Why Grammar Matters: A Place To Discuss Matters Of Grammar

annzeepark914 · May 30

Well, some of them were funny so thanks, ethalfrida, for the chuckles 🤓. My MIL would say "unthaw". I mentioned the "nip it in the butt" one at my coffee group this morning. Big hit!

ethalfrida · May 30

42 minutes ago, annzeepark914 said:

Well, some of them were funny so thanks, ethalfrida, for the chuckles 🤓. My MIL would say "unthaw". I mentioned the "nip it in the butt" one at my coffee group this morning. Big hit!

Lol, right! Same here. Whenever I hear or read the phrase I think of Barney Phife (sp) sage parenting advice about Opie!

Have a great one today, Annzeepark914…

shapeshifter · May 30

Is it grammatically correct to say:

I just wanted to see where we’re at.

I am not opposed to ending a sentence with a preposition, but is there something else amiss with this sentence?

I overheard it because I’m babysitting my 5-month-old Lambykins 👩‍🍼grandbaby because his daycare thought he had a fever yesterday. My daughter works from home, so I overheard bits of a Zoom. All participants have masters degrees.
It seems lapses into casual, informal speech are common in the middle of a discussion using formal language.
I do it too.

Just wondering.

Edited May 30 by shapeshifter

Milburn Stone · May 30

16 hours ago, Ancaster said:

I stopped reading at "here's my two cents."

Was it something in the writer's POV on the grammar issue in that section, or something in the phrase "here's my two cents"? Because I don't see an error in the latter. (I suppose one might say "here are my two cents," but nobody says that.)

Browncoat · May 30

1 hour ago, annzeepark914 said:

My MIL would say "unthaw".

My assistant said that this morning, and it wasn't the first time.

9 minutes ago, shapeshifter said:

Is it grammatically correct to say:

I just wanted to see where we’re at.

I don't think so. Besides ending the sentence with a preposition, the "at" is unnecessary. I just wanted to see where we are.

17 minutes ago, ethalfrida said:

Barney Phife

It's Fife. There were a couple of episodes where he spelled it, although a magazine article in one episode misspelled it as "Fice."

shapeshifter · May 30

49 minutes ago, shapeshifter said:

Is it grammatically correct to say:

I just wanted to see where we’re at.

34 minutes ago, Browncoat said:

I don't think so. Besides ending the sentence with a preposition, the "at" is unnecessary. I just wanted to see where we are.

Thanks!
That explains it.
And I’m going to blame this song for it:
https://genius.com/The-dave-clark-five-i-like-it-like-that-lyrics

Quof · May 30

59 minutes ago, shapeshifter said:

Is it grammatically correct to say:

I just wanted to see where we’re at.

It's redundant. I loathe it, just as I loathe "whether or not" and "new beginning."

Zella · May 30

5 minutes ago, Quof said:

It's redundant. I loathe it, just as I loathe "whether or not" and "new beginning."

"Free gift" drives me crazy!

fairffaxx · May 30

"Future plans", "past history". I cope by just feeling superior, which helps a bit.

EtheltoTillie · May 30

I don’t mind “where we’re at.” That’s an acceptable idiom.

annzeepark914 · May 30

Irregardless? Why yes, it's a wonderful restaurant in Raleigh, NC (hope it's still open).

ETA: still open. I used to order the avocado toast way back in the 1980's. I think it was in the late 90's that they had a fire. The owners paid their employees the entire time that it was closed for extensive repairs.

Edited May 30 by annzeepark914

isalicat · May 30

The one that always provokes fury in me is: "impactful". If that is really a word, then it is the number one most overused word currently. How about: "makes an impact", or "has a significant impact"...or better yet, find something else than "impact"!!

Browncoat · May 30

1 hour ago, annzeepark914 said:

Irregardless? Why yes, it's a wonderful restaurant in Raleigh, NC (hope it's still open).

ETA: still open. I used to order the avocado toast way back in the 1980's. I think it was in the late 90's that they had a fire. The owners paid their employees the entire time that it was closed for extensive repairs.

They had an outstanding Sunday brunch, too.

