Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1. Misplaced apostrophes
Apostrophes arent difficult to use once you know how, but putting them in the
wrong place is one of the most common grammar mistakes in the English
language. Many people use an apostrophe to form the plural of a word,
particularly if the word in question ends in a vowel, which might make the word
look strange with an S added to make it plural.
The rules:
Apostrophes are never used to make a word plural, even when a word is
in number form, as in a date.
In the 1980s
How to do it properly:
In the 1980s
We didnt want to do it
2. Your/youre
We covered this one before in our post on homophones, but its such a
widespread problem that theres no harm in covering it again.
The rules:
Your beautiful
How to do it properly:
Youre beautiful
3. Its/its
We said earlier that apostrophes should be used to indicate possession, but
there is one exception to this rule, and that is the word it. Unsurprisingly,
this exception gets lots of people confused.
The rules:
How to do it properly:
4. Could/would/should of
This common mistake arises because the contracted form of could have
couldve sounds a bit like could of when you say it out loud. This mistake
is made frequently across all three of these words.
The rules:
When people write should of, what they really mean is should have.
Shouldve and Should have are both correct; the latter is more formal.
How to do it properly:
5. There/their/theyre
Weve met this one before, too; its another example of those pesky homophones
words that sound the same but have different meanings.
The rules:
How to do it properly:
6. Fewer/less
The fact that many people dont know the difference between fewer and less
is reflected in the number of supermarket checkout aisles designated for 10
items or less. The mistake most people make is using less when they actually
mean fewer, rather than the other way round.
The rules:
Less refers to a commodity, such as sand or water, that you cant count
individually.
How to do it properly:
Less sand
7. Amount/number
These two work in the same way as less and fewer, referring respectively to
commodities and individual items.
The rules:
How to do it properly:
8. To/two/too
Its time to revisit another common grammar mistake that we also covered in
our homophones post, as no article on grammar gripes would be complete
without it. Its easy to see why people get this one wrong, but theres no reason
why you should.
The rules:
Im to hot
He bought to cakes
How to do it properly:
Im too hot
Its time to go
Im going to town
9. Then/than
Confusion between then and than probably arises because the two look and
sound similar.
The rules:
How to do it properly:
10. Me/myself/I
The matter of how to refer to oneself causes all manner of conundrums,
particularly when referring to another person in the same sentence. Heres how
to remember whether to use me, myself or I.
The rules:
When referring to yourself and someone else, put their name first in the
sentence.
For example, with the sentence John and I are off to the circus, you
wouldnt say me is off to the circus if it was just you; youd say I am off
to the circus. Therefore when talking about going with someone else,
you say John and I.
You only use myself if youve already used I, making you the subject
of the sentence.
How to do it properly:
I thought to myself
11. Invite/invitation
This mistake is now so common that its almost accepted as an alternative, but
if you really want to speak English properly, you should avoid it.
The rules:
How to do it properly:
12. Who/whom
Another conundrum arising from confusion over how to refer to people. There
are lots in the English language!
The rules:
Who and whom work in the same way as he or him. You can work
out which you should use by asking yourself the following:
Whom is responsible?
How to do it properly:
Who is responsible?
13. Affect/effect
Its an easy enough mistake to make given how similar these two words look
and sound, but theres a simple explanation to help you remember the
difference.
The rules:
How to do it properly:
I.e. means that is or in other words. It comes from the Latin words id
est.
E.g. means for example. It comes from the Latin words exempli gratia.
Only use i.e. and e.g. when writing informally. In formal documents,
such as essays, it is better to write out the meanings (for example or
that is).
How to do it properly:
Below are some of the most common English mistakes made by ESL
students, in speech and in writing. Go through the examples and make sure
you understand the corrections. Then try the grammar test at the end to check
your progress.
1.
Wrong
Right
3.
Wrong
Right
5.
Wrong
Right
Wrong
Right
Wrong
Right
7.
9.
11.
Wrong
Right
13.
Wrong
Right
15.
Wrong
Right
17.
Wrong
Right
19.
Wrong
Right
21.
Wrong
Right
23.
Wrong
Right
25.
Wrong
Right
27.
Wrong
Right
29.
Wrong
Right
31.
Wrong
Right
33.
Wrong
Right
35.
Wrong
Right
37.
