The Grammar Logs -- Number Eighty-Four

The
Grammar
Logs
# 84

Question Is it correct to end a question with a preposition?
I.E. Where are you from?

Source & Date
of Question Arlington, Virginia
12 March 1998
Grammar's
Response The restrictions against ending a sentence with a preposition have not exactly gone away, but they're not adhered to as strictly as they were even a decade ago. See our section on Prepositions, which has a brief remark on this problem and remember the child's question, "What did you bring that book that I don't want to be read to out of up for?"
Yes, I can't think of a better way of asking where someone is from.
Incidentally, please check out the question in the grammarlog before this one about the uses of i.e. and e.g.

Question Andy and Brenda have a baby. Which should I write:
Andy's and Brenda's baby or Andy and Brenda's baby.

Source & Date
of Question Hong Kong
13 March 1998
Grammar's
Response Assuming they have this baby together, we would write: "Andy and Brenda's baby." I suppose it's possible that they could have something like joint custody and you would want to show joint but separate "ownership," then you would write "Andy's and Brenda's baby."

Question Is "by" the only preposition after "impressed"?
He was impressed by her skills.
He was impressed at her beauty.
Is Statement 2 acceptable?
Source & Date
of Question Singapore
13 March 1998
Grammar's
Response I don't know if "by" is the only preposition, but it is certainly the one that we use most often. I have never heard "impressed at," and it sounds inappropriate, somehow.

Question What are the punctuation rules(if any) for using full dates in the middle of a sentence. For example, is a comma required after the word "1998" in the following sentence?
You are invited to a dinner May 16, 1998 at the clubhouse.

Source & Date
of Question Huntsville, Alabama
13 March 1998
Grammar's
Response Yes, you want to treat the year as a parenthetical element and put commas before and after it. If you use the international style of date-writing (16 May 1998), you will not use any commas, and if you have the month and the year only, you won't use any commas: . . . celebration in May 1998 at the clubhouse.

Question What is the preposition after "be careful"?

Be careful with the wires.
Be careful of the dog.
Be careful with/of your grammar.
Please explain.
Source & Date
of Question Singapore
13 March 1998
Grammar's
Response There seems to be a slight difference here. If I say "Be careful of the wires," that suggests that there is something dangerous about the wires; you might get hurt handling them. If I say "Be careful with the wires," it might mean the same thing, but it might also mean that you must handle them delicately because you could hurt them in some way. The same is true of that dog. Not much of a difference, but a little.

Question Does the meaning of the following sentence change if I take out the comma before "which"? If I remember correctly what I learned at school many years ago, the sentence without comma before "which" connotes that there may be other Prisoner Classification Regulations enforced on different dates. Please enlighten me.
The present classification system is basically operated in accordance with the "Prisoner Classification Regulations," which came into force on July 1, 1972.
Thank you for your big help!
Source & Date
of Question Tama City, Tokyo, Japan
13 March 1998
Grammar's
Response Generally, you're going to use a comma before a "which clause," which suggests that it is a restrictive clause, that it's information you can leave out without changing the essential meaning of the sentence. If you leave out the comma, you'd be better off using "that" instead of "which" (and, yes, that would mean that there could be regulations imposed on another date).

Question When using a proper name with "Jr." should there be a comma between the name and JR.?
Source & Date
of Question Germantown, Ohio
13 March 1998
Grammar's
Response I used to think so, but it's not necessarily so. This can be a matter of personal preference. Martin Luther King Jr., for example, did not use a comma before Jr., so it should not be written with a comma. (This was a great surprise to me.) Apparently, this means that it can go either way. I guess it's up to Junior.

Question When should I use "in" and when should I use "within"?
i.e. "The department is in the company" or "The department is within the company"?
I understand the difference between "that" and "which", but when is "in which" appropriate instead of "which"?
i.e. "The milk, which I bought yesterday, is in the refrigerator" or "The milk in which I bought yesterday is in the refrigerator"?
Is "in which" ever appropriate? It has always seemed to make my writing sound awkward. Please help!
Source & Date
of Question Frederick, Maryland
13 March 1998
Grammar's
Response The dictionary doesn't seem to help much with these two words, does it? I think the difference is that "within" suggests being enclosed by, folded into, etc. more than "in" does. In the example you give, though, I don't see much, if any, difference.
The phrase "In which" certainly doesn't fit that sentence you give us. You might say something like "That mutual fund, in which I invested half my life savings, has just folded. In the sentence you gave us, we can do without the "which clause" altogether: "The milk I bought yesterday is in the refrigerator." "In which" might, in fact, often prove a clumsy construction and you'd be wise to try to avoid it.

Question My question is about aposotrophes. If I were writing something like:
"Attention Teachers" where does the apostrophie go?
How about:

"Employers needs..."
"Employers rooms..."
"Employers are..."

Source & Date
of Question Burlington, Vermont
13 March 1998
Grammar's
Response There is no apostrophe in "Attention, Teachers!" (although you should put a comma between the words). Where you put the apostrophe in the other words depends on whether you're talking about one or more than one employer. A single employer's needs, several employers' needs -- same with rooms. Employers are -- that's a subject, a plural noun, and we don't want an apostrophe there.

