the comma.
- “Did he ever really have a chance?” the soldier asked.
If a compound adjective precedes a noun, hyphenate the words that make it up if it is not obvious that they function as a unit. For example, old car dealer suggests the dealer is elderly, but old-car dealer makes it clear that it is the cars the dealer is selling that are old.
If there is little chance of misreading, you usually do not need to hyphenate a compound adjective before a noun.
Unnecessary hyphens: civil-service job; high-school teacher; real-estate agent
Better: civil service job; high school teacher; real estate agent
Most compound adjectives that include a present or past participle are hyphenated when they appear before a noun.
- far-reaching implications
- chocolate-covered raisins
If the compound appears after the noun it modifies, no hyphen is necessary.
- The implications were far reaching.
- The raisins are chocolate covered.
If a compound’s first word is an adverb ending in ly, it is usually spelled as two words.
- carefully planned agenda
However, if the second half of the compound is hyphenated, a hyphen should also appear between the compound’s components.
- badly-drawn-up contract
When the same word appears at the end of several hyphenated adjectives listed in a row, you can omit the common word from all of the adjectives except the final one. Be sure to retain all of the hyphens, however.
Awkward: The wedding guests were staying in fifth-story, eighth-story, and tenth-story rooms.
Better: The wedding guests were staying in fifth-, eighth-, and tenth-story rooms.
Most compound adjectives that include a number are hyphenated, regardless of whether the number is spelled out or expressed as a numeral.
- three-inch nails
- 190-mile trip
Exceptions are numbers preceded by a dollar sign or followed by the word percent.
- $50 billion budget
- 35 percent growth
Place a semicolon between two sentences connected by a conjunctive adverb. Insert a comma after the adverb if it directly follows the semicolon. Insert one before and after the adverb if it is in another position.
Incorrect: Jaime wrote a novel, however it was never published.
Correct: Jaime wrote a novel; however, it was never published.
Or: Jaime wrote a novel; it was, however, never published.
In text express the day and year of a date in numerals. Spell out and capitalize the name of the month.
Incorrect: He was born on 12/8/60.
Correct: He was born on December 8, 1960.
Or: He was born on 8 December 1960.
The elements of a date are ordered in one of two sequences: day-month-year or month-day-year. Day-month-year dates have no internal punctuation. Month-day-year dates include a comma before and after the year. (If the date is followed by another punctuation mark, however, omit the comma after the year.)
- The school year ran from September 14, 1996, to June 3, 1997.
In a date consisting of only a month and year, do not insert a comma before or after the year.
- The conference was held August 1989 in Cincinnati.
In a date consisting of only a month and day, express the day as a cardinal number (e.g., 2, 17, 28) even though it is read as an ordinal (e.g., 2nd, 17th, 28th).
Incorrect: I will arrive April 18th and return May 1st.
Correct: I will arrive April 18 and return May 1.
If the day stands alone, it may be expressed as an ordinal numeral or spelled out in words.
- I’ll meet with you on the 8th.
- I’ll meet with you on the eighth.
Note that the article the precedes a numbered century unless it is used as an adjective. In that case, insert a hyphen between the number and the word century.
- 12th-century Europe
- eighteenth-century poetry
Decades may be spelled out in lowercase type or expressed as numerals. Whichever style you adopt, use it consistently throughout a document.
Incorrect: the sixties and 1970s
Correct: the sixties and seventies
Or: the 1960s and 1970s
Note that when a decade is represented in numbers, an s should follow the year given. Do not insert an apostrophe between the year and the letter s.
Incorrect: the 1930’s
Correct: the 1930s
Decades are capitalized only when they are part of a popular nickname for a period.
- Gay Nineties
- Roaring Twenties
Years are expressed as numerals unless they appear at the beginning of a sentence. Instead of spelling out a year in this position, try to rephrase the sentence so that the year appears within it.
Awkward: Nineteen eighty-seven saw a plunge in the stock market.
Better: The stock market plunged in 1987.
In years of five or more digits, insert a comma before every three digits, counting from the right. Do not use commas in years with less than five digits.
Incorrect: 1,890; 50000 BC
Correct: 1890; 50,000 BC
When choosing between farther and further, pick farther for a reference to distance and further for all other contexts.
Incorrect: Chicago is further from Dallas than from St. Louis.
Correct: Chicago is farther from Dallas than from St. Louis.
Fewer should be used with a plural noun that describes a group of individual items that can be counted.
Incorrect: Less than 25 people attended the event.
Correct: Fewer than 25 people attended the event.
Less is also the correct choice with a plural noun that describes a single distance, period of time, or sum of money.
- less than 40 miles away
- less than 13 minutes
- less than $760
Spell out and hyphenate simple fractions, such as one-half, two-thirds, and three-eighths. Also spell out any fraction at the beginning of a sentence.
- The glass is one-third full.
- Four-fifths of the class passed the test.
Capitalize the words city and state when they appear as a part of a place name.
New York City; Washington State
But: the city of New York; the state of Washington
The abbreviation U.S. may be used as an adjective, but you should spell out United States when it is used as a noun.
- The U.S. Department of Commerce
- But: The Department of Commerce of the United States
A noun or pronoun that precedes a gerund should be in the possessive case.
Incorrect: Not even a heart attack could curb Eddie eating.
Correct: Not even a heart attack could curb Eddie’s eating.
Exceptions to this rule include indefinite pronouns (e.g., everybody, anyone). Put these in the nominative case when they appear before a gerund.
Incorrect: Have you ever seen anyone’s running as fast as he is?
Correct: Have you ever seen anyone running as fast as he is?
You may also use a nominative before a gerund if the possessive form sounds unduly awkward.
Awkward: He was thrilled by the woman’s asking him out on a date.
Better: He was thrilled by the woman asking him out on a date.
A better solution, though, is to eliminate the gerund by rephrasing the sentence.
- He was thrilled that the woman asked him out on a date.
Infinitives (e.g., to eat) are often used incorrectly in the place of gerunds (e.g., eating).
Incorrect: She had no intention to marry him.
Correct: She had no intention of marrying him.
In speech, the verb get is sometimes used instead of be to form a passive verb. In writing, however, using a form of be is generally preferred.
Informal: Roger got hurt on the construction site.
Better: Roger was hurt on the construction site.
The words if and whether are largely interchangeable. When choosing between them, keep in mind, however, that whether has a more formal tone.
Sometimes, an if clause in the middle of a sentence can be read in more than one way.
Ambiguous: Mr. Thomas needs to know if she’s coming.
In these cases, for clarity, consider either beginning the sentence with the if clause or substituting if with the less ambiguous whether.
Better: If she is coming, Mr. Thomas needs to know.
Or: Mr. Thomas needs to know whether she is coming.
Usually, it is unnecessary to follow whether with the words or not.
Wordy: I don’t care whether or not he attends.
Better: I don’t care whether he attends.
Used in some ways, though, a whether phrase is incomplete without or not.
Unclear: I will support him whether his is telling the truth.
Better: I will support him whether or not he is telling the truth.
If you are in doubt, try substituting if for whether. If the sense of the expression is unchanged, the words or not can be left out.
Compound indefinite pronouns are always spelled as one word. However, if the two words that make up a compound are used instead as an adjective and a noun, they should be spelled as two words.
- Anyone who was interested could attend. [Anyone is used as a pronoun.]
- Any one of those interested could attend. [One is used as a noun and modified by the adjective any.]
Most indefinites are considered singular, except when they stand in for a plural entity. In that case, they should be treated as plural.
- Neither wants to go to the park. [singular]
- Both want to stay home instead. [plural]
The word to may be omitted when an infinitive follows certain verbs, including help:
- I will help mow the lawn.
Reflexive and intensive pronouns should not be used in place of a personal pronoun as the subject of a sentence or as the object of a verb or a preposition.
Incorrect: Herself will be traveling with Hank and myself.
Correct: She will be traveling with Hank and me.
Set off an interjection at the beginning of a sentence with a comma or an exclamation point.
- Well, I never thought of that.
- Goodness! You have certainly grown.
When an exclamation point is used, the word that follows it should be capitalized.
If an interjection appears in the middle of a sentence, insert a comma before and after it.
- I haven’t seen you for, oh, nearly a decade.
Use quotation marks, not italics, to signal that a word is used ironically or figuratively.
By convention, italics are used to set off some special words and terms within sentences, including:
sic in quotations
technical or unfamiliar terms
titles of books and some other creative works
A whole number amount should be expressed as a decimal only if an amount with both dollars and cents appears in the same sentence.
Incorrect: I owe you $4, and Jim owes me $5.23.
Correct: I owe you $4.00, and Jim owes me $5.23.
But: I owe you $4, and Jim owes me $5.
Express rounded amounts of more than $1 million with a numeral preceded by a dollar sign and followed by a word such as million or billion.
Incorrect: 56,000,000 or $56 million dollars
Correct: $56 million
As a general rule, spell out numbers from 0 to 10, and use numerals to express numbers 11 and greater.
- She and her three cousins sent out 125 Christmas cards.
However, always use numerals to express numbers used with fractions, numbers followed by units of measurement, money amounts, dates, percentages, and decimals.
Always spell out a number at the beginning of a sentence. If the number is unwieldy when expressed in words, rephrase the sentence so that the number appears in the middle or at the end.
Incorrect: 1,457 people attended the concert.
Acceptable: One thousand four hundred and fifty-seven people attended the concert.
Better: The concert was attended by 1,457 people.
If a number has five or more digits, insert a comma after every three digits, counting from the right.
Incorrect: 10650; 5188990
Correct: 10,650; 5,188,900
However, do not use commas in numbers of four digits, street numbers, temperatures, telephone numbers, or ZIP codes.
Add the suffixes nd, rd, and th to numerals greater than ten to create their ordinal form.
- Julie placed 12th; James, 23rd; and Patricia, 32nd.
In text, express rounded numbers greater than 1 million with a numeral followed by a word such as million or billion.
Incorrect: Of the nearly 23,000,000 people in the country, only 4,567,988 live in cities.
Correct: Of the nearly 23 million people in the country, only 4,567,988 live in cities.
When a parenthetical statement is an independent sentence, place the punctuation at the end of the sentence and inside the closing parenthesis.
- The girl started to cry. (She had wanted a blue bike, not a red one.)
Insert a period after an initial when it stands in for a personal name.
- W. E. B. Du Bois
Periods are sometimes omitted from a set of initials that are commonly used in place of the name of a well-known figure.
- JFK
- FDR
In a decimal, a period should separate the whole number from the fractional number.
