|
The Grammar Logs # 139 |
|
| QUESTION |
| A series of tests was/were performed duplicating the internal device. Should I use was or were and could you send along a explanation? Thanks so much. |
| SOURCE & DATE OF QUESTION |
| Ottawa, Canada ___ Sunday, June 7, 1998 |
| GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE |
| The word series can be either singular or plural, depending on the context. We would say "The World Series was over in five games." But then we could say "Two series of World Series were played in New York -- one from 1952 to 1955 and another from 1961 to 1964." (Or, more simply, four World Series were won by the Yankees in the early fifties.") As you can see, the word is practically always going to be singular -- as I think it is in your sentence, where a "series of tests" is one thing, so you want a singular verb, "was," to go with it. |
| QUESTION |
| I teach Language Arts in a small rural school. Our Literature book is full of stories with sentences that start with the word "and". Is it now permissible to do this? I will not allow my students to do this, but when they see it in one of their textbooks they think they can. Help. |
| SOURCE & DATE OF QUESTION |
| Ossian, Indiana ___ Monday, June 8, 1998 |
| GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE |
| You can find all kinds of grammatical lapses in a literature book. Literature is much closer to the language that real people use in their everyday lives (see Wordsworth's Preface to the Lyrical Ballads) than formal expository prose is. I tell my students that if they ever begin a sentence with a conjunction, they need to consider carefully whether that sentence shouldn't be connected to the sentence preceding it or whether that sentence wouldn't be better off without that conjunction. If they've thought about those two options and still want the conjunction at the beginning of the sentence, then they should use it. There is no hard and fast rule against it. A sentence beginning with a conjunction will always call attention to itself. And if that's what that sentence deserves, go with it. (The preceding sentence is not a particularly good example of what I mean.) Authority: New York Public Library Writer's Guide to Style and Usage HarperCollins: New York. 1994. 196. Cited with permission.
|
| QUESTION |
Are both of these sentences correct?
|
| SOURCE & DATE OF QUESTION |
| Taipei, Taiwan ___ Monday, June 8, 1998 |
| GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE |
| The second sentence is closer to being correct because it has the necessary verb -- the perfect construction -- but it's still not a complete sentence. The sentence starts out to say something about reliability and then modifies reliability (the reliability "we've always been known for"), but then never gives us a verb for the subject. Incidentally, do we really need "through all these years" in this sentence? We need something like this: "The reliability we've always been known for has become a legend in the industry." |
| QUESTION |
Is it grammatically correct to place an adjective (onboard) after a noun (...SCSI channels) as such:
"..., a Pentium II-based product offering dual Ultra Wide SCSI channels onboard."Thanks in advance (quoted from The China Post, June 3 issue) |
| SOURCE & DATE OF QUESTION |
| Taipei, Taiwan ___ Monday, June 8, 1998 |
| GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE |
| Yes, that is acceptable. It has the effect of stressing the adjective, which is what the writer wanted in this sentence (as opposed to "outboard" or whatever the opposite would be). The adjective could also have preceded "channels," either before "dual" or "Ultra Wide" or "SCSI," but it's fine where it is. |
| QUESTION |
| I need information on writing annotated bibliography. using journals and
magazines. How do you write them and in what order. thanks |
| SOURCE & DATE OF QUESTION |
| Glendale, New York ___ Monday, June 8, 1998 |
| GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE |
| I suggest you visit our Guide to Writing Research Papers and click on the section called Annotated Bibliographies. |
| QUESTION |
| Dear Grammar, What's the rule dealing with prepositions as they relate to islands, states, and nations?
|
| SOURCE & DATE OF QUESTION |
| Cary, North Carolina ___ Monday, June 8, 1998 |
| GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE |
| That's an interesting question. I'd never thought of this before. I do believe it has something to do with the size and whether or not you're thinking of the political entity as an island or a country. It's hard not to think of something as small as Guam without thinking of it as an island, so we probably almost always say "on Guam." (Perhaps Guam's ambiguous status as a territory contributes to this also?) On the other hand, we would say that someone lives "in Japan" or "in Hawaii" or "in Ireland," unless we specify that we're thinking of the place as island: "He lives on the island of Hawaii" or "they returned to live on the island of Puerto Rico." As the geographical entitly becomes larger, the "on" becomes less and less of a possibility. It's hard to think of someone living "on Greenland," "on Australia," "on Sri Lanka," or even "on Iceland," for that matter. Perhaps other writers may want to make a suggestion about this, and if they do, I'll pass it on to you. |
| QUESTION |
Which is correct English?
|
| SOURCE & DATE OF QUESTION |
| Boulder, Colorado ___ Monday, June 8, 1998 |
| GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE |
That Phrasal Verb, "come with," has to be accompanied by an object: "us," in this case. The sentence, in either case, has another problem. It's a comma splice. We need to end the first clause after "store," and then begin another sentence:
Julie, we're going to the store. Would you like to come with us?You might be able to use a semicolon instead of the period, but the period is probably better. |
| QUESTION |
I need help in determining the usage of "a" or "an" in the following:
A (or an) MMD-Wilson employee met with representatives of .....(MMD is acronym for Merck Manufacturing Division). |
| SOURCE & DATE OF QUESTION |
| Wilson, North Carolina ___ Monday, June 8, 1998 |
| GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE |
| You would use the article "an" in that situation because you say the letter "m" with an "em" sound. In other words, when we say the word that stands for the letter "m," we use a beginning vowel sound. If we pronounced the word that stands for the letter "m" as "moo," instead, we would say, a MMD-Wilson employee. . . (a moo-moo-dee-Wilson employee). Did that make sense, I hope? |
| QUESTION |
| Dear Grammar: Last week in San Francisco, while looking at huge strawberries, I said to an American citizen: "It's amazing. I had never seen so large till now." And he answered: "Me neither!" Shouldn't it be "Neither I!" ? Thanks a lot! |
| SOURCE & DATE OF QUESTION |
| Sao Paulo, Brazil ___ Monday, June 8, 1998 |
| GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE |
| We probably would have said, "I have never seen such large strawberries before." But the "Me neither" response from your American friend is definitely a colloquialism that ought to be avoided in writing, if not in speech. "Me neither" is heard quite often in casual speech, I must add. "Neither have I," would be much better. (It would be rather unusual, however, to leave the verb "have" out of that sentence.) |
Previous Grammar Log