The Grammar Logs -- Number Twenty-Seven

The
Grammar
Logs
# 27

Question In capitalizing titles, do I capitalize the second word in a hyphenated word?
EXAMPLE: Three-Dimensional or Three-dimensional. Ice-Flow or Ice-flow ?

Source & Date
of Question La Canada, California
4 September 1997
Grammar's
Response In a title, you'd capitalize the second word (of two connected by a hyphen) "only if it is a noun or an adjective or is as important as the first word." So in the examples you give us, yes, capitalize both words.
Authority: The Little, Brown Handbook by H. Ramsay Fowler and Jane E. Aaron, & Kay Limburg. 6th ed. HarperCollins: New York. 1995. By permission of Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers Inc.

Question How to use 'incredously' in a sentence?
Source & Date
of Question Miami, Florida
6 September 1997
Grammar's
Response The woman looked on incredulously as the sky-writer scrawled a marriage proposal in the sky above the stadium.
See the The Notorious Confusibles.

Question Would you please give me an example of a dropped participle and exactly what it is?
Source & Date
of Question Holmdel, New Jersey
8 September 1997
Grammar's
Response Are you sure you don't mean a DANGLING participle? I've never heard of a "dropped participle," and I don't see it in the indexes of any of my reference books. If it's the same thing as a dangling participle, check out, first, our description of dangling participles and if that's not enough, let us know, please. (Maybe it's a dangling participle that comes at the end of a sentence and is, thus, dropped?)

Question First, why can't we use the idiom 'put off' to 'put on'?
eg. She put on a new dress, but didn't like it, so she put it off.
Secondly, why can't we use 'put off it' or 'take off them'? This always confuses me terribly.
Thirdly, which is right, A or B?

I read a book that he bought at a shop.
I read the book that he bought at a shop.
I expect your kind and clear explanation. This email is the first time to write to you. Thank you!!
Source & Date
of Question Naruto, Tokushima, Japan
8 September 1997
Grammar's
Response We would probably say "take off" instead of "put off." The phrasal verb "put off" means to delay. We put off going to town because it's cold outside. We put off doing our homework because we're tired. Why we can't say "put off it" instead of "put it off" is absolutely beyond me.
Both your sentences about the bookshop are correct. In sentence A, you've used the indefinite article a, which means you are not being specific about which book he bought; in sentence B, you've used the definite article the, which means you're being specific about the book (the one and only book he bought, as far as we're concerened).

Question Isn't "clothes" a noncount noun? If so, one should say "much clothes". However, this sounds weird. Is it "much clothes" or "many clothes"? Please help me settle this bet.
Thank you.
Source & Date
of Question Hull, Quebec, Canada
9 September 1997
Grammar's
Response First I should ask what side you're on and what percentage I get on this. A non-count noun (or mass noun, as it's sometimes called) is something that can't be counted -- like water or laughter or wool. But you can count clothes, can't you? That's why we say, "My clothes are ruined." and "Many clothes in this store are too expensive for me." The peculiar thing about clothes, though, is that it has no singular form, and that seems to be the source of confusion here. Nouns that exist only in plural form and always act as plurals are usually count nouns. I can't think of a similar word right now, or an exception, but when I do, I'll add it to this Grammar Log.

Question Tangible nouns - chair, table, pen
Intangible nouns - improvement, confusion, intensity
I always have the intuition that an article ("a" or "an") should precede a singular noun. However, if the noun is plural, the article should be absent. Consider the following statements:
A1. Do you need a cable for the concert?
A2. Do you need cables for the concert?
A3. Do you need cable for the concert?
To me, both A1 & A2 are grammatically correct, although they may connote different meanings. On the other hand, A3 is ALWAYS WRONG. Is my intuition right?
More complications will surface when we talk about INTANGIBLE nouns:
B1. There is room for an improvement.
B2. There are rooms for improvements.
B3. There is room for improvement.
Again, similarly, I'd say that B1 & B2 are correct and B3 is wrong, if I were to follow my original rule rigidly. Am I right here again?
C1. This method may lead you to a confusion.
C2. This method may lead you to confusions.
C3. This method may lead you to confusion.

D1. He gave her a reward for her hard work.
D2. He gave her rewards for her hard work.
D3. He gave her reward for her hard work.
I really hope that all 1st and 2nd statements are right and all 3rd statements are erroneous. Otherwise, I will feel more discouraged in learning English Grammar!
Source & Date
of Question Singapore
18 September 1997
Grammar's
Response In set A, the problem is one of usage: "cable" can be either a count noun or a non-count noun. In #3, you're using it as a non-count noun, and it is correctly used. (A count-noun, such as "chair," would be incorrect here: Do you need "chair" for the concert?
I'm not aware of any rules that say you can't use an article with what you call an intangible noun. Both B3 and C3 are correct, although you're probably right about D3 being incorrect. In B2, "room" has shifted meaning on you, from the singular "room" meaning an opportunity for improvement to the plural "rooms" meaning inhabitable spaces. C1 and C2 also have problems. It's unlikely that "confusion" has a plural, and although the construction "a confusion" is certainly possible, it's not correct usage in this sentence.
Please don't be discouraged! You're doing fine, just asking such good questions!

Question I have two questions. Is there ever a time when one should not put quotation marks outside of other punctuation marks? For example, I was recently reading a book called The Oxford History of Christianity, and I came across this sentence: But resurrection is not resuscitation, but a mysterious 'going to God'. First, why did they use single quotes? It wasn't a quote inside of a quote. Second, isn't it wrong to not put the single quote mark outside of the period?
My second question has to do with the usage of apostrophes. In names such as Chris, Bevis, etc. should we add an extra "s" when showing possession? For example, "Chris's car is ugly." Would it be better to write "Chris' car is ugly." I was informed that the former is the preferred way of doing it these days. I still remember, however, that when I was taught about this stuff in grade school, I was taught to add an extra "s." Thanks for your time.
Source & Date
of Question Slinger, Wisconsin
11 September 1997
Grammar's
Response That Oxford History was undoubtedly published in Britain, where punctuation conventions using quotation marks are quite different than they are in the U.S. (unfortunately). Brits are apt to use single quote marks where Americans use double quote marks and the Brits use logic instead of convention in the placement of end-marks around quotation marks. In the U.S., that phrase would have appeared as follows: "going to God." (with the period inside the second quotation mark).
The Chris's/Chris' car dilemma is a toss-up. Do it either way you wish, and do it according to how it sounds to you, but do it consistently. Strunk's Elements of Style definitely recommends the added -s. I definitely hear that second -s in Chris's car and think it should be there. Sometimes, though, that added -s is just plain clumsy, as in the book that belongs to a fellow named Hodges: "Hodges's book" sounds klutzy, and I think we're better off with Hodges' book. But most manuals I've got say this is a matter of personal preference, although they urge consistency above all. See, also, our section on Possessives.

Question What's the correct form?

You can take a turn at bat after Sharon and me. (Sharon and me -- object of preposition)
or
You can take a turn at bat after Sharon and I. (do -- verb implied --subjective case)

Source & Date
of Question Hull, Quebec, Canada
11 September 1997
Grammar's
Response I don't think you can assume do as the "verb implied" here. The first sentence is correct, as you're looking (as you point out) for the object of the preposition after, which, of course, would be me. Compounding the me with someone else (Sharon) doesn't change its form.

Question What is the rule about articles when using them before acronyms that begin with "L"? For example:
"This is located in a(n?) LAF record."
It would be spoken "an LAF record," but if it weren't an acronym, it would be spoken, "a Loans Admin File record."
Source & Date
of Question Chicago, Illinois
16 September 1997
Grammar's
Response If you are using the word acronym as a pronounceable word (as in RADAR or LASER or NATO or URL) and pronouncing the word LAF as you would the word "laugh," say, then you'd use the article "a" in front of it. (Technically, an acronym is a pronounceable word, and we would use the word abbreviation to describe a word such as ATM.) On the other hand, if you pronounce LAF as three distinct letters, L-A-F, then the first sound begins with a vowel-sound, as in "el," and you would use the article "an" in front of it. I hope that doesn't confuse things.

Question I am in charge of getting a list of names together of our graduating class and the question came up as to where the Jr. goes when writing the last name first for a program (ie., Joe Blow Jr.)> Is it written with last name first= Blow, Joe. Does Jr. go after the last name or after the first name or a different place all together?
Thanks for your help.
Source & Date
of Question Fremont, California
15 September 1997
Grammar's
Response When a Jr. or Sr. or III or something like that is an essential part of someone's name, place it after the given name and separate it with from the rest of the name with a comma:
Banks, Arthur C., Jr.
Sherry, George L., III

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

Question	How to use 'incredously' in a sentence?
Source & Date of Question	Miami, Florida 6 September 1997
Grammar's Response	The woman looked on incredulously as the sky-writer scrawled a marriage proposal in the sky above the stadium. See the The Notorious Confusibles.

Question	Isn't "clothes" a noncount noun? If so, one should say "much clothes". However, this sounds weird. Is it "much clothes" or "many clothes"? Please help me settle this bet. Thank you.
Source & Date of Question	Hull, Quebec, Canada 9 September 1997
Grammar's Response	First I should ask what side you're on and what percentage I get on this. A non-count noun (or mass noun, as it's sometimes called) is something that can't be counted -- like water or laughter or wool. But you can count clothes, can't you? That's why we say, "My clothes are ruined." and "Many clothes in this store are too expensive for me." The peculiar thing about clothes, though, is that it has no singular form, and that seems to be the source of confusion here. Nouns that exist only in plural form and always act as plurals are usually count nouns. I can't think of a similar word right now, or an exception, but when I do, I'll add it to this Grammar Log.

Question	I have two questions. Is there ever a time when one should not put quotation marks outside of other punctuation marks? For example, I was recently reading a book called The Oxford History of Christianity, and I came across this sentence: But resurrection is not resuscitation, but a mysterious 'going to God'. First, why did they use single quotes? It wasn't a quote inside of a quote. Second, isn't it wrong to not put the single quote mark outside of the period? My second question has to do with the usage of apostrophes. In names such as Chris, Bevis, etc. should we add an extra "s" when showing possession? For example, "Chris's car is ugly." Would it be better to write "Chris' car is ugly." I was informed that the former is the preferred way of doing it these days. I still remember, however, that when I was taught about this stuff in grade school, I was taught to add an extra "s." Thanks for your time.
Source & Date of Question	Slinger, Wisconsin 11 September 1997
Grammar's Response	That Oxford History was undoubtedly published in Britain, where punctuation conventions using quotation marks are quite different than they are in the U.S. (unfortunately). Brits are apt to use single quote marks where Americans use double quote marks and the Brits use logic instead of convention in the placement of end-marks around quotation marks. In the U.S., that phrase would have appeared as follows: "going to God." (with the period inside the second quotation mark). The Chris's/Chris' car dilemma is a toss-up. Do it either way you wish, and do it according to how it sounds to you, but do it consistently. Strunk's Elements of Style definitely recommends the added -s. I definitely hear that second -s in Chris's car and think it should be there. Sometimes, though, that added -s is just plain clumsy, as in the book that belongs to a fellow named Hodges: "Hodges's book" sounds klutzy, and I think we're better off with Hodges' book. But most manuals I've got say this is a matter of personal preference, although they urge consistency above all. See, also, our section on Possessives.

Question	What's the correct form? You can take a turn at bat after Sharon and me. (Sharon and me -- object of preposition) or You can take a turn at bat after Sharon and I. (do -- verb implied --subjective case)
Source & Date of Question	Hull, Quebec, Canada 11 September 1997
Grammar's Response	I don't think you can assume do as the "verb implied" here. The first sentence is correct, as you're looking (as you point out) for the object of the preposition after, which, of course, would be me. Compounding the me with someone else (Sharon) doesn't change its form.

Question	What is the rule about articles when using them before acronyms that begin with "L"? For example: "This is located in a(n?) LAF record." It would be spoken "an LAF record," but if it weren't an acronym, it would be spoken, "a Loans Admin File record."
Source & Date of Question	Chicago, Illinois 16 September 1997
Grammar's Response	If you are using the word acronym as a pronounceable word (as in RADAR or LASER or NATO or URL) and pronouncing the word LAF as you would the word "laugh," say, then you'd use the article "a" in front of it. (Technically, an acronym is a pronounceable word, and we would use the word abbreviation to describe a word such as ATM.) On the other hand, if you pronounce LAF as three distinct letters, L-A-F, then the first sound begins with a vowel-sound, as in "el," and you would use the article "an" in front of it. I hope that doesn't confuse things.

Question	Would you please give me an example of a dropped participle and exactly what it is?
Source & Date of Question	Holmdel, New Jersey 8 September 1997
Grammar's Response	Are you sure you don't mean a DANGLING participle? I've never heard of a "dropped participle," and I don't see it in the indexes of any of my reference books. If it's the same thing as a dangling participle, check out, first, our description of dangling participles and if that's not enough, let us know, please. (Maybe it's a dangling participle that comes at the end of a sentence and is, thus, dropped?)

Question	I am in charge of getting a list of names together of our graduating class and the question came up as to where the Jr. goes when writing the last name first for a program (ie., Joe Blow Jr.)> Is it written with last name first= Blow, Joe. Does Jr. go after the last name or after the first name or a different place all together? Thanks for your help.
Source & Date of Question	Fremont, California 15 September 1997
Grammar's Response	When a Jr. or Sr. or III or something like that is an essential part of someone's name, place it after the given name and separate it with from the rest of the name with a comma: Banks, Arthur C., Jr. Sherry, George L., III