- $345.76
If ellipsis points follow a complete statement, be sure to include four periods after the sentence – one to represent the period needed to punctuate it and three to represent the ellipsis points.
- The memo stated, “The end of the year will soon be here.… Your bonuses will be announced then.”
A request should be punctuated with a period even if it takes the form of a question.
- Will you please fill out this form.
Lowercase kinship terms – such as sister, father, and cousin – unless they are used in place of a name or as part of a name.
Incorrect: Oswald’s Sister met mother and aunt Jane.
Correct: Oswald’s sister met Mother and Aunt Jane.
To make an open or a hyphenated compound plural, change the principal noun in the compound, rather than its modifier, from the singular to the plural form.
- chief of staff, chiefs of staff
- lieutenant colonel, lieutenant colonels
- ex-president, ex-presidents
- mother-in-law, mothers-in-law
Some nouns are identical in their plural and singular forms.
- aircraft
- buffalo
- corps
- series
- species
The indefinite pronoun each does not have a possessive form. To express ownership, use the phrase of each, not each’s.
Incorrect: each’s report card
Correct: the report card of each
To form a possessive of a singular noun, add an apostrophe and an s to the end of it, even if a noun ends with the letter s.
- the boss’s assistant
Exceptions to this rule are some expressions that include the word sake.
for goodness’ sake
for appearance’ sake
for conscience’ sake
To form a possessive of a plural noun, add only an apostrophe if the word ends with an s.
- companies’ earnings
Usually, using a possessive with an of phrase is considered redundant.
Incorrect: the cry of the baby’s
Correct: the cry of the baby
Or: the baby’s cry
An exception is made if a person possesses many things like the thing named.
- a friend of Marie’s
Objects usually follow their prepositions and are always in the objective case. Be careful not to use the nominative form of a personal pronoun when the pronoun is the preposition’s object.
Incorrect: between you and I; from he and she; among they
Correct: between you and me; from him and her; among them
For readability, avoid using more than two prepositional phrases in a row.
Unwieldy: I drove through the snowstorm over the mountains after midnight to reach her house.
Better: Through the snowstorm, I drove over the mountains after midnight to reach her house.
In speech, the words of, up, and down are sometimes used with another preposition. In formal writing, however, omit these words if they do not add any meaning to the sentence.
Incorrect: General Stafford stormed out of the door.
Correct: General Stafford stormed out the door.
If these words are part of a compound preposition, however, they should not be left out.
Incorrect: He’s completely out time.
Correct: He’s completely out of time.
When a series of objects share the same preposition, either repeat the preposition before each object or include it before only the first.
Incorrect: Janie drove to the supermarket, the bank, and to the drugstore.
Correct: Janie drove to the supermarket, to the bank, and to the drugstore.
Or: Janie drove to the supermarket, the bank, and the drugstore.
Do not, however, omit a preposition that functions as part of a verb.
Incorrect: Jeffrey was annoyed and angry at the barking dog.
Correct: Jeffrey was annoyed by and angry at the barking dog.
Many grammar experts in the past insisted that a sentence should never end with a preposition. In most cases, the rule still holds. Nearly all experts now agree, however, that a preposition may appear at the end of a sentence if moving it to another position would create an awkward construction.
Awkward: I want an income on which I can count.
Better: I want an income I can count on.
If a collective noun is treated as a unit, a pronoun referring to it should be singular. If the noun’s components are emphasized, however, the pronoun should be plural.
- The council reached its decision.
- The council cast their votes for president.
If a sentence includes a phrase such as can I, will you, or should we, place a comma before and after the phrase and end the sentence with a question mark. (If the phrase falls at the end of the sentence, omit the second comma.)
- You know, don’t you, how much we care about you?
- We shouldn’t leave the office yet, should we?
If a quotation is a statement and it appears at the end of a question, place the question mark outside the closing quotation mark. Omit the period that would normally appear at the end of the quoted statement.
- Are you sure she said, “We’re going to Albuquerque”?
If a quotation appears at the end of a statement or command, place the period that punctuates the sentence inside the closing quotation mark.
- When I asked if she was feeling well, she said, “Oh, sure.”
If the quoted material ends in a question mark or exclamation point, however, omit the period.
- When I asked if she was feeling well, she said, “What?”
- When I asked if she was feeling well, she said, “You bet!”
Commas should be placed inside closing quotation marks, even if they are not part of the quotation.
- “I’d be happy to do the job,” he volunteered.
Colons and semicolons, on the other hand, always belong outside closing quotation marks.
- Tully insisted there are two “necessities”: health and peace of mind.
- The girl said, “My friends are my family”; in fact, they were the only family she had ever known.
Question marks and exclamation points should be placed inside closing quotation marks only if they punctuate the quoted material. If they apply to the sentence as a whole, they should be positioned outside.
- Oscar asked, “What is your favorite song?”
- But: Did you know that my favorite song is “Night and Day”?
Do not enclose a paraphrased statement in quotation marks.
Incorrect: She said that “she will be home by the 4th.”
Correct: She said that she will be home by the 4th.
Or: She said, “I’ll be home by the 4th.”
Use single quotation marks (‘ ’) to mark the beginning and end of a quotation inside a quotation.
- Her assistant explained, “They claimed the package was ‘misplaced,’ but I think it was stolen.”
To tell readers that a word is used figuratively, you may enclose it in quotation marks.
- The neighborhood dogs held a “meeting” in the park every afternoon.
A word may be placed in quotation marks to show that it is used ironically.
- The teenagers snickered at their teacher’s “stylish” leisure suit.
Be careful to use this device sparingly, if at all. Before resorting to quotation marks to communicate irony, try rephrasing your sentence so that your words themselves establish the tone you want.
If you define a word in text, enclose the definition in quotation marks. The word itself should be set in italics.
- Reboot means “restart.”
You can also use quotation marks to set off a translation of a foreign term or phrase.
- She graduated summa cum laude (Latin for “with highest praise”).
Use italics, not quotation marks, to give added emphasis to a word or phrase.
Incorrect: He is “very” sorry for what he did.
Correct: He is very sorry for what he did.
Quotation marks (“ ”) are used to mark the beginning and end of a passage quoted directly from speech or written material.
- “Ask not what your country can do for you,” Kennedy cried out, “ask what you can do for your country.”
Do not change the person of a pronoun in a quotation to make a sentence sound less awkward. Instead, if possible, re-edit the quotation to eliminate the problem.
Incorrect: Will Rogers once wrote that he “never met a man he didn’t like.”
Correct: Will Rogers once wrote, “I never met a man I didn’t like.”
If words are omitted in the middle of a quotation, replace them with ellipsis points – three periods with spaces between them. Do not add ellipsis points before or after a quotation.
When quoting a complete statement, replace the period at its end with a comma if a phrase identifying the speaker directly follows it. If the sentence ends with a question mark or an exclamation point, retain this punctuation and omit the comma.
- “He’s not coming,” Mary said.
- “How do you know?” asked Tony.
- “I just do!” she shouted.
Do not use quotation marks with a paraphrased quotation or with a well-known proverb or saying.
Incorrect: Marcie said that “she wanted to move to Paris.”
Correct: Marcie said that she wanted to move to Paris.
Incorrect: I would “never count my chickens before they’re hatched.”
Correct: I would never count my chickens before they’re hatched.
If a quotation is brief, you should run it into the surrounding text.
- The report maintained that “the future looks bright” but cautioned stockholders not to become “overly optimistic about profits in the short term.”
Below is a list of some commonly used redundant phrases. In formal writing, they should be replaced with the words enclosed in parentheses.
as to whether (whether)
biography of one’s life (biography)
but nevertheless (nevertheless)
circle around (circle)
come to an end (end)
connect together (connect)
consensus of opinion (consensus)
eliminate altogether (eliminate)
join together (join)
just exactly (exactly)
last of all (last)
may possibly (may)
never at any time (never)
reason why (reason)
shuttle back and forth (shuttle)
skirt around (skirt)
strangled to death (strangled)
Many redundant phrases consist of an adjective and a noun. For instance, past history is redundant because history by definition refers to events that occurred in the past. In this example and those listed below, the adjective can be eliminated without changing the phrase’s meaning.
advance planning
close proximity
definite decision
end result
excess verbiage
final outcome
first priority (this is acceptable if you are writing about a series of priorities)
free gift
general consensus
invited guest
joint cooperation
main protagonist
major breakthrough
mutual cooperation
old adage
passing phase
past history
personal friendship
prototype model
representative cross section
root cause
separate entities
serious danger
true facts
To avoid redundancy, use acronyms as adjectives with care. Do not follow an acronym with a noun that is included in the term the acronym represents, as in the following examples:
- Incorrect: AMA association
- Correct: AMA
- Or: American Medical Association
Use who to refer to people; which, to ideas or things. Use that to refer to either.
- Elsie, who loves to travel,…
- The Bahamas, which is a popular vacation destination,…
- The assignment that the students received…
- The students that completed the assignment…
A relative pronoun can be omitted if the meaning of the sentence is clear without it.
- The woman he married
What may be used in place of either a singular or a plural noun. When a clause beginning with what is used as a subject, the number of the verb should agree with the number of the noun that what represents.
- What is important is this moment in time.
- What are important are the moments we have together.
Capitalize earth, moon, and sun only when they are used in connection with other celestial bodies. In more casual references, these terms should be lowercased.
- The Moon orbits Earth, just as Mercury, Venus, Earth, and the other planets orbit the Sun.
- But: In the morning, the sun shined bright; in the evening, the moon glowed.
A semicolon can be used in place of a conjunction to connect two independent clauses.
- The clock read 12:03; it was time to go.
It is also used between independent clauses joined by a conjunction when at least one of the clauses includes a comma.
- Orville, who arrived late with Betty, Morris, and Faith, missed my solo; but I was surprised he came at all.
A semicolon should precede a word or phrase such as for example, that is, or namely when it introduces a list of items.
- An artist must have certain traits; for example, perseverance, confidence, and courage.
Semicolons should replace commas to separate items in a list if at least one of the items includes a comma.
- The students with the highest test scores were Joe, with an 87; Amy, with a 92; and Frederick, with a 99.
Semicolons should always be placed outside closing quotation marks and parentheses.
- She tried to find the “right words”; nothing would dissuade him.
- In first place was a palomino (a tan horse with a white mane); he won by a nose.
A sentence fragment is a clause or phrase that does not form a complete sentence but is punctuated as though it does. Fragments are often used in informal correspondence or fiction, particularly in dialogue to communicate halting speech. In formal writing, however, they should be rewritten as complete sentences or attached to another related sentence.
The easiest fragments to identify are phrases that do not include a subject-verb combination.
