The Word of the Year...

And the word of the year is...

Locavore

At least it is according to The New Oxford American Dictionary. "Locavore" refers to the movement to buy local or homegrown food to support local farmers and environmental causes.

Merriam-Webster, however, disagrees, and officially declared this the word of the year:

w00t

"w00t" is a computer gaming word somehow akin to "yay." More than that, I don't know. Check out this link though for more background: http://www.reuters.com/article/internetNews/idUSN1155159520071212

And so what do I say is the word of the year? I don't know about 2007, but I've got my word for 2008...

In true Syntax Sisters fashion, I want to declare this the year of "fewer."
Yes, I want this to be the year grocery stores and cable television programs fix their grammar and proudly ask us to step up to the express lane only if we have twelve or fewer items. I want the word "less" to be banished to uncountable quantities only, doomed to live a life of indeterminate value. I believe this is the year English begins its slow climb into proper usage and grammar teachers across the country can stand up and be proud to say there are fewer errors than there were last year!

But then again, I've always been a bit of a nerd.

What's your word of the year?

Couldn't resist...

This is taken from an article on cnn.com:

"U.S. Rep. Bobby Jindal became the nation's youngest governor and the first nonwhite to hold post in Louisiana since Reconstruction when he carried more than half the vote to defeat 11 opponents."

Can you spot what's wrong? It's funny...

Hint: a word or phrase that modifies a noun must be next to the noun it modifies.

The answer is in the comments section...

Where have we gone?

The Syntax Sisters are currently on hiatus. We continue to care about grammar and correct everything in sight, but for the time being we have stopped posting.
If you would like to see our return, please email us at syntaxsisters@yahoo.com.
We might be enticed back!

Number vs Numeral

Dan wrote to us at syntaxsisters@yahoo.com to ask about the difference between the words
"number" and "numeral." I checked a few dictionaries which confirmed my suspicions about these two words.

Number refers to the concept of a number. For instance, when we say there are five ducks, we can picture five little birds in a row.

Numeral refers to the markings we use to indicate that idea of "fiveness", such as "5", "V", or even "five."

So, if I wanted to say how many ducks there are, I would say "The number of ducks is five." If I wanted to tell someone what to write down, I would say "Use the numeral for five."

Or, for instance, if your house is number 182, then your house number contains the numerals "1", "8", and "2."

Does that help?
Any brilliant insights, sis?

Text Messaging and Grammar

I know that I have noticed this phenomenon in my college students. The IM and text message language and writing style has infiltrated into more traditional forms of writing. I believe that one of the big challenges in the years to come for those of us who teach writing will be transitioning our students from modern computer slang to traditional, standard English.

From CNN.com

Report: Text messaging harms written language
DUBLIN, Ireland (Reuters) -- The rising popularity of text messaging on mobile phones poses a threat to writing standards among Irish schoolchildren, an education commission says.
The frequency of errors in grammar and punctuation has become a serious concern, the State Examination Commission said in a report after reviewing last year's exam performance by 15-year-olds.
"The emergence of the mobile phone and the rise of text messaging as a popular means of communication would appear to have impacted on standards of writing as evidenced in the responses of candidates," the report said, according to Wednesday's Irish Times. "Text messaging, with its use of phonetic spelling and little or no punctuation, seems to pose a threat to traditional conventions in writing."
The report laments that, in many cases, candidates seemed "unduly reliant on short sentences, simple tenses and a limited vocabulary".
In 2003, Irish 15-year-olds were among the top 10 performers in an international league table of literacy standards compiled by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
Copyright 2007 Reuters.

On April 17, a fan in Syracuse, NY, wrote:

Our local news used the term ‘snowblowed.’ The sentence was something like … “many CNYer’s snowblowed their walkways several times today…” My question is other than saying …’many CNYer’s had to snowblow their walkways several times today...,’ is ‘snowblowed’ correct?

Snowblowed? Snowblew? In English, to form the past tense of a regular verb (that is, indicate that an event has occured in the past), we add the ending -ed. So if "snowblow" is a regular verb, "snowblowed" is correct. But "blow," is not a regular verb, its past tense being "blew." So should the past tense of "snowblow" be "snowblew"? Good question.

