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