Wrong
Right
39.
Wrong
Right
41.
Wrong
Right
43.
Wrong
Right
45.
Wrong
Right
47.
Wrong
Right
49.
Wrong
Right
51.
Wrong
Right
53.
Wrong
Right
55.
Wrong
Right
57.
Wrong
Right
59.
Wrong
Right
Is ready my passport?
Is my passport ready?
61.
Wrong
Right
63.
Wrong
Right
She is success.
She is successful.
65.
Wrong
Right
67.
Wrong
Right
69.
Wrong
Right
71.
Wrong
Right
73.
Wrong
Right
75.
Wrong
Right
77.
Wrong
Right
79.
Wrong
Right
My husband engineer.
My husband is an engineer.
81.
Wrong
Right
83.
Wrong
Right
85.
Wrong
Right
87.
Wrong
Right
89.
Wrong
Right
91.
Wrong
Right
93.
Wrong
Right
95.
Wrong
Right
97.
Wrong
Right
99.
Wrong
Right
Use "fewer" when discussing countable objects. For example, "He ate five fewer
chocolates than the other guy," or "fewer than 20 employees attended the
meeting."
Use "less" for intangible concepts, like time. For example, "I spent less than one
hour finishing this report."
2. "It's vs. "Its"
Normally, an apostrophe symbolizes possession. As in, "I took the dog's bone."
But because apostrophes also usually replace omitted letters like "don't"
the "it's" vs. "its" decision gets complicated.
Use "its" as the possessive pronoun: "I took its bone." For the shortened version
of "it is" use the version with the apostrophe. As in, "it's raining."
3. Dangling Modifiers
These are ambiguous, adjectival clauses at the beginning or end of sentences
that often don't modify the right word or phrase.
For example, if you say, "Rotting in the refrigerator, our office manager threw
the fruit in the garbage." The structure of that sentence implies your office
manager is a zombie trapped in a chilly kitchen appliance.
Make sure to place the modifying clause right next to the word or phrase it
intends to describe. The correct version reads, "Our office manager threw the
fruit, rotting in the refrigerator, in the garbage."
4. "Who" vs. "Whom"
Earlier this year, "The New Republic" published a review of Mark
Leibovich's "This Town." Regardless of his opinions, the author deserves praise.
The title reads, "Careful Whom You Call A Hypocrite, Washington." Yes, Alec
MacGillis. Just yes.
When considering whether to use "who" or "whom," you have to rearrange the
sentence in your own head. In the aforementioned case, "whom you call a
hypocrite" changes to "you call whom a hypocrite." "Whom" suits the sentence
instead of "who" because the word functions as the object of the sentence, not
the subject.
It's not always easy to tell subjects from objects but to use an over-simplified
yet good, general rule: subjects start sentences (or clauses), and objects end
them.
For reference, "who is a hypocrite?" would be a perfectly grammatically correct
question to ask.
5. Me, Myself, And I
Deciding when to use me, myself, or I also falls under the subject/object
discussion. "Me" always functions as the object (except in that case); "I" is
always the subject. And you only use "myself" when you've referred to yourself
earlier in the sentence. It's called a reflexive pronoun it corresponds to a
pronoun previously in the sentence. For example, "I made myself breakfast" not
"my friend and myself made lunch."
To decide usage in "someone else and me/I" situations, take the other person
out of the sentence. "My co-worker and I went to lunch." Is "I went to lunch"
correct? You're good then.
6. "Lie" vs. "Lay"
Dear everyone, stop saying: "I'm going to go lay down." The word "lay" must
have an object. Someone lays something somewhere. You lie. Unless you lay,
which means lie but in the past tense. Okay, just look at the chart.
Present
Past
Lie
Lie
Lay
Lay
Lay
Laid
7. Irregular Verbs
The English language has quite a few surprises.We can't list all the irregular
verbs, but be aware they do exist. For example, no past tense exists for the
word "broadcast." "Broadcasted" isn't a word. You'd say, "Yesterday, CNN
broadcast a show."
"Sneak" and "hang" also fall into the category of irregular verbs. Because the
list of irregular verbs (and how to conjugate them) is so extensive, you'll have to
look into them individually.