In fact, the problem here is not one of regular or irregular past tense. Instead, the problem is what is commonly referred to as "verbing a noun," that is, using a noun (remember? person, place, or thing) as a verb (action word). A "snowblower" is a thing, thus, a noun. "To snowblow" is the result of "verbification," turning a legitimate noun into an illegitimate verb. Sometimes, verbing a noun is useful; most often it is senseless and lazy. Unfortunately, many examples of unnecessary verbification have become common parlance: "email" (noun) to "email, emailing, emailed" (verb forms); "contact" (noun) to "contact, contacting, contacted" (verb forms); and "impact" (noun) to "impact, impacting, impacted" (verb forms)--oh, how I cringe at this last example! Verbification is generally lazy and results from an attempt to say something as quickly and efficiently as possible. I'm all for efficiency, don't get me wrong; but don't do it to the destruction of the English language! Nancy Allison has a clever (and lengthier) article on "nerbs," as she calls them, at http://www.stcboston.org/archives/articles/nouns.shtml.

So, no, to a classic grammarian, "snowblowed" is not correct, nor would be "snowblew" or any other verbification. I'd suggest, "Many CNY'ers [what the heck is a "CNY'er," anyway? the subject for another post, I'd say!] cleared their sidewalks with snowblowers several times today." Longer, yes, but so much more pleasant to the ear, wouldn't you say?

The most important element of this question, though, as I see it is what on earth you're doing living in a place where snowblowers are in use "several times" on April 17!

Grammar crackdown overseas

Just saw this article on cnn.com. Now if only we could get this sort of thing to happen in our own country...

BEIJING, China (AP) -- On the floor at Beijing's Capital Airport, a sign reads: "Careful Landslip Attention Security."

On a billboard, this mysterious message: "Shangri-La is in you mind, but your Buffalo is not."

In an elevator, parents are warned: "Please lead your child to tare the life."

Beijing officials have promised to crack down on bad English in preparation for the 2008 Olympics and they've asked the public to help police bad grammar and faulty syntax.

With 500,000 foreigners expected for the Olympics, taxi drivers who can't speak English -- or signs that mangle the language -- could be an embarrassment and distract from the $40 billion being poured into rebuilding the city for the games.

Liu Yang, who heads the "Beijing Speaks Foreign Languages Program" for the city government, said 6,500 "standardized" English-language signs were put up last year on Beijing roads.

Liu said a language hotline may be set up for the games to encourage the public to report nonsense English. China's diplomatic missions abroad are assisting, Liu said, "and our people working in foreign companies are helping with correct usage."

Officials have also undertaken efforts to stamp out spitting and bad manners in the run-up to the games.

Copyright 2007 The Associated Press.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/TRAVEL/04/19/china.olympics.ap/index.html

Good or Well?

After a conversation with a friend yesterday, I was reminded of the confusion that exists with when to use "good" and when to use "well." I'm borrowing a page from my sister's book and giving the next commonly confused words post as a dialogue.

Imagine a conversation in an office hallway.

Employee#1: Hi. How are you?

Employee #2: I'm doing well. I just heard good news: we are all getting a raise!

Employee #1: Does that mean that our product has been well-received?

Employee #2 Yes it does, and it is a good thing too.

Employee #1: And why is that?

Employee #2: The head of the company said that if sales didn't go well, we might be looking at a pay decrease instead of a pay increase.

Employee #1: That is good news!


So, what can we tell from this (besides that it is good to get a raise!)?

Good is an adjective, used to describe nouns (like "news" and "thing").

Well is an adverb, used to describe verbs or actions (like the act of receiving or the act of going).

When you are discussing your health, we also use well. ("I am well.")

This last one is what trips a lot of people up. We think that when we say "I'm good" we're describing ourselves. What we are actually describing is our state of health, which requires us to use well. Here's a handy trick: we go to the doctor's office for wellness visits. Just the same when someone says, "Hi, how are you?" we are being asked about our health, so we should say "I'm well" (that is, healthy).

Unless, of course, you didn't just get a raise. Then feel free to say "I'm miserable."

National Poetry Month

In April we celebrate many things, not the least of which is the return (we hope) of good weather. We also take this month to enjoy and appreciate poets and poetry. If you are interested in information about celebrations going on, here's a handy website:

http://www.poets.org/page.php/prmID/41


Happy National Poetry Month!

Feel like chasing a goose?

Laura, in NYC, NY, emailed to ask us about a way to remember the difference between lose and loose. "How do you remember, between 'lose' and 'loose,' which one sounds like it has a 'z'?"