Milburn Stone · May 31

Just an addendum on why "here's my two cents" (rather than "here are my two cents") is correct. "Two cents" in this context does not mean "more than one penny." It's a stand-in for "opinion." One wouldn't say "Here are my opinion."

shapeshifter · May 31

7 minutes ago, Milburn Stone said:

Just an addendum on why "here's my two cents" (rather than "here are my two cents") is correct. "Two cents" in this context does not mean "more than one penny." It's a stand-in for "opinion." One wouldn't say "Here are my opinion."

Unless "two cents" turns out to be more than one opinion that I have?
— which is always the case in my brain.

annzeepark914 · May 31

Well, nerts to the "rule" about apostrophes. I tried omitting them but 1980s looked too needy, ya know what I mean? Not sure I can get used to the new "look". Are newspapers doing this?

EtheltoTillie · May 31

2 hours ago, annzeepark914 said:

Well, nerts to the "rule" about apostrophes. I tried omitting them but 1980s looked too needy, ya know what I mean? Not sure I can get used to the new "look". Are newspapers doing this?

I'm confused. Which apostrophes? and which is a new rule?

Mondrianyone · May 31

Trade books, fiction and nonfiction, have not used apostrophes in plural years for decades. In my memory it's always been "the 1960s," not "the 1960's." That's how the Chicago Manual of Style mandates anyway.

EtheltoTillie · May 31

24 minutes ago, Mondrianyone said:

Trade books, fiction and nonfiction, have not used apostrophes in plural years for decades. In my memory it's always been "the 1960s," not "the 1960's." That's how the Chicago Manual of Style mandates anyway.

Thanks, Mondrianyone. When I was a magazine copy editor in the '70s and '80s and early '90s, we also never used apostrophes for plural years. I did not think of this as a new rule.

Now, let's not get started on apostrophes for the missing century, as in '60s. That rule still stands--no? And never two apostrophes, right?

And that's my two cents.

Edited May 31 by EtheltoTillie

EtheltoTillie · May 31

Ha, at first I forgot the apostrophes in the decades! Then I went back and edited.

We can get into a lot of boring copy editor style arguments about whether we should spell out numbers or not. I say, pick a side and stick with it.

annzeepark914 · May 31

1 hour ago, EtheltoTillie said:

Ha, at first I forgot the apostrophes in the decades! Then I went back and edited.

We can get into a lot of boring copy editor style arguments about whether we should spell out numbers or not. I say, pick a side and stick with it.

Since I'm no longer writing for a foundation newsletter (never used the years anyway) I'll do whatever I'm in the mood for/to do/awww whatevahhh!

SoMuchTV · May 31

2 hours ago, EtheltoTillie said:

We can get into a lot of boring copy editor style arguments about whether we should spell out numbers or not. I say, pick a side and stick with it.

I'm vaguely aware that there's a rule where it's one way when it's at the start of a sentence and the other when it's within the sentence, but I couldn't tell you which is which. I think I do pick up on it sometimes when it's not right, though.

My one numeral-related grammar peeve (or my 1 numeral-related...) is when someone uses "1" when they mean "one". But I don't think I've seen that on anything that has gotten past a copy editor.

shapeshifter · June 2

On 5/31/2024 at 3:15 PM, EtheltoTillie said:

We can get into a lot of boring copy editor style arguments about whether we should spell out numbers or not. I say, pick a side and stick with it.

When I was doing some freelance side-gig editing of dissertations for scholarly publication, there were specific rules about spelling out the number if it was below, maybe, 10 (I always had to look it up) and to spell it out at the beginning of a sentence.
I no longer look it up — or citation styles either — but that work left me with an understanding of when something looks like it will be understood correctly by the reader
— which is a long-winded way to say:
Just make sure the people reading it will understand it.

Edited June 3 by shapeshifter

EtheltoTillie · June 3

12 hours ago, shapeshifter said:

When I was doing some freelance side-gig editing of dissertations for scholarly publication, there were specific rules about spelling out the number if it was below, maybe, 10 (I always had to look it up) and to spell it out at the beginning of a sentence.
I no longer look it up — or citation styles either — but that work left me with an understanding of when something looks like it will be understood correctly by the reader
— which is a long-winded way to say:
Just make sure the people reading it will understand it.