317 COMMENTS
In:
Craft
Grammar
Vocabulary
Ive edited a monthly magazine for more than six years, and its a job thats
come with more frustration than reward. If theres one thing I am grateful for
and it sure isnt the pay its that my work has allowed endless time to hone
my craft to Louis Skolnick levels of grammar geekery.
As someone who slings red ink for a living, let me tell you: grammar is an ultramicro component in the larger picture; it lies somewhere in the final steps of
the editing trail; and as such its an overrated quasi-irrelevancy in the creative
process, perpetuated into importance primarily by bitter nerds who accumulate
tweed jackets and crippling inferiority complexes. But experience has also
taught me that readers, for better or worse, will approach your work with a
jaundiced eye and an itch to judge. While your grammar shouldnt be a
reflection of your creative powers or writing abilities, lets face it it usually is.
Below are 20 common grammar mistakes I see routinely, not only in editorial
queries and submissions, but in print: in HR manuals, blogs, magazines,
newspapers, trade journals, and even best selling novels. If it makes you feel
any better, Ive made each of these mistakes a hundred times, and I know some
of the best authors in history have lived to see these very toadstools appear in
print. Let's hope you can learn from some of their more famous mistakes.
Who and Whom
This is one of the most common mistakes out there, and understandably so.
That is a restrictive pronoun. Its vital to the noun to which its referring. e.g.,
I dont trust fruits and vegetables that arent organic. Here, Im referring to all
non-organic fruits or vegetables. In other words, I only trust fruits and
vegetables that are organic. Which introduces a relative clause. It allows
qualifiers that may not be essential. e.g., I recommend you eat only organic
fruits and vegetables, which are available in area grocery stores. In this case,
you dont have to go to a specific grocery store to obtain organic fruits and
vegetables. Which qualifies, that restricts. Which is more ambiguous
however, and by virtue of its meaning is flexible enough to be used in many
restrictive clauses. e.g., The house, which is burning, is mine. e.g., The house
that is burning is mine.
Lay and Lie
This is the crown jewel of all grammatical errors. Lay is a transitive verb. It
requires a direct subject and one or more objects. Its present tense is lay (e.g.,
I lay the pencil on the table) and its past tense is laid (e.g., Yesterday I laid the
pencil on the table). Lie is an intransitive verb. It needs no object. Its present
tense is lie (e.g., The Andes mountains lie between Chile and Argentina) and its
past tense is lay (e.g., The man lay waiting for an ambulance). The most
common mistake occurs when the writer uses the past tense of the transitive
lay (e.g., I laid on the bed) when he/she actually means the intransitive past
tense of lie" (e.g., I lay on the bed).
Moot
The word envy implies a longing for someone elses good fortunes. Jealousy
is far more nefarious. Its a fear of rivalry, often present in sexual situations.
Envy is when you covet your friends good looks. Jealousy is what happens
when your significant other swoons over your good-looking friend.
Nor
May implies a possibility. Might implies far more uncertainty. You may get
drunk if you have two shots in ten minutes implies a real possibility of
drunkenness. You might get a ticket if you operate a tug boat while drunk
implies a possibility that is far more remote. Someone who says I may have
more wine could mean he/she doesn't want more wine right now, or that
he/she might not want any at all. Given the speakers indecision on the
matter, might would be correct.
Whether and If
Less is reserved for hypothetical quantities. Few and fewer are for things
you can quantify. e.g., The firm has fewer than ten employees. e.g., The firm is
less successful now that we have only ten employees.
Since refers to time. Because refers to causation. e.g., Since I quit drinking
Ive married and had two children. e.g., Because I quit drinking I no longer wake
up in my own vomit.
Disinterested and Uninterested
Unless youre frightened of them, you shouldnt say youre anxious to see your
friends. Youre actually eager, or "excited." To be anxious implies a looming
fear, dread or anxiety. It doesnt mean youre looking forward to something.
Different Than and Different From
This is a tough one. Words like rather and faster are comparative adjectives,
and are used to show comparison with the preposition than, (e.g., greater
than, less than, faster than, rather than). The adjective different is used to
draw distinction. So, when different is followed by a preposition, it should be
from, similar to separate from, distinct from, or away from. e.g., My living
situation in New York was different from home. There are rare cases where
different than is appropriate, if than operates as a conjunction. e.g.,
Development is different in New York than in Los Angeles. When in doubt, use
different from.
Bring and Take
In order to employ proper usage of bring or take, the writer must know
whether the object is being moved toward or away from the subject. If it is
toward, use bring. If it is away, use take. Your spouse may tell you to take
your clothes to the cleaners. The owner of the dry cleaners would say bring
your clothes to the cleaners.
Impactful
It isn't a word. "Impact" can be used as a noun (e.g., The impact of the crash
was severe) or a transitive verb (e.g., The crash impacted my ability to walk or
hold a job). "Impactful" is a made-up buzzword, colligated by the modern
marketing industry in their endless attempts to decode the innumerable
nuances of human behavior into a string of mindless metrics. Seriously, stop
saying this.
Affect and Effect
Heres a trick to help you remember: Affect is almost always a verb (e.g.,
Facebook affects peoples attention spans), and effect is almost always a noun
(e.g., Facebook's effects can also be positive). Affect means to influence or
produce an impression to cause hence, an effect. Effect is the thing
produced by the affecting agent; it describes the result or outcome. There are
some exceptions. Effect may be used as a transitive verb, which means to
bring about or make happen. e.g., My new computer effected a much-needed
transition from magazines to Web porn. There are similarly rare examples where
affect can be a noun. e.g., His lack of affect made him seem like a shallow
person.
Irony and Coincidence
Too many people claim something is the former when they actually mean the
latter. For example, its not ironic that Barbara moved from California to New
York, where she ended up meeting and falling in love with a fellow Californian.
The fact that theyre both from California is a "coincidence." "Irony" is the
incongruity in a series of events between the expected results and the actual
results. "Coincidence" is a series of events that appear planned when theyre
actually accidental. So, it would be "ironic" if Barbara moved from California to
New York to escape California men, but the first man she ended up meeting
and falling in love with was a fellow Californian.
Nauseous
Sometimes it is difficult to know where to put a full stop and we like to hedge
our bets by putting a comma instead. Sorry to tell you but this wont work! If
you are hesitating about using a comma or a full stop, go for a full stop. You
are more likely to be correct.
Handy hints
'Then always starts a new sentence unless it has a connective such as and,
but or so in front of it. Then should not be overused as it is not a
sophisticated linking word.
I got into school at 8.45 and then I went to my registration class.
I got into school at 8.45. Then I went to my registration class.
However
Emma's skills in listening and talking are developing. However, she needs to
keep practising her reading at home.
Because
Yes, in spite of what your pupils will tell you, you can start a sentence with
because. Just make sure that you have an end to it and it is not left hanging
loose! The end is shown in bold.
Examples
Because many teachers were rather uncertain about some aspects of grammar,
this online module has been put together to support them.
Incorrect example not a sentence
Because there were many new courses on offer in the school to ensure that young
people had a lot of choice. X
You could change this to the correct version:
Because there were many new courses on offer in the school to ensure that young
people had a lot of choice, the school got an excellent report.
Although
Although works in the same way as because. It can start a sentence, but
must have an end, so it is not hanging loose.
Examples
Although most of the pupils had learned to tie their laces, a few still had problems.
Smoking has been banned in public places for some time now and this has
helped some people to stop. Although other people still find it hard to give up.
X
King Kong was created using layers of cotton, rubber and fur which were fixed
to a metal frame. Although several models were used in the film. X
In my handout entitled Grades on essays and the mid-year test: for Eco.
201Y1 and 3031Y, I provided a list of the most common faults on student
essays & examinations, with the indication that those that were checked off
in the following list apply either wholly or partially to the answer given in the
student's paper or examination. This document may be found on-line on my
Home Page: http://www.economics.utoronto.ca/munro5/GRADEXa.pdf
The final one, no. 8, states that: Your written English is deficient in one or
more of the following:
Striving to write good English is not a matter of mere pedantry. For, in writing
any essay, report, examination, etc., your objective must be to convince the
reader of your arguments, with the greatest possible clarity. In achieving this
objective you must also appeal to the reader's sympathies, i.e. you must elicit a
favourable impression to maintain the reader's attention and interest in what
you have to say. Even if you are reasonably clear and cogent in your writing,
you are unlikely to maintain the readers' attention and sympathy if your
writing is clumsy, ugly, or in other ways deficient.
So please take the following examples of bad English seriously; and strive to
improve your written (and spoken) English.
1. DANGLING MODIFIERS:
As written, the present participle 'discussing' modifies 'it'; and 'it' cannot do
any discussing.
Correct forms:
Another example:
2. RUN-ON SENTENCE:
Examples:
(1) The Dutch gained commercial and financial supremacy during the later
sixteenth, seventeenth, and early eighteenth centuries, however, they lost that
supremacy to Great Britain during the later eighteenth and early nineteenth
centuries.
Fault: confusing 'however' (adverb) with 'but' (conjunction); 'but' is the proper
and only conjunction to be used in linking thee two principal clauses, which,
however, should also be separated by a semi-colon, for better clarity.
Note: 'However' may be used as a conjunction, but only in one restricted set of
circumstances, when 'however' means 'in whatever manner or way'. Thus: 'We
can go however he likes' [in whatever manner he likes]. Normally, however, the
word 'however' is an adverb and thus cannot and may not be used as a
conjunction (i.e. meaning 'but').
Correct: The Dutch gained commercial and financial supremacy during the
later sixteenth, seventeenth, and early eighteenth centuries; but subsequently,
during the later eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, they lost that
supremacy to Great Britain.
(2) During the fifteenth century, the Dutch gained supremacy over the
Hanseatic Germans in both the herring fisheries and the Baltic trades, many of
the German Hanse towns then suffered slow but irredeemable decline. [Note
how these two distinctly separate sentences run on together without the proper
conjunction or proper punctuation.]
(a) During the fifteenth century, the Dutch gained supremacy over the
Hanseatic Germans in both the herring fisheries and the Baltic trades; and
subsequently, many of the German Hanse towns suffered slow but
irredeemable decline.
[The two principal clauses are properly separated by the conjunction 'and' and
also by a semi-colon.]
(b) During the fifteenth century, the Dutch gained supremacy over the
Hanseatic Germans in both the herring fisheries and the Baltic trades.
Subsequently, many of the German Hanse towns suffered slow but
irredeemable decline. [Two completely separate sentences.]
(c) During the fifteenth century, the Dutch gained supremacy over the
Hanseatic Germans in both the herring fisheries and the Baltic trades, so that
many of the German Hanse towns subsequently suffered slow but irredeemable
decline.
(d) During the fifteenth century, the Dutch gained supremacy over the
Hanseatic Germans in both the herring fisheries and the Baltic trades, while
many of the German Hanse towns thereafter suffered slow but irredeemable
decline.
Wrong: The Dutch gained supremacy in the northern herring trades, because
they developed superior, much larger-scale, more efficient fishing boats,
because of the fifteenth-century shift of the herring spawning grounds from
Scania in the Baltic to the North Sea fishing grounds between the Netherlands
and England, and also with the benefits derived from on-board salt-curing.
Correct: The Dutch gained supremacy in the northern herring trades, because
they developed superior, much larger-scale, more efficient fishing boats;
because such craft, during the much longer sea voyages, permitted and indeed
necessitated on-board salt-curing, whose very rapidity greatly improved quality;
and finally because, during the early fifteenth century, the spawning grounds
shifted from Scania in the Baltic to the North Sea fishing grounds between the
northern Netherlands and England.
Do not use 'as' to introduce a subordinate clause that follows the principal
clause, when 'as' in that subordinate clause explains why: in the sense of
'because, since, for'.
Example: I opened the front door as the salesman was insistently pressing on
the buzzer.
This can be confusing: does the sentence mean that I opened the door just as
and at the very moment that the salesman was pressing on the buzzer? -- the
only permissible form of 'as' in this particular construction; or, more likely,
does it mean that I opened the door because the salesman was so insistently
pressing on the buzzer? If the latter, the sentence is both confusing and
inelegant.
A gerund is a verbal noun: a verb form acting as a noun, e.g. as the subject or
object of the principal clause in a sentence. As such, any other noun or
pronoun modifying that gerund must be in the possessive case [and not in the
objective case, in the latter example]
Wrong: The Exchequer officials queried them submitting tax receipts that were
so often carelessly compiled.
Correct but clumsy: The Exchequer officials queried their submitting tax
receipts that were so often carelessly compiled. [What was queried was not the
persons but the actual submission of the carelessly compiled tax receipts: the
pronoun thus must be in the possessive case in modifying the gerund
'submitting'.]
Better: The Exchequer officials queried the submission of the tax receipts that
they had so often carelessly compiled. [Change the gerund into a regular noun.]
7. DISTINGUISH BETWEEN 'DUE TO' AND 'BECAUSE OF': note that due is
an adjective, while 'because of' is a preposition introducing an adverbial
phrase.
The growth in English population from the 1740s was principally due to a
change in nuptiality and thus in the birth rates. [Was, from 'to be', is a copula
verb that may be modified by an adjective]
None: Please note that this pronoun must take the verb in the singular,
because it means 'not one'. Never say: 'none of them are.....'
Decimate: Please note that this verb, with Roman-Latin origins, means
to kill one out of ten; and thus do not use it to mean 'to kill a large
number....'. To state that the Black Death (a combination of bubonic and
pneumonic plague) 'decimated' the population of mid and later 14thcentury Europe is a gross understatement, because the combination of
those plagues destroyed about 40 percent of the European population, by
the 1370s.
Thus The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English (ed. H.W. and F.G Fowler,
3rd edn. 1934, with many reprints) defines plausible: 'Of arguments,
statements, etc.: specious, seeming reasonable or probable; of persons: fair
spoken (usually implying deceit). [From L plausbibilis]'.
The Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary (1975 edn.) similarly states, for
plausible: 'adj (L plausibilis: worthy of applause] 1: superficially fair,
reasonable, or valuable, but often specious; 2: superficially or pleasing or
persuasive; 3: appearing worthy of belief.'
More nuanced, perhaps in accordance with the current temper of the times, is
The Canadian Oxford Dictionary (1998 edn.), which more curtly states, for
plausible: 'of an argument, statement, etc., seeming reasonable, believable, or
probable.' [But note the use of the word seeming.]
Since the vast majority of writers, including the vast majority of good writers,
neglect to observe the following rule about 'defining' and 'non-defining' relative
clauses, the failure to do so can hardly be considered a major sin, or indeed
even an error. Since, however, at least two editors have rapped me on the
knuckles for failing to observe this rule in the past, I have been forced to
examine this rule more closely, and have thereby concluded that observing it
does indeed add to clarity. Please do consider the following carefully, before
condemning this advice as mere pedantry.
A defining relative (subordinate) clause is one that specifies that the noun
so modified is unique (i.e. the only possible one); such a relative clause
should be introduced by the conjunction 'that' (rather than 'which'), and it
must not be separated by commas from the principal clause.
Example: The river that flows through London [England] is murky and turbid.
[The relative clause tells us specifically what river is meant, and indeed the
only river meant in this context. Removal of the relative clause would make the
sentence meaningless: The river is murky and turbid. We want to know
specifically what river is meant by this criticism.]
A non-defining relative clause is one that merely adds additional but noncrucial information; it should commence with the conjunction 'which'
(and not 'that') and it must be separated from the principal clause by the
two commas.
Example 1: The English river Thames, which flows through London, is murky
and turbid.
[By specifically naming this river, the author merely supplies additional but
non-crucial or 'non-defining' information about the river; and removal of this
relative clause in no way impairs the meaning of the sentence: The English
river Thames is murky and turbid.]
Example 2: The Humber River that flows through metropolitan Toronto is quite
polluted.
Explanation: This defining relative clause ensures that the European reader
does not confuse this particular and little-known Humber River, in Canada,
with the much better known Humber River in England.
Or: The Humber River, i.e. the one that flows through metropolitan Toronto, is
quite polluted.
Example 3: The same rules apply to the use of the relative conjunction
'who' and 'whose' in defining and non-defining relative clauses, viz:
The British military officer who defeated Napoleon became a duke: the famed
'Iron Duke' of Wellington.
The Duke of Wellington, whose peerage was the reward for his victories over
Napoleon, was Great Britain's greatest national hero in the nineteenth century.
The British general whose peerage was earned in the Napoleonic Wars was
Arthur Wellesley, the Duke of Wellington, who is perhaps better known as the
Iron Duke.
NAS Not a sentence. What you have written lacks a subject (noun) and/or a
proper verb; and it is therefore just a phrase or a subordinate clause.
SP Spelling errors
PE Punctuation errors