Incorrect: The party was a great success. The best one ever.
Correct: The party was a great success. It was the best one ever.
Or: The party was a great success – the best one ever.
In English, the subject usually precedes the predicate.
- The woman he’d been waiting for was knocking at the door.
This order can be reversed to emphasize the subject.
- Knocking at the door was the woman he’d been waiting for.
Use the present tense for statements of universal truths or unchangeable conditions regardless of the tenses of other verbs in the sentence.
- The teacher knew that boys always blame their dogs. [past, present]
To indicate a range of consecutive months or years, a slash can be used in place of a hyphen.
- March/April profits
- winter of 1988/89
When two titles are held by the same person, the titles can be connected either by a slash or a hyphen.
- Thomas Lee is the new secretary/treasurer.
- Or: Thomas Lee is the new secretary-treasurer.
Unless you are writing specifically for readers in the United Kingdom, you should use American spellings. Whether your audience is American or international, American spellings are likely to be more familiar.
Temperatures should be expressed with a numeral and the degree symbol (°), set without a space between them.
- The weather report says that it will be 99° by noon.
Use one of the following abbreviations to designate which temperature scale you are using. These abbreviations are capitalized but are not punctuated with a period.
- C Celsius
- F Fahrenheit
Place the abbreviation directly after the degree sign.
- The boiling point is 212°F (100°C).
Except in very formal writing, express weights and measures with numerals. Always use a numeral if the unit of measurement is abbreviated.
That and which are pronouns used to introduce dependent clauses. If a clause includes information that is essential to the meaning of the sentence, it should begin with that.
- My portrait was the only one that was stolen.
If the sentence would still express a complete idea if the clause was omitted, choose which instead.
- My portrait, which was painted last year, was stolen.
As in the example above, a comma should appear before and after a which clause. (If the clause appears at the end of a sentence, omit the second comma.) A that clause, however, should not be set off by any punctuation.
Incorrect: A car, that runs well, is all I need.
Correct: A car that runs well is all I need.
The pronouns that and who can be used to introduce dependent clauses that are essential to the meaning of a sentence. In most cases, you should choose who if the pronoun’s antecedent (the word the pronoun represents) is a person and that if it is not.
- The chef who prepared the meal is famous for his lasagna.
- The lasagna that he prepared was delicious.
There are two common exceptions to this rule:
You may use who if the antecedent is an animal
- The dog who appeared on her doorstep has become her favorite pet.
and use that with a human antecedent if it represents a class of people.
- A baby that giggles is always a delight.
Both who and whom can be used to introduce dependent clauses. Which word is correct depends on the function of the noun it represents, or its antecedent. If its antecedent is the subject of a verb, use who. If its antecedent is the object of a verb or of a preposition, use whom.
- The man who came to the meeting… [subject of came]
- The man whom she met at the meeting… [object of met]
- The man with whom she attended the meeting… [object of with]
A time of day designating an hour, half hour, or quarter hour is usually spelled out in text. If you prefer, you may express hours with numerals instead.
- I will need to leave at one fifteen.
- Ms. Miller will visit the office at 7 PM.
The titles Mistress, or Missus (Mrs.), Mister (Mr.), and Doctor (Dr.) are always abbreviated when they precede a proper name. The abbreviations should be capitalized and punctuated with a period. Although the title Ms. does not stand for another word, it too should be followed with a period for consistency’s sake.
Professional, military, religious, and honorary titles are capitalized if they appear before a name or are used as a name in dialogue.
- Professor Fred H. Smith
- Could you please explain your theory, Professor?
If only a last name is given, spell out the title.
Incorrect: Gen. Taylor
Correct: General Taylor
In text the title of a creative work – such as a book, painting, or movie – is styled to distinguish it from the surrounding words. Most words in the title are capitalized, and the title as a whole is either set in italics or enclosed within quotation marks.
Always capitalize the first letter of the first and last word in a title. Articles, coordinating conjunctions, the to in infinitives, and prepositions of less than five letters are lowercase; all other words should be capitalized. A preposition should be capitalized if it functions as part of a verb.
- Barefoot in the Park
- How to Write Short Stories
- Getting Out
In long titles that include punctuation, capitalize any word that follows a punctuation mark, such as a colon used to separate a title and subtitle.
- Jackson Pollock: An American Saga
The titles of the following works are set in italic type: books (including poetry collections and anthologies of short stories and essays), magazines, newspapers, book-length poems, plays, movies (including made-for-TV movies and animated movies), television series, radio shows, operas and other long musical compositions, record albums, ballets and modern dance pieces, paintings, sculptures, and other works of art.
The titles of these works are set in roman type within quotation marks: newspaper articles, magazine articles, essays, short stories, short poems, television episodes, songs, comic strips.
Use a singular verb with a subject with two or more elements connected by or or nor. If the subject includes both singular and plural nouns, however, the verb should agree with the noun closest to it.
- The manager or her assistant works late.
- The manager or the assistants work late.
Also use a singular verb with a singular subject followed by a phrase that begins with together with, along with, as well as, in addition to, or plus.
- The manager as well as his assistant works late.
For clarity, consider replacing such phrases with the word and. If you do, change the verb from a singular to a plural.
Voice is the property of a verb that indicates the relationship between the action the verb describes and its subject. In the active voice, the subject performs the action. In the passive voice, the subject receives it.
- Active: Joshua eats the strawberry pie.
- Passive: The strawberry pie is eaten by Joshua.
Generally, the active voice creates a more concise and immediate sentence than the passive. It is therefore preferred for most writing.
Do not shift from one voice to another within a sentence.
Incorrect: Jennie pled for mercy, even though her guilt was admitted.
Correct: Jennie pled for mercy, even though she admitted her guilt.
Be alert to not only a word’s denotation (dictionary definition) but also its connotation – the set of ideas that is associated with it. For instance, psychiatric hospital and madhouse are synonyms, but the former conjures up an image of an organized institution while the latter suggests a den of chaos and squalor.
Avoid using vague words. Writing, for example, that a lecture was “interesting” is to say little. Entertaining, informative, or controversial are all better choices because these adjectives provide more precise information. When choosing between synonyms, think carefully about the small ways in which their definitions differ, and select the word that most closely fits your meaning.
One of the most prevalent errors in word choice is using a wordy phrase when a single word would suffice. Too often, insecure writers mistakenly believe that extraneous words give their writing an air of authority; in fact, readers are far more likely to be annoyed than impressed by wordiness, particularly in business documents. Note the difference in the readability of the two sentences below.
- At the present time, I am of the opinion that we have the ability to meet our quota in the near future. [22 words]
- I now think we can meet our quota soon. [9 words]
Wordy: In spite of the fact that I am working on another project, I will begin the report in the near future.
Better: Although I am working on another project, I will begin the report soon.
GOOD ENGLISH
Language is an artful game, sometimes casual and sometimes competitive, and those who know its conventions, techniques, and finer points – those who have a command of good English – play it better than those who don’t. They are consistent - and consistency is an important secret of their game.
Many errors in grammar do not violate deep principles at all – they merely violate convention. Those who are not aware of the principles and are therefore not aware of the difference between a violation of principles and a violation of convention must face every problem in expression in an almost superstitious way hoping the jumble of half-remembered and quite likely dubious precepts in their minds – Don’t split infinitives; Don’t end a sentence with a preposition – will see them through.
A sentence is a group of words that are grammatically dependent on one another but are not grammatically dependent on any words outside the group.
Grammatical dependence is what determines whether a group of words is a sentence, whether the group contains enough words, too few, or too many and whether the relationships among the words are easy or difficult for a listener or reader to understand.
I discovered the overalls. When I was ladling out the chowder. The fragment is easy to see. The second “sentence” is merely a dependent clause of the first sentence. The word When makes the clause dependent on something outside itself, so the word group When I was ladling out the chowder does not meet the definition proposed in the discussion just preceding this rule. It must be joined to the first sentence, on which it depends: I discovered the overalls when I was ladling out the chowder.
Fragments are sometimes deliberately employed to produce special effects: I said a year ago that this company was headed for trouble. Which is where we’ve arrived, as these figures will show. There should ordinarily be a comma after trouble rather than a period, but presenting the dependent clauses as if they constituted a separate sentence gives them an emphasis that may be desirable. The device should be used sparingly and alternatives should be considered; a dash after trouble would give the clauses similar emphasis.
In a well-written paragraph each sentence should add its thought to the thoughts of preceding sentences whether or not it begins with a conjunction. Sentences that begin with conjunctions are now accepted except in very formal writing. But remember that some people still condemn such use of conjunctions.
Many sentences are elliptical – that is, they leave out one or more words that the listener or reader can be expected to supply. The missing word or phrase is called an ellipsis. An elliptical sentence is not a fragment; fragments are faulty grammar, but elliptical sentences are usually quite respectable grammatically. (They are, however, sometimes ambiguous. For example, John loves money more than Mary has an elliptical dependent clause, which could be filled out in two very different ways: more than Mary loves money or more than he loves Mary.)
The stock has always performed as well or better than expected attempts to be a compact sentence and does leave out some dispensable words, but the second as in the adverbial construction as well as should not be omitted; it should be as well as or better than expected.
The stock has always performed as well as expected or better and The stock has gone up as much as IBM if not more are, however, correct. These are elliptical sentences. It is permissible, and often desirable, to let the listener or reader supply the missing words, which would be than expected in the first example and than IBM in the second example. Thus, though the first part of a phrase pair must be complete, the second part can be elliptical.
Profits were higher than they were in the preceding year. We can leave out they were – such an omission is proper ellipsis. And if we don’t leave out they were, we can even leave out in; phrases such as in the preceding year, which are called prepositional adverbial phrases, can often be shortened by omitting the preposition, as in Quarterly earnings will be announced [on] Friday. But we cannot leave out both they were and in without creating a false comparison.
He either will or has already left is wrong. The verb form left is appropriate with the second auxiliary verb, has, but inappropriate with the first, will. This kind of error is sometimes called syllepsis. The sentence should be He either will leave or has already left.
Changed verb forms can often be omitted in the second construction: He didn’t go but should have; He hasn’t gone but will. When the first application of the verb is omitted, it is an error of grammar, but when the second application is omitted, it is a grammatically permissible syllepsis, though it may be undesirable, as it is to some degree in each of the two examples.
When no auxiliary verb is involved but a verb changes form because of a change in person, the verb can be omitted in the second construction: I drive more than she; I supply his financial support, his mother his emotional support. When an auxiliary verb is involved and changes form because of a change in person, the whole compound verb can be omitted as long as the form of the actual verb is the same, as in I am going to jail, you to your just reward, in which the omitted auxiliary verb is are, but the omitted actual verb is going, the same form as in the first clause.