Each publication has "house style." When you work on a publication you have to keep it consistent and follow the style. There is something arbitrary about that custom, but it is the custom. I suppose to make things seem "professional." That's why I was talking about boring copy editor style arguments lol.

shapeshifter · June 4

On 6/3/2024 at 6:53 AM, EtheltoTillie said:

Each publication has "house style." When you work on a publication you have to keep it consistent and follow the style. There is something arbitrary about that custom, but it is the custom. I suppose to make things seem "professional." That's why I was talking about boring copy editor style arguments lol.

I loved that stuff, LOL.

SoMuchTV · June 8

8 minutes ago, graybrown bird said:

I know this is picky but it is an ongoing peeve I see not just in random posts but in the newspaper from time to time: "lead" as the past tense of "to lead." The past tense is simply "led."

Maybe what confuses people is that the element "lead" is pronounced like the past tense of the verb ("led").

Agreed! It seems like I’ve been seeing this more and more lately for some reason - like, multiple times a day!

Ancaster · June 10

Off of.

graybrown bird · June 10

Using "lay" for lie: He was laying ("lying!") on the floor. Or to an innocent doggie: "Lay down, Henry!" (In my head: "Lie down! Lie down!")

shapeshifter · June 10

9 minutes ago, graybrown bird said:

Using "lay" for lie: He was laying ("lying!") on the floor. Or to an innocent doggie: "Lay down, Henry!" (In my head: "Lie down! Lie down!")

I'm sure I make this mistake.
Note to self: Doggies cannot lay eggs.

Ancaster · June 11

12 hours ago, graybrown bird said:

Using "lay" for lie: He was laying ("lying!") on the floor. Or to an innocent doggie: "Lay down, Henry!" (In my head: "Lie down! Lie down!")

Ugh. If you feel the urge to say "lay", ask yourself what you're laying. An egg, maybe?

ABay · June 11

Wou

Or it be correct to say "he lay back on the bed"?

Lay lie laid lying...

I'm not at all confident about any of the L words. Is there a mnemonic that might help? Something like "Fewer apples, less applesauce" which I've found helpful for the few/less issue?

Bastet · June 11

9 hours ago, ABay said:

Wou

Or it be correct to say "he lay back on the bed"?

Lay is the past tense of lie, so if that's the context in which you're saying it, yes.

Mondrianyone · June 12

On 6/11/2024 at 5:57 AM, ABay said:

Is there a mnemonic that might help?

Well, there's a partial one. If you have trouble with the present tense, you can remember that "lie" is in "recLIne" and "lay" is in "pLAce." And "lie" is intransitive while "lay" is transitive, but I suppose a lot of people don't know what that distinction means.

As for the rest of the tenses, you're on your own there. Most of the confusion comes from the fact that the past tense of "lie" is "lay," so they cross over. And from the fact that "lie" as in recline is also "lie" as in to tell an untruth. So people tend to shy away from saying that someone is lying in bed and are drawn to saying that someone is laying in bed, because there's no ambiguity to the latter. Even though it's wrong.

This is why I have a job. You gotta love English.

shapeshifter · June 12

5 minutes ago, Mondrianyone said:

And from the fact that "lie" as in recline is also "lie" as in to tell an untruth. So people tend to shy away from saying that someone is lying in bed and are drawn to saying that someone is laying in bed, because there's no ambiguity to the latter.

So would:
"My ex could be found lying in bed 12 hours a day"
be a grammatically correct double entendre?

Mondrianyone · June 12

How would I know? He's your ex, not mine. 😉

shapeshifter · June 12

9 minutes ago, Mondrianyone said:

How would I know? He's your ex, not mine. 😉

Ooo, but I only asked if it was "grammatically correct," not true! 🤣

Feel free to use my query in a PowerPoint.😉

Bastet · June 12

24 minutes ago, Mondrianyone said:

As for the rest of the tenses, you're on your own there.

Lay vs. lie is easy peasy for me, since it simply depends on whether there's an object, but conjugating the various tenses of whichever word is appropriate sometimes requires me to think for a moment. Or two.

Browncoat · June 12

Today, I saw, "I wish there was a pneumonic device to help me remember."