Here's a way:

You can let loose a goose, but don't lose your shoes chasing it!

Maybe that doesn't help with the "z" sound too much, but it does emphasize the difference in "o" sounds.
Plus it's funny to imagine chasing a goose...

(Photo courtesy of Mark Mitchell, Atlanta, GA)

Bring it on!

Kathee in Seattle wonders about the uses of "bring" and "take." See what you think:

Carla: Fido! Bad dog! Bring my new Coach purse over here right now! Take that out of your mouth! C'mon boy, bring it to me!
Fido stops to consider...then continues chewing happily on the expensive leather strap.
Carla (panicking): C'mon, Fido, bring it to me! It's okay; I won't take it from you. Just bring it over here. I promise I won't take it.
Fido still "thinking" (do dogs think?).
Carla: Here, Fido; take this biscuit. Just bring the bag to me, and you can take this biscuit, this bone...anything! Please! Just bring me my bag!
Fido picks up the bag and takes it across the room, away from all the yelling.
Carla (desperate): Here, take my double cheeseburger, take my...
Fido sees his opportunity and decides not to take any chances that she'll change her mind. He brings her the purse and takes off with the whole bag of fast food: VICTORY. Dumb dog? I think not.

Got it? Just remember: bring to, take from.

Question: Affect or Effect?

We have our first email question. This is from Robin in Syracuse, NY:

"How about effect and affect? I am often confused and see the same confusion in my students’ papers. Even when I try to clarify that affect is acting on and effect is the result of."

Great question. These are tricky. The best way to remember the difference is to remember the part of speech for these words.

Affect is a verb. It describes an action, specifically the act of producing a change or influencing. So, for instance, Jane affected (influenced) her husband's outfit by saying the shirt and pants did not match.

Effect is primarily a noun. It is a thing. It usually means result. The effect (result) of Jane's comment was that her husband changed his pants.

Just to make matters worse, effect can also be a verb. In this form, effect means to bring about. This usage is less common. The company effected (brought about) new rules for drug safety policies.

The way I usually tell my students to remember is if you can subsitute in "influence" you want affect, and if you can substitute in "result" you want effect.

Daniele, do you have any handy tricks for this one?

A funny joke...

I seem to be stuck on punctuation these days. I was just reminded of a joke/forward that goes around from time to time. I'm not sure of its original source.
It goes something like this:

A college professor wrote a sentence on the blackboard with no punctuation. It looked like this:

Woman without her man is nothing

The professor then asked two students to punctuate it. The first student was male, and he did this:

Woman, without her man, is nothing.

The second student was female, and punctuated it this way:

Woman: without her, man is nothing.

Isn't it funny what a difference a punctuation mark makes?

Teach your children well...but not too well!

Okay, I admit it. There's one grammar error I make all the time when I'm talking...so in the spirit of full disclosure, here you have it. When my not-yet-three-and-a-half-year-old corrected me recently, though, I decided never to make this mistake (or any other, for that matter; how can I win "Mother of the Year" if I keep making mistakes?) again. I swear I am not making this up.

Here's how the conversation went:

I said something to my son about his mattress...

3-year-old: What's a mattress?
Me: That's the thing on top of your bed, you know, the part you lay on.
3-year-old: You mean the part I lie on?
What I wanted to say: You little...how dare you correct your mother?...don't you know I'm never wrong?

But alas and alack, I was wrong. So here it is, straight from the legendary Strunk and White (if you don't know who they are, see "Recommended Reading" to the right; you need to know these guys!):

Lay: A transitive verb [...] do not misuse it for
the intransitive lie. The hen, or the play, lays an egg;
the llama lies down. The playwright went home and lay
down.

lie; lay; lain; lying
lay; laid; laid; laying. (51)

Got it? I didn't think so. So here it is in lay terms (no pun intended...okay, maybe I did intend it) from another great resource, Woe Is I, by Patricia T. O'Connor (complete citation in sidebar):

lay/lie. To lay is to place something; there's always a "something" that's being placed. To lie is to recline. If you're not feeling well, lay your tools aside and lie down. (102)

Lie (to recline): She lies quietly. Last night, she lay quietly. For years, she has lain quietly.
Lay (to place): She lays it there. Yesterday she laid it there. Many times she has laid it there. (When lay means "to place," it's always followed by an object, the
thing being placed.). (64)

The things we can learn from our children...little know-it-alls.

How many items?