Sometimes an omitted verb has the same form as a supplied verb but a different meaning. He is crazy already and quickly driving his wife crazy may look fine – not only is the verb supplied in the first construction but it is unchanged in form in the second construction. However, the omission of is in the second construction is at best questionable. In the first construction, is is a linking verb – He is crazy – but in the second construction, it is an auxiliary verb – He is driving. The same word should not be forced to carry two different meanings, so it should be repeated in the second construction.
Occasionally the multiple meanings of verbs are used deliberately for a humorous effect, a device sometimes also called syllepsis but more precisely called zeugma: He took his hat and his leave.
You better do it right now is an odd but very common error; the verb had is left out completely. In speech, You had better is quite properly contracted to you’d better, then improperly blurred to You better.
He is the man went to Washington is distinctly folksy. However, He is the man we sent to Washington is good standard grammar. We cannot ordinarily leave out a subjective relative pronoun such as who, but we can often leave out an objective relative pronoun such as whom. In simple sentences, the distinction is clear even with pronouns such as which and that, which have the same form in subjective and objective cases; we accept This is the house Jack built but not This is the house fell down around Jack – we have to supply the pronoun which or that to serve as the subject of fell.
The same relative pronoun cannot be used both as the object of one verb and the subject of another, with the exception of the pronouns whoever and whomever. In a complicated sentence, it may take some study to reveal that a relative pronoun is trying to play two grammatical roles. Thus They were all fully occupied in preparing for the invasion of the mainland, which they had planned as the next stage in Allied strategy and was to follow in less than a month is troubling – mysteriously so until it is noticed that which is both the object of they had planned and the subject of was to follow. But the error occurs in simple sentences too, such as Do what you like and makes you feel good, in which what is supplied as the object of like but omitted as the subject of makes.
We disagreed only with regard to what the disaster was due has one too few uses of the preposition to, which is needed after due as well as after regard: We disagreed only with regard to what the disaster was due to. Similarly, It was a disaster the significance of which no one was entirely ignorant needs of at the end to go with ignorant; the earlier of after significance cannot play two roles. It must be admitted that the correct versions of these sentences are much harder on the ear or eye than the incorrect versions, and that rewriting them would be advisable. Sentences can end with prepositions, despite the oft-heard dogma that they should not, but a sentence that does is likely to be a sentence in which the word order is not standard, because in standard word order a preposition is followed by its object. Sometimes there is no good reason to depart from standard word order. Certainly We disagreed only about the cause of the disaster is easier and pleasanter to read than a sentence so twisted that a preposition can be mislaid among its convolutions.
There is neither enough time nor energy is faulty; it should be There is neither enough time nor enough energy. The error can be considered faulty parallelism.
He was expelled for failing physics and gambling is ambiguous because of an omitted preposition; it should be He was expelled for failing physics and for gambling, to prevent gambling from being momentarily taken as a second direct object of failing. Text that contains many opportunities for misreading can be profoundly irritating.
The word that is often omitted in such constructions as I believe I’ll go home and He said I could stay. These omissions are fine, but sometimes when that is left out it is not clear where it belongs. The expectation is falsely high earnings will be reported could mean either The expectation is that falsely high earnings will be reported or The expectation is falsely high that earnings will be reported. Sentences with that omitted should be inspected with extra care.
It takes special alertness to catch omissions that are grammatically correct but invite misreading, since we already know what we mean. Ambiguity is always with us. Yet the effort to reduce ambiguity is well worth making and should be part of the process of revising any carefully composed work.
Refer back is redundant in Please refer back to the previous chapter. But the re in refer does not necessarily have the same meaning as back. Obviously it doesn’t in Please refer to the next chapter. While reading Chapter 10, one might expect to be referred to Chapter 12 but would not object to being referred back to Chapter 8; the back might be dispensable, but it would remind me that I am being referred to text I have already read. It is wrongheaded and simpleminded to leap on every redundancy.
I venture to say that you wouldn’t find me so contemptible if I’d split the money with you begins with a somewhat quaint flourish. However, an occasional flourish is not only permissible but desirable; flourishes can add nuance and expression to otherwise bald statements and convey the feeling of the writer or speaker about the statement. Of course, writers or speakers who use I venture to say, I would hazard that, and similar expressions to begin every other sentence are nervous, or pompous, or uncertain, or just clumsy with language.
He liked sailing, swimming, and to fish is a simple example; most of us don’t have to be told that the third item in the series should be fishing, producing a series of three gerunds rather than two gerunds and an infinitive, or else the first two items should be to sail and to swim, producing a series of three infinitives. Yet wrong as the example seems, its grammar is technically correct, since either a gerund or an infinitive can be used as an object of liked. The error is an error of parallelism.
He liked sailing, beachcombing forays, and swimming is a subtler example of faulty parallelism. Although sailing, beachcombing, and swimming are all gerunds, beachcombing does not stand alone but merely modifies the noun forays, so instead of a series of three gerunds we have a gerund, a modified noun, and another gerund. If we take out forays, the series is properly parallel.
He liked sailing, swimming, and other seaside activities is not a case of faulty parallelism. The third item in the series is not parallel in meaning and significance to the other two, but characterizes them and represents a group of unnamed activities.
Two infinitives and a noun combine in a series much less happily – that is, they are farther from parallel – than two gerunds and a noun.
He liked to sail, swim, and had a passion for beachcombing is in real trouble, because the last item is not part of the series at all but is the second part of a compound predicate: He liked... and had... . The error seems glaring but is very common. He liked to sail and swim and had a passion for beachcombing is correct: two predicates to go with He, and two parallel objects to go with liked. If we want to avoid the run-together look of sail and swim and had, we can put a comma after swim.
He has either gone swimming or gone sailing is precisely parallel; gone swimming and gone sailing are grammatically similar and share their relationship with he has. The sentence can be made nonparallel all too easily by misplacing either: He has either gone swimming or sailing omits a repetition of gone, and He either has gone swimming or gone sailing omits a repetition of has. These failures of parallelism are not really offensive in the casual context of the example, but they are noticeable.
With the conjunctive pairs either ... or and not only ... but also, the item following the first conjunction and the item following the second conjunction should be grammatically similar.
Note that this is not true of all conjunctive pairs. With the conjunctive pair whether ... or, the item following the second conjunction usually can be and often should be shorter. I don’t know whether he has gone swimming or he has gone sailing is precisely parallel but not natural English; the second he should come out, and has or has gone could come out.
He has either gone swimming or gone to town with his father is not strictly parallel – gone swimming and gone to town with his father are both predicates and hence are grammatically equivalent, but they are structured differently and make different uses of the verb gone. That is quite all right; correlative items should be as grammatically similar as their meaning permits, but they cannot always be grammatically identical. He has gone either swimming or to town with his father is not all right; since gone functions differently with swimming and to town, it should be repeated.
Sentences that are more ambitious than the examples above often fall into misplacement of correlative conjunctions because of an inverted or otherwise unusual word order. The effect is to make serious prose seem somewhat scatterbrained, as in Not only had classical anticommunism returned to Washington in official rhetoric, but also in military programs and the reassertion of self-confidence. There is a failure of parallelism, because the item introduced by Not only is a clause, but the item introduced by but also is merely a prepositional phrase.
He sails more than me can be considered an error of parallelism, since He and me are grammatically parallel and should therefore be in the same case.
He learned to swim that summer, but more than swimming with his friends on the broad public beach he liked to sail to the deserted strands of the islands in the bay fails to make swimming and to sail parallel, but then perhaps they are not really parallel in thought anyway – there is an implication that when he got to those deserted strands he liked to swim there, and consequently the parallel in thought is between swimming with friends and swimming alone rather than between swimming and sailing. English is not mathematics, and language can sometimes compare nonparallel things – can compare apples and oranges. Careful parallelism is not the only important property of good English, and sometimes it is a dispensable property.
Antithetical constructions are used to state that something is true of one thing but untrue of another. He liked sailing and swimming but not to walk on the beach is faulty parallelism; to walk should be changed to walking.
He chose to sail to the island rather than swimming there is nonparallel, and it is easily made parallel by changing swimming to to swim or simply to swim – it is often permissible to leave out to in an infinitive, though to should be either consistently included or consistently omitted in the second and subsequent infinitives in a series. However, nonparallelisms with rather than are often not objectionable, even in such a straightforward sentence as the example, and sometimes they are necessary. He sailed to the island rather than swam there is parallel, and He sailed to the island rather than swimming there and He sailed to the island rather than swim there are not, but the second and third versions do not mean the same as the first; the first version simply tells us what he did and did not do, whereas the second suggests to us and the third tells us that he made a conscious decision between alternatives.
When the negative rather than construction precedes the positive construction, parallelism is actually an error: Rather than swam there, he sailed to the island is not English, though the nonparallel swim and swimming would both be English. The normally conjunctive phrase rather than is often used, and used correctly as if it were a prepositional phrase such as instead of, and when it is so used, the rule that items joined by conjunctions should be as grammatically similar as possible must sometimes be abandoned.
The case of a noun or pronoun is determined by the function of the word within its sentence – by whether it is the subject of a verb, the object of a verb or preposition, or the possessive modifier of another word. English nouns have only two forms for the three cases, since the subjective and objective forms are the same; the possessive case is formed by adding an apostrophe and s or sometimes just the apostrophe. Some pronouns, such as one and anybody, also have only two forms, but some others have not just three but four. I, me, and my are subjective, objective, and possessive forms, and there is also a special form for the so-called independent possessive, mine, which instead of merely modifying another word acts like a noun: Let’s take your car, since mine has bald tires.
Since nouns have the same form in the subjective and objective cases, violations of this rule occur only with a few pronouns – the personal pronouns I/me, he/him, she/her, we/us, and they/them, and the relative or interrogative pronoun who/whom and its indefinite form whoever/whomever.
It was she I was writing about may seem puzzling at a glance, because there is no objective pronoun and I was writing about seems to require one. The temptation is to make it It was her I was writing about, thus providing an objective pronoun. This is an error – It was she is correct, since a pronoun is governed by its own clause. The missing objective pronoun, whom, has simply been omitted, as is entirely permissible. With the ellipsis filled in, the sentence becomes It was she whom I was writing about.
I invited people whom I thought would get along together is just as wrong. The pronoun whom is the subject of would, not the object of thought, and it should therefore be who. Often a relative clause such as who would get along together is interrupted by another clause such as I thought. Perhaps the fuzziness about the object of the verb in the interrupting clause explains an odd fact. Even though the relative pronoun in the sentence I invited people who I thought would get along together is subjective, it can be dropped: I invited people I thought would get along together. Normally we could not omit a subjective pronoun – we could not make it I invited people would get along together – but the interrupting clause permits the omission, just as if the pronoun were objective, as it is in I invited people whom I thought you would like.
I met a man whom I thought to be better dressed than I is correct. Whom is objective as the subject of the infinitive to be. In I saw a man whom I thought better dressed than I, the infinitive is omitted but understood, and whom remains correct.
Whoever, unlike other pronouns, can play two roles in a sentence at once. It can function as the subject of one verb and the object of another, as in I will invite whoever wants to come, in which whoever is the subject of wants and also the object of invite (though more precisely it is not whoever but the entire clause whoever wants to come that is the object of invite). Whomever can function as the object of verbs in two clauses, as in I will invite whomever you choose, or as the subject of a verb and the object of a preposition, as in Whomever we send invitations to is sure to come. Other combinations of function are possible. As the examples here show, the form of the pronoun – whether it is the subjective whoever or the objective whomever – is determined by the role it plays in its own clause, which is the clause that completes its meaning, defining who whoever or whomever is.
She sails better than him seems wrong to most of us. The word than is a conjunction, and conjunctions join words or word groups of similar grammatical significance – two adjectives modifying the same noun, two subjects or two objects of the same verb, two clauses, and so on. In She sails better than him, than joins a clause and an objective pronoun, which is not a proper function of a conjunction. Use of objective pronouns with than has been exceedingly common for centuries, however, especially with first-person pronouns: She thinks she’s better than me; She sails better than us. Consequently, some modern dictionaries accept than as a preposition, condoning its use with objective pronouns, since the objects of prepositions should be in the objective case. I advise denying oneself this liberty, since there are many who condemn it.
John, he of the big mouth, won’t be invited and Let’s not invite John, him of the big mouth are both correct. In the first sentence, he of the big mouth is in apposition to John, the subject of the sentence, and the pronoun he is in the subjective case. In the second sentence, him of the big mouth is again in apposition to John, but John is the object of the sentence, and the pronoun him is in the objective case. The case of a pronoun in apposition is determined by the case of the word that it is in apposition to.
All of us are going may seem puzzling, since us are going is impossible. But in All of us are going, the pronoun us is the object of the preposition of, not a word in apposition to the subject of the verb; there is no apposition in the sentence. The entire phrase All of us is the subject, and the case of the pronoun is determined by its role within its phrase.
A subject complement is a word or phrase that follows a linking verb such as is or seems; it’s the that in This is that, and it’s the gray in All cats seem gray. A subject complement isn’t the object of a verb but something linked to the subject by a verb. The rule for subject complements is very simple: They should be in the same case as the subject they are linked to, which is, of course, the subjective case.
It’s me and It’s us break the rule, a fact that has probably generated more incredulity among grammar-school students than any other precept of “good grammar,” because It’s I and It’s we seem impossibly unnatural to them. I advise breaking the rule whenever the subjective pronouns I and we seem stiff or prissy, as they do following the informal contraction It’s and in many other situations. That was we singing outside your window last night; When you hear three knocks, it will be I; His chief victim was I – such sentences may obey the rule, but they are idiomatically objectionable.
It's him and It's her cannot be defended quite as energetically, because the rule-observing It's he and It's she, though perhaps slightly stilted, are not outlandish; most careful speakers and writers do use them. It’s them is perhaps more often defensible, because It's they is more than slightly stilted. The ear must be the judge.
I put the subject of a gerund in the possessive case, if possible. I dislike that man’s wearing a mask and I dislike that man wearing a mask are different statements. In the first, the wearing of the mask is disliked; in the second, the man is disliked. In the first statement, wearing is a gerund – that is, a special verb form that functions as a noun – and it is the object of the sentence, with the possessive phrase that man’s modifying it. Such a possessive “owns” the action implied by the gerund and thus is considered the subject of the gerund. In the second statement, wearing is a participle – that is, a special verb form that functions as an adjective – and that man is the object of the sentence, with the participial phrase wearing a mask modifying it.
However, very often the objective case rather than the possessive case is used for the subject of a gerund, especially when it is unlikely that the gerund will be misperceived as a participle, as in I dislike him wearing a mask. Many writers and editors, and some of the grammarians whose books they use for reference, condemn use of the objective case if the possessive case is possible. Since such use of the objective case will not escape criticism, I advise against it.
There are two types of gerund. One type is exactly like a noun - it can be the subject or object of a verb; it is modified by articles and adjectives, and it cannot take a direct object. The other type is mostly like a noun but has some of the characteristics of a verb or a participle – it too can be the subject or object of a sentence, but it is modified by adverbs and can take a direct object. In The inappropriate wearing of a mask is forbidden, the gerund wearing is of the first type; in Inappropriately wearing a mask is forbidden, the same gerund is of the second type. We do not mix the types in modern English, though fluent users of the language did mix them in previous centuries; The trouble and vexation that attended the bringing these animals thus far is hardly to be conceived, in which bringing is modified by the, just as a noun would be, but has the direct object these animals, just as a verb or participle would have.
Every modern fluent user of English automatically uses the possessive for the subject of gerunds of the first type – I dislike that man’s inappropriate wearing of a mask – because the “nounness” of the gerund is so evident. But a great many fluent speakers and writers use the objective for the subject of gerunds of the second type – I dislike that man inappropriately wearing a mask – because the “nounness” of the gerund is obscured by its adverbial modifier and direct object. When the objective is used instead of the possessive, the gerund can be perceived as a participle modifying man rather than a gerund modified by man, and the meaning is likely to be different. Sometimes it makes little difference to the sense of a sentence whether a verb form ending in ing is understood as a participle or as a gerund. For example, I don’t remember his ever being angry and I don’t remember him ever being angry mean very nearly the same thing. But often there is a difference, and if we mean the ing word to be a gerund rather than a participle, we should use the possessive case for its subject.
When the subject of a gerund is not a simple noun or pronoun but a group of words, it may be impossible or at least bizarre to use the possessive. For example, the possessive in Many of us don’t approve of a man whom we voted against’s being elected is bizarre. It may seem reasonable enough to dispense with the possessive in such situations: ... a man whom we voted against being elected. However, rephrasing may be worth the trouble.
There is no sense in both of us going cannot be called an error – it is virtually an idiom, and certainly both of us cannot be made possessive. The fastidious may nevertheless make it There is no sense in our both going, which is just as idiomatic and allows the possessive.
John having worn a mask, no one knew he was there begins with an absolute construction. The word having is not a gerund but a participle. Past participles can be used in absolute constructions too: The mask removed, we all recognized John.
Who is the subjective case and whom is the objective case. But for a century and a half, educated speakers and writers often use who and whoever when the objective case is called for: Who are you going to invite? I’m going to invite whoever I choose. Certain failures to use the objective are perceived as glaringly wrong, such as To who will you send invitations? But most get by, and their correct equivalents can seem labored and prissy. In formal writing it is best to use whom and whomever in every objective situation.
The object of to, between, or any other preposition must be in the objective case, just as the object or indirect object of a verb must be.
But is a conjunction in She left but he didn’t, whereas in Everyone but he left and Everyone left but I, it is a preposition, with the same meaning as the preposition except, and its object must be in the objective case: Everyone but him left; Everyone left but me.
Since like is a preposition, it should not be used to mean as or as if, which are conjunctions.
Exception: The preposition of is sometimes followed by the possessive case, as in Any friend of John’s is a friend of mine, in which both John and mine are possessive.
Neither of us is crazy is correct; it is elliptical for Neither one of us is crazy, with one the real subject and us merely the object of the preposition of. It is you that are crazy is more complicated. Many grammarians would argue that the verb should agree with the “true” subject, you, when the statement is positive, but with It when the statement is negative: It is not you that is crazy, it is I. This second position seems sensible to me. The subject of the relative clause is the pronoun that, and if the sentence states that the antecedent of that is you, there is a good argument for making the verb in the relative clause agree with you, whereas if the sentence states that the antecedent of that is not you, there seems no argument at all for making the verb agree with you – it seems better to let it agree with some not-yet-specified someone.
One of those disasters that often occurs when you’re traveling befell me contains a typical error of agreement caused by confusion. The antecedent of that is disasters, not One, so the verb should be occur.
In My suitcase as well as the briefcase containing all my tax records were stolen, the long phrase as well as the briefcase containing all my tax records is not part of the subject, but it has incorrectly influenced the number of the verb.
We’d correctly say Pork chops and potatoes is his favorite snack, because the subject is a singular idea. Similarly, when phrases joined by and are used as the subject of a sentence, they may add up to a single idea and thus require, or at least permit, a singular verb. Losing my suitcase and missing my appointment with Smith were my worst mistakes has a clearly plural subject and requires its plural verb, but Reaching for my suitcase and finding it gone was heart breaking has a subject that is plural in structure but singular as an idea and requires a singular verb.
Discontent and disenchantment run through his work and Reorganization and reinforcement take time have two-idea subjects and plural verbs, but A pervasive discontent and disenchantment runs through his work and Thorough reorganization and reinforcement takes time have one-idea subjects and singular verbs, though plural verbs would not be wrong.
When singular subjects joined by and are merely a wordy or joking way of referring to a single thing, the verb is singular: My son and heir was supposed to be keeping an eye on the luggage. Somewhat similarly, fanciful expressions such as everybody and his grandmother are usually singular: Everybody and his grandmother was there.
When singular subjects joined by and are preceded by each or every, the verb must be singular: Each suitcase and briefcase has to be checked; Every tourist and business traveler has had similar experiences; Every girl and boy brings his or her own lunch. This is true even if each or every is repeated before the second element: Each suitcase and each briefcase has to be checked.
When one of the subjects is singular and the other is plural, the number of the verb is determined by the number of the closer subject: The bellboys or the taxi driver was probably involved; The taxi driver or the bellboys were probably involved. Nor follows the same rule: Neither the bellboys nor the taxi driver was involved; Neither the taxi driver nor the bellboys were involved. This rule permits sentences that are correct but clumsy. Such sentences can be rewritten to avoid the clumsiness, but note that paired subjects of different number are far more likely to occur than paired subjects of different person, and a policy of not allowing them may be quite onerous.
A guest or two was standing near and One or two was hostile disobey the usual convention, since the closer subject is two, but are idiomatically correct, even in formal writing. The plural were would also be correct.