But my heart rejoiced at the sign by the express lane at Target, which said, "10 items or fewer."

SoMuchTV · June 12

On 6/12/2024 at 6:24 PM, Browncoat said:

But my heart rejoiced at the sign by the express lane at Target, which said, "10 items or fewer."

Normally I’m a less/fewer stickler, but in this case I might be able to accept “10 items or less [stuff]”. On the other hand, it should definitely be “10 or fewer (not less) items”.

Edited June 15 by SoMuchTV

Quof · June 12

A local store apparently solved the debate in the marketing meeting over the correct grammar, putting up signs that say "Up to 12 items". 🥰

Ancaster · June 15

On 6/11/2024 at 2:57 AM, ABay said:

Would it be correct to say "he lay back on the bed"?

On 6/11/2024 at 12:05 PM, Bastet said:

Lay is the past tense of lie, so if that's the context in which you're saying it, yes.

Yes, because if you say "he lays back on the bed," it's present tense and would mean he had reverted to laying, for example, eggs on the bed again, as opposed to in the hen house, where he'd been doing it for a while.

On 6/12/2024 at 4:33 PM, SoMuchTV said:

Normally I’m a less/fewer sticker, but in this case I might be able to accept “10 items or less [stuff]”. On the other hand, it should definitely be “10 or fewer (not less) items”.

I'll take a sticker of you advocating for the difference between less and fewer. 😉

SoMuchTV · June 15

18 hours ago, Ancaster said:

On 6/12/2024 at 7:33 PM, SoMuchTV said:

Normally I’m a less/fewer sticker, but in this case I might be able to accept “10 items or less [stuff]”. On the other hand, it should definitely be “10 or fewer (not less) items”.

I'll take a sticker of you advocating for the difference between less and fewer. 😉

Thank you for making fun of my dumb typo within the edit window! I always especially love it when I make mistakes in the grammar thread.

(Oh and for stickers, visit my merch page. Like, rate, and subscribe!)

Edited June 15 by SoMuchTV

chitowngirl · June 15

I would be happy if the shoppers would not have more than 10 items in the cart! I hate when shopper with a cart load full of items is attempting to check out in the express lanes.
I DO recognize this is a Peeve and not a grammar matter….

Edited June 15 by chitowngirl

shapeshifter · June 15

7 minutes ago, chitowngirl said:

I DO recognize this is a Peeve and not a grammar matter….

Unless you can find such an offender with 20 items in their cart who says:
“The sign said ‘10 items or less,’ but it didn't say less than what.”

Milburn Stone · June 15

16 hours ago, Ancaster said:

...if you say "he lays back on the bed," it's present tense and would mean he had reverted to laying, for example, eggs on the bed again, as opposed to in the hen house, where he'd been doing it for a while.

I love that you are open to this possibility!

Ancaster · June 16

16 hours ago, SoMuchTV said:

Thank you for making fun of my dumb typo within the edit window! I always especially love it when I make mistakes in the grammar thread.

Now I feel bad because I didn't mean to "make fun of you", just share a chuckle.

EtheltoTillie · June 16

I think we could tell it was a good natured joke. At least you’re not feeling badly.

Edited June 16 by EtheltoTillie

SoMuchTV · June 16

23 hours ago, SoMuchTV said:

Thank you for making fun of my dumb typo within the edit window! I always especially love it when I make mistakes in the grammar thread.

(Oh and for stickers, visit my merch page. Like, rate, and subscribe!)

7 hours ago, Ancaster said:

Now I feel bad because I didn't mean to "make fun of you", just share a chuckle.

Om my gosh, I really didn't mean to come across that way! I was making fun of myself, not making a dig at you. That's why I made sure to add a "laugh" reaction to your post when I made my comment!

Mondrianyone · June 16

You just have to try more hardly next time. 👩‍🎓

Ancaster · June 16

1 minute ago, Mondrianyone said:

You just have to try more hardly next time. 👩‍🎓

People actually say this?!

Sign In

Why Grammar Matters: A Place To Discuss Matters Of Grammar

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

nokat

Browncoat

GHScorpiosRule

Posted Images

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment