The Grammar Logs -- Number Twenty-Four

The
Grammar
Logs
# 24

Question When I am referring to a group of doctors, is it appropriate to refer to them in the following manner: Drs. Brown, Jones, Smith? If not, what would be the best way to refer to a group of doctors?
Source & Date
of Question Provo, Utah
22 July 1997
Grammar's
Response Yes, that is the appropriate abbrevation of the plural of Dr.
I wonder what the plural of Mrs. is.

Question Is it alright to put a comma after the word farm in this sentence?
At the farm, I helped Uncle Willie take care of the sheep, pigs, cows, and horses.

Source & Date
of Question Oroville, California
22 July 1997
Grammar's
Response I would certainly put a comma there, but the rule that says to put a comma after an introductory modifying phrase or clause is not one of those rules you'd want to bet the farm on. Some good writers would say you don't need a comma after that phrase because a comma doesn't really help you sort out the sense of things. For me, it does, and I'd use a comma. It's easier simply to put a comma after all introductory modifying phrases and clauses -- with exceptions granted to those sentences that flow so smoothly from introductory modifier to the rest of the sentence that a comma is intrusive.
P.S. You're not the first good writer to spell all right as alright, but some people get excited about that word and insist that all right is the only correct spelling. (They're probably wrong, but I wouldn't want you to come to grief in an English class over it.)

Question Can you help me with the use of helping verbs?
Source & Date
of Question Bangkok, Thailand
23 July 1997
Grammar's
Response I don't mean to dodge the issue here, but the Purdue University Writing Lab already has a pretty good place to begin. Try going to their Helping Verbs Page, and if you have any specific questions after that, try writing us again.

Question As a child, I was taught to put a comma after introductory adverbial and prepositional phrases. Is this still the case? I seem to recall that a new rule was adopted which said to use the comma only if the phrase contained five or more words.
Source & Date
of Question Upper Saddle River, New Jersey
23 July 1997
Grammar's
Response I assure you that there's no one at the controls who can make such a decision for the rest of us (although that doesn't sound very reassuring, does it?). This five-word-or more idea is an interesting rule-of-thumb, made up by somebody, but I'm not sure it's worth much. Yes, it was commonplace to say you should put a comma after all introductory modifiers (prepositional phrases or whatever else), but nowadays you see many good writers not doing that. Most writers will put a comma after all beginning adverbial clauses, still, but commas after other introductory modifiers seem to be determined on a case-by-case basis. If the lack of a comma could mislead or confuse in any way, then the comma is necessary, of course, but if the sentence flows nicely without the comma, many writers, nowadays, are leaving it out.

Question We are wondering if the first word after a ? should be capitalized or not. Example:

"Why do you think that?" he asked.
or
"Why do you think that?" He asked.
The only time we agree is if ? is followed by a name.
".....think that?" Jarod asked.

Source & Date
of Question Phoenix, Arizona
24 July 1997
Grammar's
Response "What do you think of that?" he asked is correct. The idea there is that the sentence doesn't really end at the question mark: the quotation is part of a larger construction, which simply continues after the quotation mark. There's at least one other situation where you wouldn't capitalize the word after a question mark, and that's when you have a series of questions in parallel form: Do you like this one better? or this one? or what about that one? This is a matter of personal preference (whether to capitalize or not).

Question Hello. My query is: Is there a major difference between omit and avoid? If not, then how close to them is the verb shun? I have taken three examples from the Cobuild dictionary:

The officials said North Korea was trying to avoid dialogue with the South.
His new girlfriend had omitted to tell him she was married.
He has always shunned publicity.
I hope I will get your explanation soon. Thank you.
Source & Date
of Question Murska Sobota, Slovenia
28 June 1997
Grammar's
Response There's not much difference between shun and avoid. If you habitually avoid something or someone that means that you shun that thing or person. Shunning might involve a kind of value judgment that is not necessarily implicit in avoiding, but not always. Omit, though, means to leave something out. The new girlfriend had told him a lot, but she had left out that "detail." I guess you could say that she had avoided mentioning that fact. So, yes, there is a difference between avoid and omit, but used this way, they can mean much the same.

Question How do I cite the Bible in a bibliography?
Source & Date
of Question Middletown, Pennsylvania
28 July 1997
Grammar's
Response Once you've established (within your text) the edition of the Bible you're using, there's no need to list it in your References or Works Cited page (Rev. 14.3, John 13.6). Parenthetically, you'll let your reader know the source of your quotations, using the established abbreviations for the books of the Bible. Incidentally, you should underline or italicize neither the title of the book nor the word Bible itself. The accepted abbreviations are listed here in their traditional order: Old Testament (OT): Gen., Exod., Lev., Num., Deut., Josh., Judg., Ruth,1 Sam., 1 Kings, 1 Chron., Ezra, Neh., Esth., Job, Ps., Prov., Eccles., Song Sol. (also Cant.), Isa., Jer., Lam., Ezek., Dan., Jos., Joel, Amos, Obad., Jon., Mic., Nah., Hab., Zeph., Hag., Zech., Mal. New Testament (NT): Matt., Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Rom., 1 Cor., Gal., Eph., Phil., Col., 1 Thess., 1 Tim., Tit., Philem., Heb., Jas., 1 Pet., 1 John, Jude, Rev. (also Apoc.).

Question Why do people say "an history"? Shouldn't it be "a history" since the "h" is pronounced? Thanks.
Source & Date
of Question Hickory, North Carolina
28 July 1997
Grammar's
Response People who say "an history" are probably affecting something British, and the British, when they say "an history" (as, I've been told, they often do), are probably affecting something else. You're right: the "h" sound is definitely there, and the "a" is therefore the appropriate article.

Question Please explain how and when to change the pronounciation of the word "the." How does it change pertaining to the sounds it precedes?
Should I say Please take the unbrella or "thee" umbrella?
What is the general rule and can you give me examples?
Source & Date
of Question Korea
29 July 1997
Grammar's
Response You can live your whole life through without ever pronouncing the as thee (with the long e sound). You will, however, sometimes hear it pronounced (but never spelled) that way when the speaker wants to stress the uniqueness of the word modified. "She was the THEE arbiter of fashion during the 1980s." "They were members of THEE intelligentsia in Europe." "She is THEE professor that really mattered on this campus." So you would take the [not THEE] umbrella, unless, for some reason, you wanted to stress the fact this this is the one, the only umbrella available. I don't think this has anything to do with the sound of the word that the/thee precedes.

Question Question on future tense:
If you don't take the time for him today, he may not have time for you tomorow.
Is this correct usage? How about he may not has time? In my mind I always think of I have, we have, you have, they have, but not he have. Would you please explain to me. Thank you very much.
Source & Date
of Question Portland, Oregon
June 28 1997
Grammar's
Response The modal auxiliary "may" accompanies a main verb and works the same way as "he can have/should have/will have." I suggest you check out Edunet's web-page on the uses of may and might. If you were not using an auxiliary verb with the verb to have here, you would, indeed, write "he has."

Previous Grammar Log
Next Grammar Log
Index of Grammar Logs
Guide to Grammar and Writing

Question	When I am referring to a group of doctors, is it appropriate to refer to them in the following manner: Drs. Brown, Jones, Smith? If not, what would be the best way to refer to a group of doctors?
Source & Date of Question	Provo, Utah 22 July 1997
Grammar's Response	Yes, that is the appropriate abbrevation of the plural of Dr. I wonder what the plural of Mrs. is.

Question	Is it alright to put a comma after the word farm in this sentence? At the farm, I helped Uncle Willie take care of the sheep, pigs, cows, and horses.
Source & Date of Question	Oroville, California 22 July 1997
Grammar's Response	I would certainly put a comma there, but the rule that says to put a comma after an introductory modifying phrase or clause is not one of those rules you'd want to bet the farm on. Some good writers would say you don't need a comma after that phrase because a comma doesn't really help you sort out the sense of things. For me, it does, and I'd use a comma. It's easier simply to put a comma after all introductory modifying phrases and clauses -- with exceptions granted to those sentences that flow so smoothly from introductory modifier to the rest of the sentence that a comma is intrusive. P.S. You're not the first good writer to spell all right as alright, but some people get excited about that word and insist that all right is the only correct spelling. (They're probably wrong, but I wouldn't want you to come to grief in an English class over it.)

Question	Hello. My query is: Is there a major difference between omit and avoid? If not, then how close to them is the verb shun? I have taken three examples from the Cobuild dictionary: The officials said North Korea was trying to avoid dialogue with the South. His new girlfriend had omitted to tell him she was married. He has always shunned publicity. I hope I will get your explanation soon. Thank you.
Source & Date of Question	Murska Sobota, Slovenia 28 June 1997
Grammar's Response	There's not much difference between shun and avoid. If you habitually avoid something or someone that means that you shun that thing or person. Shunning might involve a kind of value judgment that is not necessarily implicit in avoiding, but not always. Omit, though, means to leave something out. The new girlfriend had told him a lot, but she had left out that "detail." I guess you could say that she had avoided mentioning that fact. So, yes, there is a difference between avoid and omit, but used this way, they can mean much the same.

Question	Please explain how and when to change the pronounciation of the word "the." How does it change pertaining to the sounds it precedes? Should I say Please take the unbrella or "thee" umbrella? What is the general rule and can you give me examples?
Source & Date of Question	Korea 29 July 1997
Grammar's Response	You can live your whole life through without ever pronouncing the as thee (with the long e sound). You will, however, sometimes hear it pronounced (but never spelled) that way when the speaker wants to stress the uniqueness of the word modified. "She was the THEE arbiter of fashion during the 1980s." "They were members of THEE intelligentsia in Europe." "She is THEE professor that really mattered on this campus." So you would take the [not THEE] umbrella, unless, for some reason, you wanted to stress the fact this this is the one, the only umbrella available. I don't think this has anything to do with the sound of the word that the/thee precedes.

Question	Question on future tense: If you don't take the time for him today, he may not have time for you tomorow. Is this correct usage? How about he may not has time? In my mind I always think of I have, we have, you have, they have, but not he have. Would you please explain to me. Thank you very much.
Source & Date of Question	Portland, Oregon June 28 1997
Grammar's Response	The modal auxiliary "may" accompanies a main verb and works the same way as "he can have/should have/will have." I suggest you check out Edunet's web-page on the uses of may and might. If you were not using an auxiliary verb with the verb to have here, you would, indeed, write "he has."

Question	Can you help me with the use of helping verbs?
Source & Date of Question	Bangkok, Thailand 23 July 1997
Grammar's Response	I don't mean to dodge the issue here, but the Purdue University Writing Lab already has a pretty good place to begin. Try going to their Helping Verbs Page, and if you have any specific questions after that, try writing us again.

Question	As a child, I was taught to put a comma after introductory adverbial and prepositional phrases. Is this still the case? I seem to recall that a new rule was adopted which said to use the comma only if the phrase contained five or more words.
Source & Date of Question	Upper Saddle River, New Jersey 23 July 1997
Grammar's Response	I assure you that there's no one at the controls who can make such a decision for the rest of us (although that doesn't sound very reassuring, does it?). This five-word-or more idea is an interesting rule-of-thumb, made up by somebody, but I'm not sure it's worth much. Yes, it was commonplace to say you should put a comma after all introductory modifiers (prepositional phrases or whatever else), but nowadays you see many good writers not doing that. Most writers will put a comma after all beginning adverbial clauses, still, but commas after other introductory modifiers seem to be determined on a case-by-case basis. If the lack of a comma could mislead or confuse in any way, then the comma is necessary, of course, but if the sentence flows nicely without the comma, many writers, nowadays, are leaving it out.

Question	How do I cite the Bible in a bibliography?
Source & Date of Question	Middletown, Pennsylvania 28 July 1997
Grammar's Response	Once you've established (within your text) the edition of the Bible you're using, there's no need to list it in your References or Works Cited page (Rev. 14.3, John 13.6). Parenthetically, you'll let your reader know the source of your quotations, using the established abbreviations for the books of the Bible. Incidentally, you should underline or italicize neither the title of the book nor the word Bible itself. The accepted abbreviations are listed here in their traditional order: Old Testament (OT): Gen., Exod., Lev., Num., Deut., Josh., Judg., Ruth,1 Sam., 1 Kings, 1 Chron., Ezra, Neh., Esth., Job, Ps., Prov., Eccles., Song Sol. (also Cant.), Isa., Jer., Lam., Ezek., Dan., Jos., Joel, Amos, Obad., Jon., Mic., Nah., Hab., Zeph., Hag., Zech., Mal. New Testament (NT): Matt., Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Rom., 1 Cor., Gal., Eph., Phil., Col., 1 Thess., 1 Tim., Tit., Philem., Heb., Jas., 1 Pet., 1 John, Jude, Rev. (also Apoc.).

Question	Why do people say "an history"? Shouldn't it be "a history" since the "h" is pronounced? Thanks.
Source & Date of Question	Hickory, North Carolina 28 July 1997
Grammar's Response	People who say "an history" are probably affecting something British, and the British, when they say "an history" (as, I've been told, they often do), are probably affecting something else. You're right: the "h" sound is definitely there, and the "a" is therefore the appropriate article.