Here's your next quick grammar lesson:

Can't remember how to use the words fewer and less? Just remember that most grocery stores have it backwards, and you'll never forget again. Use fewer for countable items, less for non-countable quantities.

The express lane--"Ten Items or Less"--then, has got it all wrong. Can you count the items in your cart? Then use fewer. You have fewer items than the guy behind you does. But how much milk is in that quart you're buying? Less than is in a gallon jug. Can you count the milk? No, so use less.

Cashier: Ma'am, I'm afraid you don't have less than ten items.
You: Pardon me, but don't you mean fewer?
Cashier: Excuse me? Ma'am, this is the express line; you can't use this line unless you have less than ten items.
You: But you should say fewer...see, I can count my items, so you should use fewer and not less...
Cashier: Apparently, you can't count them! You have twelve!

Got it? I wouldn't recommend arguing about it with your cashier, though...

Breaking News....

I just heard this story this morning on NPR. Ever heard of a fast food restaurant suing a dictionary? As Daniele said when she heard about the story, "What is this world coming to?"
Here is a blurb from NPR's website, www.npr.org:

Morning Edition, March 21, 2007 ·
It's one thing to have your brand name go generic: Kleenex for tissues, Xerox for copies. It's another when it's generic for something the company finds derogatory. Which explains McDonald's current fight over [the word] "McJob" and its negative connotations ([ McJob is defined as a] low-paying, dead-end [job]). The fast-food franchise wants the Oxford English Dictionary — the last word on words — to delete "McJob."

*Statements in brackets are mine, and are not original to the website.

Oh my.

Need to take an English class?

If you don't find these actual student errors from actual student essays funny, you might want to consider it...

Students summarizing what they have learned in a grammar and basic composition course:

• "Now I know that subjects and verbs always needs to agree." Is that so?
• "In class I have learn lots and lots of grammer. Writing is something else that I done." Apparently not enough of it, I guess.
• "I've learned a lot of grammar. For example, I've learned that instead of saying, 'I had my hair done,' I should say, 'I had my hair did.'" Oh, dear...
• "I have improved my skills using commas and apostrophe's." (Don't get this one? See the posting below entitled, "Say what?".)
• "But the one thing that's very clear to me now, is using commas in the correct places." Don't be so sure.

And people wonder what inspires us to keep teaching English...obviously, someone's got to do it!

A Reason to Know your Punctuation Rules...

Here's a news article from npr.org about a case that made headlines last fall. It gives us a really good reason to know our comma rules. In this case, a misplaced comma could cost a company one million dollars!

Million-Dollar Comma May Aid Canadian Company

All Things Considered, October 25, 2006 · A contract dispute in Canada centers on what's being called a million-dollar comma. Canada's telecommunications regulator has decided that a misplaced comma in a contract concerning telephone poles will allow a company to save an estimated $2 million (Canadian).

The current exchange rate is around 88 cents (U.S.) on the Canadian dollar.

The contract between cable company Rogers Communications and telephone company Bell Aliant allowed Rogers to use Bell Aliant's telephone poles. Bell Aliant sought to get out of the deal.

Canada's telecommunications regulator said the case hinged on the placement of the second comma in this clause:

"This agreement shall be effective from the date it is made and shall continue in force for a period of five (5) years from the date it is made, and thereafter for successive five (5) year terms, unless and until terminated by one year prior notice in writing by either party."

Rogers had insisted the contract was good for at least five years; Aliant said the comma denotes that the deal can be terminated at five years -- or before, as long as one year's notice is given.

The ruling commission said that the comma should have been omitted if the contract was meant to last five years in its shortest term.

The case is now being appealed; Rogers claims that in its French version, the contract has a different statement clarifying the point.

Say what?

Quick grammar lesson:
Apostrophes - used to make contractions (like I'm, you're, don't) and to make things possessive, that is, show ownership (like John's raincoat, or the house's broken shutters)

Here are some funny signs I've seen with some serious apostrophe errors:

Posted along a state highway (I'll leave the state unnamed)

"Take a Break
Stay Awake
For Safety Sake"

Umm....do you mean Safety's Sake? Big oops.

A sign at a local mechanic's shop:

"We Love
4 Wheel Drive's
SUV's
Jeep's"

What, exactly, do all of those vehicles own?


And finally, a national television commercial for a fastfood restaurant (name omitted):

"Our drive thru's are now open late"

Again, are the drive thrus owning something?

Too funny!