I think not only the bellboys but the taxi driver was involved; I think not only the taxi driver but also the bellboys were involved. Both subjects are positive, but the verb occurs only with the subject preceded by but or but also, and the subject preceded by not only does not affect the number of the verb. Of course, if the verb occurs with the subject preceded by not only, it agrees with that subject: I think not only were the bellboys involved but the taxi driver.
Collective nouns, such as family, group, and committee, can take either singular or plural verbs, depending on whether they are being thought of as singular or plural. The committee is qualified to decide makes a statement about the committee as a unit; The committee are not all qualified to decide makes a statement about some of the individual members. The number of a collective noun should if possible be consistent throughout a written work.
About 50 percent of the population is rural and About 50 percent of the population are farmers are both correct. Although rural and farmers in these examples are only subject complements, not subjects, and do not directly determine the number of the verb, they do reflect that About 50 percent is, or at least can be, thought of as a singular in the first example and is necessarily thought of as a plural in the second. About 50 percent of the respondents were rural and Half have no insurance similarly require plural verbs because the subjects have to be thought of as plural.
There are many words that can switch back and forth from their singular to their plural meanings quite freely even in different clauses of the same sentence. Example: Physics is my field, but the physics of this device baffle me.
Five boys is certainly a plural – what could be more plural than a plural noun modified by a number larger than one? Yet Five boys is not enough even for a scrub game is correct. In that example, the plural are could be used too, but sometimes it cannot be. Five dollars are too much is wrong, or at best unidiomatic; a sum of money is thought of as singular. Usually we know without thinking about it whether a noun modified by a number is really plural, as in Five boys were enrolled for soccer, or just a unit that is plural in form. We can switch back and forth freely: Seven silver dollars were exposed on his grubby palm, but Seven dollars was not enough for a motorcycle.
More than one can only be plural in meaning but nevertheless often takes a singular verb, either modifying a noun or standing alone: More than one child was crying; More than one was crying.
In The secret is more controls, the singular subject The secret is linked to the plural complement more controls by the singular verb is. The subject, not the complement, determines the number of the verb.
All as a subject sometimes mistakenly gets a plural verb when it has a plural complement. All is often clearly plural, as in All are glad to be home, in which it refers to some group of people. Often it is clearly singular, as in All is lost, in which it refers to a totality not a plural of some kind.
In some constructions, what combines the functions of the demonstrative pronoun that or those and the relative pronoun which. For example, the cumbersome That which is important is the money becomes What is important is the money, and the cumbersome Those which are welcome are large donations becomes What are welcome are large donations. As may be apparent in the second example, what are is often somewhat troubling; what is accepted by grammarians as a plural relative pronoun as well as a singular one, but nevertheless it seems happier in singular constructions. There is a strong tendency to mix singular and plural verbs, as in What is welcome are large donations, and the tendency is stronger when some verb other than is follows what and there are several words between the first and second verb, as in What warms the cockles of our hearts are large donations. The advice of most writers on grammar and usage, including me in the first edition of this book, is to resist this tendency and allow ourselves only either What warm the cockles of our hearts are large donations or What warms the cockles of our hearts is large donations, with the verbs agreeing in number. In the singular-verb version, which I think is preferable, it is entirely correct for is not to agree in number with donations, since donations is merely the complement in the construction, not the subject, and it is the subject that determines the number of the verb.
John (and his parents) was at the zoo yesterday. A parenthetical subject has no effect on the number of the verb. John as well as his parents was entranced by the monkeys and The zoo in addition to the parks was closed during the war years are correct. Phrases such as as well as and in addition to indicate a parenthetical construction. Their position, even their lives, was now at risk goes too far, however; it requires the plural were. When a second subject is modified by even, it seems to take more than a pair of commas to make the subject parenthetical. Even emphasizes the element and entitles it to affect the verb. The troubling commas can be avoided, of course – Their position and even their lives were now at risk.
Make a pronoun and its antecedent agree in number, person, and gender. The antecedent of a pronoun is the noun or noun phrase that it represents. In I asked Bill, but he can’t go, the antecedent of the pronoun he is the noun Bill. Pronouns do not always have antecedents, and some logically can’t have antecedents. In the question Who can go? the interrogative pronoun Who has no antecedent.
Any, none, and such combinations of pronouns as Any of them and none of you are primarily singular. Formerly the rule was that they always had to be considered singular, but this rule has wisely been loosened, since they are often clearly plural in meaning. Thus None of the citizens vote as often as they are supposed to, in which both the verb and the pronoun are plural, is correct. The plural pronoun is also correct in None vote as often as they are supposed to.
In the sentence The dog didn’t come, though I called him and rattled his dish, and the next morning he was still missing, the pronoun is first objective as the object of called, then possessive as a modifier of dish, and then subjective as the subject of was still missing.
Don’t let a pronoun have more than one likely antecedent. The resources of the Ruhr were very great, but the capacity of the war industries to take advantage of them was much reduced when they became a prime target of Allied air raids is a carefully written sentence, but we can’t tell whether it was the resources or the war industries that became the prime target. Ambiguous pronouns are difficult to catch, because we ourselves know what we mean. Once we’ve caught one by careful checking for possible misreadings, we may decide to let it go, believing that the misreading is too unlikely to worry about. This decision is sensible enough.
The basic tenses are past, present, and future, but English has a lot more than three tenses – by some counts, it has more than thirty. We have not just I cooked, I cook, and I will cook, but the present perfect I have cooked, the past perfect I had cooked, and the future perfect I will have cooked. These tenses – now there are six – also have progressive forms: I was cooking, I am cooking, I will be cooking, I have been cooking, I had been cooking, and I shall (or will) have been cooking. Some tenses have a special emphatic form: I do cook, I did cook. Various other combinations with auxiliary verbs can be considered separate tenses: I was going to cook, I would be cooking, I would have been going to cook, and so on.
Keep the tense of a verb in proper relation to the tenses of other verbs in the sentence or passage. A very high percentage of the time, we know without thinking about it when there is only one proper tense for a verb and when we have a choice of tense and we are safe enough just using the tense that seems right. It is usually only when we do think about it, perhaps feeling that we have lost ourselves in a maze of relative times, that we make errors, applying misremembered rules and momentarily losing our ear for the natural tense.
Often a subordinate verb that expresses something that is always true, not just true at the time of the main verb’s action, is in the present tense, as in Galileo believed that the earth moves around the sun – but moved would not be wrong, and some would consider it preferable, since a subordinate clause in the present tense is slightly jarring when the main clause is in a past tense.
When the actions of a main verb and a secondary verb take place at different times and this fact is evident because of some modifying word for the secondary verb, the verbs can often be either in the same tense or in the logically appropriate different tenses: He always goes out after he comes home or has come home; He went out after he came home or had come home. In She arrived after he had left the party and He had left the party before she arrived, the past perfect has no necessary function, because the adverbs after and before express the time relationship. Some grammarians would call the use of the past perfect in these examples redundant, and therefore wrong. Although redundancy is not always an ultimate evil that must be stamped out wherever it appears, there is perhaps something slightly illogical about indicating time differences with both an adverb and a tense; He left the party describes an action, and after he left the party seems sufficient to describe anything subsequent to that action. Nevertheless, the past perfect is acceptable and to some ears preferable.
Smith said he arrived at the bank on time and went to the vault. The verbs arrived and went are not in the proper tense relative to the verb said; since Smith’s arrival and his going to the vault took place in time previous to the time established by Smith said, the verbs should be had arrived and had gone. However, suppose the account of what Smith said goes on for a long paragraph or even for pages. Are we required to let Smith’s said force every subsequent verb into the clumsy and wordy past perfect tense? No. In such a circumstance, it is not only permissible but desirable to let the tense slide to the simpler past tense, and the sooner the better.
If they swim well, their father smiles contains two indicative verbs in the present tense, swim and smiles. If they don’t swim well and we want to state what the effect on their father would be if they did, we use subjunctive verb forms: It’s too bad they don’t swim well. If they swam well, their father would smile. The verb swam looks like a past tense and the verb would smile looks like a special form of the past tense used to show habitual action, and that is what they would be in a different context: The children sometimes swam well. If they swam well, their father would smile. But in the original context, there is no “pastness” to the meaning of the verbs; the sentence is a statement about an imaginary present rather than an actual past, and the verbs are subjunctive. Subjunctive forms used to make statements about an imaginary present typically are identical with indicative forms used to make statements about an actual past.
The would have ... would have error may be appealing partly because using the same tense in the if clause and the main clause seems a neat and balanced way of arranging things. But an if-this-then-that statement is necessarily not balanced – one part of it is a condition and the other part is a conclusion based on that condition – and therefore the tenses should not be balanced. The subjunctive sequence of tenses is If A were then B would be; If A had been, then B would have been. A subjunctive form occurs in both the first clause and the second, but the forms are of different tenses. (Note that if-then statements about the future, which in American English are usually indicative rather than subjunctive in both clauses, show the same pattern of different tenses: If A happens, then B will happen. The British often use a subjunctive form for the if clause: If A should happen, then B will happen.)
I wish you would have paid me is another common error; it should be I wish you had paid me.
He acts as if he were rich, He acted as if he were rich, and He will act as if he were rich are correct, and so are He acts as if he had been elected, He acted as if he had been elected, and He will act as if he had been elected.
The present infinitive very frequently has a future meaning, as in I am to go tomorrow. In this construction, it is like the present progressive tense, which is formed with the present participle and can also indicate future time, as in I am going tomorrow.
The subjunctive mood is not used to express what something is or what something does, as the indicative mood is, or to make a direct command, as the imperative mood is. It is used to express what something might be or do, should be or do, or must be or do. In a way it is the most distinctively human of moods, because it expresses possible being or action rather than actual being or action. Animals can exist only in the real world, but we exist in imaginary ones as well, and we need the subjunctive mood to think about and talk about our imaginary worlds.
Clauses that begin with if or as if are not always subjunctive. If he is rich he will be welcome is indicative; the if clause presents a condition that may be true. He acts as if his life is in danger and He acts as if his life were in danger are both correct; the indicative as if clause in the first sentence implies that his life may well be in danger, and the subjunctive as if clause in the second sentence implies that it is unlikely that his life is in danger – it states a condition that is, or at least is believed to be, contrary to fact.
She knew that if she were to graduate she would have to study harder is an error; were should be was. Again, the sentence can be tested by seeing if it can be put in the present tense – if it can be, it must be an indicative sentence, not a subjunctive one. And it can be: She knows that if she is to graduate she will have to study harder.
The active voice is simple and direct: Smith hired Brown. The passive voice reverses the position of the agent of the verb and makes the object of the verb its subject: Brown was hired by Smith. When we are children, we often perceive ourselves as objects of action more than as subjects of it, and we use the passive voice even though it takes more words and requires more complicated constructions. The passive voice is a feature of childish expression. It does make childish expression weak compared to adult expression, and therefore teachers try to get us to make more use of the active voice. We do have to become adults, do have to learn to think of ourselves as the subjects of action as well as the objects of it. However, the passive voice is respectable, is capable of expressing thoughts and shades of meaning that the active voice cannot express, and is even sometimes more compact and direct than the active voice.
The passive voice permits not naming the agent of the verb, because the object of the active verb becomes the subject of the passive verb. If the agent is too obvious, too unimportant, or too vague to mention, the passive is usually better.
The pussyfooting passive is admittedly often overused. These arrears cannot be overlooked, and if payment is not made promptly our legal staff will be notified and rigorous action will be taken is an offensive, falsely polite way of saying We cannot overlook these arrears, and if you do not make payment promptly we will take rigorous legal action. In the passive sentence, the writer seems to pretend that the recipient of the letter is being threatened by abstract forces beyond the writer’s control – the credit system, perhaps. By not naming the agent of the threats, the writer avoids admitting responsibility as the agent. The pussyfooting passive is essential in journalism – often the writer does not know who did something or is not free to say who did it, but wants to say it was done.
Adjectives and adverbs are the parts of speech that the term modifier brings to mind – adjectives modify nouns and sometimes pronouns, and adverbs modify verbs, adjectives, and other adverbs. However, the term also includes phrases and dependent clauses that define or elaborate on words or other phrases and clauses.
The possessive my is classified as a definitive adjective. (Other definitive adjectives are the articles the and a and the demonstrative adjectives this, that, these, and those.) After definitive adjectives come numerical adjectives modifying what remains of the word group. Then there are judgmental and descriptive adjectives, such as beautiful and furry.
Because adverbs can wander and because they can modify adjectives, other adverbs, and whole sentences as well as verbs, there may be several words or phrases in a given sentence that an adverb can modify, and this makes confusion and ambiguity possible even in sentences that are grammatically correct. We can’t accept completely abstract logic is ambiguous. The adverb completely could modify either the verb preceding it or the adjective following it. Such a modifier is sometimes called a squinting modifier – it seems to look in two directions at once. Squinting modifiers can be hard to find when we’re looking over what we’ve written, because we ourselves, of course, know what we mean, and the grammar is not incorrect, just ambiguous. The example could be made unambiguous by making it either We can’t completely accept abstract logic or We can’t accept logic that is completely abstract.
I’m only going to tell you once has a misplaced modifier - it should be I’m going to tell you only once – but it is not ambiguous, and it is not graceless either; it is almost an idiom. The “correct” version may sound a little stiff. Sometimes taste must determine when positioning a modifier precisely is desirable and when it is too fussy.
It was impossible to completely follow his logic contains a split infinitive, but it is far better than either It was impossible to follow completely his logic, which is unnatural or It was impossible completely to follow his logic, which is both unnatural and ambiguous. As is frequently the case, we do have a good alternative to splitting the infinitive: It was impossible to follow his logic completely. Fewer and fewer writers, and few grammarians, subscribe to the rule against the split infinitive. And yet there is some virtue in obeying it. If we choose to avoid split infinitives, we should also take the trouble to recast sentences to avoid putting the modifier in an unnatural place.
Inspecting the books, the error was immediately apparent contains a dangling participial phrase. The word the participle should modify must be some word signifying whoever inspected the books.
Providing, as in Providing the books are complete, we will find the error, is accepted by dictionaries as a conjunction, but it is nevertheless much condemned. I advise using provided instead.
I feel badly about it is such a common error that some authorities accept it as idiomatically correct, though no one would say I feel well about it. The verb feel is a linking verb in these examples, not an ordinary verb as it can be in other sentences, such as I feel strongly about it and We feel similarly about it. A linking verb links its subject to the following word or phrase. I is a pronoun and cannot be modified by or linked to an adverb, but it can be modified by or linked to an adjective. Thus it should be I feel bad about it.
The most common linking verb is, of course, be. Other common verbs that can be linking verbs include seem, appear, look, become, grow, taste, smell, sound, remain, stay and stand. Most of them are not always linking verbs. The verb smell is not a linking verb in He vigorously smells the wine or in He smells less acutely than the winemaster, but it is a linking verb in He smells winy after his sessions in the cellar.
You have to hold the camera vertically for close-up portraits is incorrect. It is the camera, not the holding of it, that has to be vertical; the sentence should read You have to hold the camera vertical for close-up portraits. The error is similar to the error in I feel badly, but instead of a linking verb it involves an object complement – a noun or adjective that follows the actual object of a verb to complete the meaning. In They elected him president, the noun president is an object complement; in They called him crazy, the adjective crazy is an object complement. Sometimes a sentence can be phrased either with adverbs or with object complements with no significant change in meaning: Slice the steak thinly or Slice the steak thin; Let us see it clearly and plainly or Let us see it clear and plain.
Precision with adjectives and adverbs can be important. In opening his poem on his father’s dying with the line Do not go gentle into that good night, Dylan Thomas was being precise. He wanted his father to remain himself as he faced death, not to be gentle and resigned, but he did not want his father to die ungently and painfully which is what Do not go gently would mean. To communicate his meaning, Thomas used gentle as what is called a predicate complement – a construction that is quite common, as in I came home tired and Don’t go away mad, and is not likely to give any fluent user of the language trouble, but that does surprise us and make us pay attention when we find it in Thomas’s line where we would expect an adverb.
Spoken language, rich and beautiful as it can be in other respects, must often be less compact and complex than written language, because it does not have the precise syntactical signals that marks of punctuation represent.
Imprecise punctuation, which is a feature of the writing of the badly educated and is by no means uncommon in the writing of the well educated, can be worse than no punctuation at all, because it gives false signals. It also gives the writer away. It doesn’t just suggest ignorance of “good English,” as might an occasional grammatical lapse; it exposes muddled ideas and faulty connection of ideas, an impairment not only of expression but of thinking.
There is often more than one valid way to punctuate a sentence. Also, punctuation practices change more quickly than grammatical rules, and there is more disagreement about them from authority to authority, from stylebook to stylebook. Nevertheless, punctuation can be absolutely wrong.
Sentence structure is a basic part of language, and ordinarily we don’t have to think about it very much. However, when we are not sure how to punctuate a sentence, we do have to think about its structure, and usually in terms of three basic questions:
1. Is it a simple sentence, a compound sentence, or a complex sentence?
2. If the sentence includes a dependent clause or phrase, is the dependent clause or phrase parenthetical or defining?
3. Does the sentence begin with the main clause or with an introductory word, phrase, or dependent clause?
Mary writes is the simplest sort of simple sentence, containing just a subject, Mary, and a verb, writes. Mary writes me letters is still a simple sentence, though now the verb has the direct object letters and the indirect object me. Mary and John write is also a simple sentence, though it has the compound subject Mary and John. And Mary writes and telephones is a simple sentence, though it has the compound predicate writes and telephones. A sentence can get quite long and complicated and still remain a simple sentence. Until recently Mary and John, my grandchildren, wrote me letters twice a month and telephoned every Sunday afternoon is a simple sentence, even though it includes an introductory adverbial phrase, a compound subject with an appositive, a compound predicate, a direct and an indirect object for one of the verbs, and an adverbial phrase for each of the verbs. It is simple because in spite of its complexity and its three commas, it still merely connects one subject or set of subjects to one action or set of actions.
John writes, and Mary telephones is a compound sentence. It consists of two clauses, either of which could stand alone: John writes, Mary telephones. They are independent clauses – that is, not only does each have its own subject and predicate (the minimum any clause must have), but neither one is dependent on the other. A compound sentence is merely a group of two or more simple sentences (or complex sentences, discussed below) that have been made one sentence by punctuating them appropriately and often by using a conjunction such as and. John, who is my grandson, doesn’t write anymore contains the dependent clause who is my grandson. Mary still gets the urge to telephone just before the rates go up on Sunday contains the dependent clause just before the rates go up on Sunday. Both are complex sentences – that is, sentences with one or more dependent clauses. The clause who is my grandson is obviously not an independent clause (unless one makes it a question); it is an adjectival clause modifying John. The clause just before the rates go up on Sunday is not independent either; it is an adverbial clause modifying gets the urge to telephone. Each dependent clause merely modifies something in the main clause.
They wanted to go on writing and telephoning, but after they moved into my house I told them to stop has an independent clause extending up to the comma and then another independent clause, I told them to stop at the end, so it is a compound sentence. The second independent clause is modified by the dependent clause after they moved into my house, so the sentence is also a complex sentence. Thus we have a compound/complex sentence – a compound sentence in which at least one of the independent clauses is modified by a dependent clause.
We may now be able to identify a sentence as simple, compound, or complex, but to punctuate it properly we must answer the second and third of the three questions listed at the beginning of the rule – we must determine whether any dependent constructions are parenthetical or defining and whether the sentence begins with the main clause. Essentially this requires us to consider the meanings of the separate parts – the phrases and clauses – that form the sentence and the relationships among these meanings that give the sentence its overall meaning. Writers who punctuate improperly very likely do not always understand what their sentences mean and perhaps do not always understand even what they want them to mean; if they inspected their writing carefully enough to punctuate it properly they might actually improve their ability to think.
One part of a sentence may be like a parenthetical remark – helpful, perhaps even very important, but not essential to the meaning of the rest of the sentence. Another part may actually define the meaning and hence be essential. A primary purpose of punctuation is to indicate this distinction.
His son, who is a good swimmer, made the rescue contains the parenthetical dependent clause who is a good swimmer. The pair of commas around the clause are, in their effect on the structure of the sentence, exactly like a pair of parentheses: His son (who is a good swimmer) made the rescue. Omitting one comma or the other would be just as bad an error as omitting one of the parentheses. Parenthetical constructions are often called nonrestrictive, because they do not restrict the meaning of the word or words they relate to but only expand on that meaning; they could be removed from the sentence without changing the basic meaning of the subject-predicate combination that makes up the basic sentence.
Parentheses themselves often do suggest that what they enclose is a digression or a bit of incidental information that should not distract the reader from the main point of the sentence, but pairs of commas, and especially pairs of dashes, frequently emphasize what they enclose.
When a parenthetical clause begins a sentence, the first comma is, of course, omitted: Although he swims well, he has no lifesaving training. The second comma – in the example, the one after well – is optional but often desirable.
Parenthetical elements don’t have to be clauses; they can also be phrases or even single words. His son, John, made the rescue has the parenthetical element John. John, swimming strongly, reached the child in time has the parenthetical element swimming strongly.
The examples of parenthetical constructions above might lead one to conclude that such constructions must always be set off by punctuation. However, sometimes they are not. In John as well as his brothers has received lifesaving training, the phrase as well as his brothers is parenthetical. The phrase has no effect on the basic meaning, John has received lifesaving training. The phrase as well as and some others can be so clearly parenthetical, so clearly an interruption, that the signal of enclosing punctuation is not needed.
His son who is a good swimmer made the rescue is quite different from the earlier example with commas. When the sentence has no commas, the subject is no longer just His son, but a specific son who is a good swimmer, as distinguished from other sons who aren’t. There are no commas because who is a good swimmer is now a necessary, integral part of the sentence essential to the meaning. Defining constructions are often called restrictive, because they restrict the meaning of the word or phrase they relate to. Like nonrestrictive elements, restrictive elements can be single words or phrases as well as clauses. Because they are an essential part of the meaning, they should not ordinarily be separated from the words they relate to by commas – though, as will be explained, they sometimes can and sometimes should be so separated when they begin a sentence and in certain special situations.
His son John who is a good swimmer made the rescue is good news but bad punctuation. The lack of punctuation clearly tells the reader that both John and who is a good swimmer are defining elements, but that can’t be the case, because surely only one son is named John. The clause who is a good swimmer must be considered a parenthetical element and thus be set off with a pair of commas or other marks.
In His son, the one who is a good swimmer, made the rescue the interrupting construction is obviously defining – it pins down which son is meant – but it just as obviously requires the commas, unlike the defining constructions in earlier examples. The reason is that the one who is a good swimmer is actually an alternate subject of the sentence; The one who is a good swimmer made the rescue is as grammatically valid a sentence as His son made the rescue. The complete sentence has two beginnings and one ending, and the commas are necessary signals of the second beginning. Although careful writers generally avoid having to begin sentences twice to make their meaning clear, alternate subjects are sometimes employed for rhetorical effect.
An appositive is a noun, or a group of words acting as a noun, that immediately follows another noun to define it or further explain it. My friend Mary is getting married uses Mary as a defining appositive, narrowing down friend to a specific friend, and no commas are used. Mary, my friend from school, is getting married uses my friend from school as a parenthetical appositive, and parenthetical commas are used.
When a noun and another noun in apposition to it are both completely specific, the noun in apposition is considered parenthetical: My husband, John, is at work; John, my husband, is at work. Both John and my husband are completely specific. Parenthetical commas can often be omitted in phrases such as my husband John and my sister Mary, even though there could be only one husband and there may be only one sister. My husband John can be considered a unit, somewhat like my Uncle Bob, rather than an ordinary case of noun and appositive; it often would be spoken without pauses. My sister Mary can also be considered a unit when the existence of other sisters is unknown or irrelevant.
An introductory construction is anything that precedes and modifies the main clause or any independent clause in a sentence. It may be a single word, such as However; it may be a phrase, such as In view of the circumstances; it may be a dependent clause, such as When I’m ready. It may be either defining or parenthetical. Frequently an introductory construction is followed by a comma, which serves as a signal that the main clause is about to begin. I’ll call you when I’m ready contains the defining dependent clause when I’m ready. When I’m ready, I’ll call you puts the dependent clause first, as an introductory construction; When I’m ready is still a defining clause, restricting the meaning of I’ll call you, but because it is introductory it can be set off with a comma. Thus after an introductory construction, a comma is not the signal of a parenthetical element but simply a clarifying pause.
A comma is not always required following an introductory construction – When I’m ready I’ll call you is fine, since the introductory clause is short and very closely related to the main clause. The comma can sometimes be omitted even when the introductory clause is parenthetical, as in Although he swims well he has no lifesaving training, which might benefit from a comma after well but does not strictly require it. Commas or omitted commas are clear indications of parenthetical or defining constructions only when the constructions are not introductory.
Dinner being over we began to quarrel requires a comma after over to separate the absolute phrase Dinner being over from the main clause; an absolute phrase, even though it is not an independent clause, is independent of the sentence containing it, and its independence is honored in speech with a distinct pause.
A moment later, he left the room, and we discussed the issue more openly; omitting the comma after later would make it more apparent that the introductory phrase modifies only he left, not we discussed, for which it is not a very suitable modifier – it indicates a point in time, and we discussed indicates an activity that extends over time.
Therefore, however, in addition, and many similar words and phrases are usually followed by a comma when they are used to introduce a sentence: Therefore, let’s talk about something else. There is some flexibility when such words and phrases are used in a compound sentence to introduce a second clause: Tempers were beginning to rise, and therefore we changed the subject. A comma after therefore would not be incorrect, but it would give the sentence a loose look, with no distinction made between the major pause after rise and the minor or missing pause after therefore. Tempers were beginning to rise; and therefore, we changed the subject uses a semicolon for the major pause and a comma for the minor one, which is correct but gives the sentence more punctuation than it really needs.
We’re going to discuss it, and then we’ll decide what to do is a compound sentence – that is, it has two independent clauses. We’re going to discuss it can stand alone as a complete sentence, and so can Then we’ll decide what to do. When joined by and, the clauses are separated by a comma. A semicolon could be used instead, and if and is omitted, a semicolon should be used. When and is supplied, a semicolon is usually an unnecessarily strong mark of punctuation; the comma is better.
Often when the second independent clause begins with an introductory construction, the comma is misplaced: We’re going to discuss it and, when we’ve worked it out, we’ll let you know should have a comma after discuss it and no comma after and. The comma after out is optional in this example.
Let's sit down and I’ll tell you a story is a compound sentence and could have a comma after down, but it is better without the comma. This is often the case when the clauses of a compound sentence are short; the syntactical signal a comma would provide just isn’t needed, because even though there are two clauses, the sentence can be absorbed as a unit.
It’s an unusual problem and no one knows much about it, but we’re going to discuss it and then we’ll decide is a double compound sentence – two independent clauses joined by and connected to two other independent clauses joined by and. We could put commas after problem and discuss it, but if we do, we had better change the existing comma after about it to a semicolon to avoid a loose string of three commas: It's an unusual problem, and no one knows much about it; but we’re going to discuss it, and then we’ll decide. This would have been considered the best way to punctuate the sentence a generation or so ago, and in formal prose it remains a good way but the trend today is to use light punctuation. With only one internal mark, the comma after about it, the sentence is smoother and just as easy to understand.
As a general principle, it is sensible to omit a comma between independent clauses that are both modified by the same dependent clause or introductory phrase. Tomorrow morning, I’ll come over, and we’ll see the lawyers in the afternoon is not such a case – the second independent clause is not modified by Tomorrow morning. But Tomorrow morning, I’ll come over and we’ll see the lawyers is such a case, and though the comma omission is not required for clarity in this example, it is nevertheless desirable to indicate the shared relationship with the introductory phrase. If in a given example of a shared introductory phrase the sentence begins to seem unwieldy and to require a comma between clauses just for ease of reading, it is likely that the sentence has outgrown its structure and should be divided or recast.
Commas that have no function should be omitted, just as words that have no function should be omitted.
We’ll check the books, and let you know next week justifiably uses the comma to make it clear that the adverbial phrase next week modifies only let you know, not check the books. Often a comma is helpful to counter the tendency of modifiers to link themselves to the wrong word or phrase. He left, and mixed a tray of drinks justifiably uses the comma to keep the first verb from momentarily seeming to share the object a tray of drinks with the second verb, as in He mixed and served a tray of drinks. Verbs joined by and are likely to be perceived as having equal effects on the rest of the sentence containing them.
He mixed the drinks, then served them necessarily uses the comma, because the and that would normally join the predicates is missing. The comma often is used in place of a missing word, and even though its primary function is to separate – to prevent conjunction – it can replace the conjunction and; the slight pause it represents leaves mental room for the omitted word.
He is doing well, and will rise to the top if he keeps it up justifiably uses the comma to separate predicates that are quite different in significance – one is a statement about the present and the other is a prediction. When the verbs in a compound predicate are in different tenses, as they are in the example, a comma is often justifiable. Somewhat similarly He was not doing well, and was eaten by a bear has a justifiable comma; the verb in the first predicate is active, the verb in the second predicate passive.
The figures do not prove, but merely suggest that trouble is ahead is incorrect, because it separates prove from its object, which is also that trouble is ahead; the verbs share the same object. The sentence must have either two commas or none. Two commas make a proper parenthetical interruption, but a single comma cuts one verb or the other from its object.
The expectation is falsely high earnings will be reported, which most readers would have to read twice to get the meaning – which is falsely high, expectation or earnings? – and they couldn’t be sure of it then. Inserting a comma after is would make the meaning clear, though inserting that there instead would be better. Of course, that should be inserted after high if that is the intended meaning.
If the modified element is not a single word but a compound noun, such as merchant ship or dishwater blonde, the first word of the compound may be mistakenly treated as part of a series of adjectives and preceded by a comma, as in Ours was a solid, old-fashioned, merchant ship and Our captain was a blowzy, profane, dishwater blonde, which should not have their second commas.
Toward the hazy cape, the weary whalers rowed, with subject and verb in normal order but the adverbial Toward the hazy cape at the beginning rather than at the end, is only partially inverted. The comma after cape is wrong. In standard order, the basic sentence is The weary whalers rowed toward the hazy cape, and when the adverbial toward the hazy cape is moved to the beginning, it is still part of the basic sentence, not an introductory construction.
Use a comma before and, or, or nor preceding the last of a series of three or more words or phrases. The safe contained coins, jewelry, and documents has a series of three nouns. He emptied the safe slowly, carefully, and completely has a series of three adverbs. He came in, sat down, and began to tell his story has a series of three predicates. His manner was not shifty, shy, or sheepish, but his flying, fluttering, and flouncing hands suggested some deep anguish has a series of three adjectives and a series of three adjectival participles. In all such cases, I advise using a comma before the and that connects the last item in the series to the preceding items. This rule is old-fashioned. Don’t use it if you don’t want to. I remember the gleam of the rain-washed pavement, the distant clatter of streetcars, the garlicky aroma wafting from the restaurant downstairs and the simple dress she wore is one of those jocose examples invented by writers like me to bully readers and attempt to amuse them. But such sentences do occur. Thus those who customarily omit the final serial comma must take special care to make an exception when the final item in the series can be misread as part of the preceding item. Why bother making exceptions? Play it safe and use the final serial comma. Use of the final serial comma does not, unfortun