Question When I was studying English grammar, I remember the teacher making a big deal about "Partial Negation." Examples she used:

All that glitters is not gold.
Both John and Mary didn't want to do it.
Everthing the politician says cannot be a lie.
"Not" in the above sentences negates only a portion of the subject, by the rules of grammar (or the purists' rules). If you want to be sure that's how people read them, you would want to change them to:

Not all that glitters is gold. (Some that glitter are gold; others that do are not.)
Only John or Mary, but not both, wanted to do it.
Sometimes the politican says the truth (sadly, not very often!).
Now my questions.
Are these rules still valid? Or, have they gone out the window along with "Whom am I talking to?," "It is I," "between you and me," etc. I notice many people, educated ones among them, use "Both A and B are not" to mean "Neither A nor B." I've always been taught that to "both...not..." apply the rules of "partial negation."
I would appreciate your reply.
Source & Date
of Question Torrance, California
14 March 1998
Grammar's
Response Another way of putting your argument is to say that the subject should be allowed to carry its weight. If we said "Not everything that glitters is gold" and "Neither John nor Mary wanted to do it" and "Not everything a politician says is a lie," our meaning would be more clear. This is an area where logic and grammar work nicely together -- when they're allowed to. I had never heard the term "partial negation," though, and I thank you for introducing the idea to me. Whether our concern for it has gone the way of the dodo bird and "between you and me," I can't say. I'll have to pay more attention.

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

Question	Andy and Brenda have a baby. Which should I write: Andy's and Brenda's baby or Andy and Brenda's baby.
Source & Date of Question	Hong Kong 13 March 1998
Grammar's Response	Assuming they have this baby together, we would write: "Andy and Brenda's baby." I suppose it's possible that they could have something like joint custody and you would want to show joint but separate "ownership," then you would write "Andy's and Brenda's baby."

Question	Is "by" the only preposition after "impressed"? He was impressed by her skills. He was impressed at her beauty. Is Statement 2 acceptable?
Source & Date of Question	Singapore 13 March 1998
Grammar's Response	I don't know if "by" is the only preposition, but it is certainly the one that we use most often. I have never heard "impressed at," and it sounds inappropriate, somehow.

Question	What are the punctuation rules(if any) for using full dates in the middle of a sentence. For example, is a comma required after the word "1998" in the following sentence? You are invited to a dinner May 16, 1998 at the clubhouse.
Source & Date of Question	Huntsville, Alabama 13 March 1998
Grammar's Response	Yes, you want to treat the year as a parenthetical element and put commas before and after it. If you use the international style of date-writing (16 May 1998), you will not use any commas, and if you have the month and the year only, you won't use any commas: . . . celebration in May 1998 at the clubhouse.

Question	What is the preposition after "be careful"? Be careful with the wires. Be careful of the dog. Be careful with/of your grammar. Please explain.
Source & Date of Question	Singapore 13 March 1998
Grammar's Response	There seems to be a slight difference here. If I say "Be careful of the wires," that suggests that there is something dangerous about the wires; you might get hurt handling them. If I say "Be careful with the wires," it might mean the same thing, but it might also mean that you must handle them delicately because you could hurt them in some way. The same is true of that dog. Not much of a difference, but a little.

Question	Does the meaning of the following sentence change if I take out the comma before "which"? If I remember correctly what I learned at school many years ago, the sentence without comma before "which" connotes that there may be other Prisoner Classification Regulations enforced on different dates. Please enlighten me. The present classification system is basically operated in accordance with the "Prisoner Classification Regulations," which came into force on July 1, 1972. Thank you for your big help!
Source & Date of Question	Tama City, Tokyo, Japan 13 March 1998
Grammar's Response	Generally, you're going to use a comma before a "which clause," which suggests that it is a restrictive clause, that it's information you can leave out without changing the essential meaning of the sentence. If you leave out the comma, you'd be better off using "that" instead of "which" (and, yes, that would mean that there could be regulations imposed on another date).

Question	When using a proper name with "Jr." should there be a comma between the name and JR.?
Source & Date of Question	Germantown, Ohio 13 March 1998
Grammar's Response	I used to think so, but it's not necessarily so. This can be a matter of personal preference. Martin Luther King Jr., for example, did not use a comma before Jr., so it should not be written with a comma. (This was a great surprise to me.) Apparently, this means that it can go either way. I guess it's up to Junior.

Question	When should I use "in" and when should I use "within"? i.e. "The department is in the company" or "The department is within the company"? I understand the difference between "that" and "which", but when is "in which" appropriate instead of "which"? i.e. "The milk, which I bought yesterday, is in the refrigerator" or "The milk in which I bought yesterday is in the refrigerator"? Is "in which" ever appropriate? It has always seemed to make my writing sound awkward. Please help!
Source & Date of Question	Frederick, Maryland 13 March 1998
Grammar's Response	The dictionary doesn't seem to help much with these two words, does it? I think the difference is that "within" suggests being enclosed by, folded into, etc. more than "in" does. In the example you give, though, I don't see much, if any, difference. The phrase "In which" certainly doesn't fit that sentence you give us. You might say something like "That mutual fund, in which I invested half my life savings, has just folded. In the sentence you gave us, we can do without the "which clause" altogether: "The milk I bought yesterday is in the refrigerator." "In which" might, in fact, often prove a clumsy construction and you'd be wise to try to avoid it.

Question	My question is about aposotrophes. If I were writing something like: "Attention Teachers" where does the apostrophie go? How about: "Employers needs..." "Employers rooms..." "Employers are..."
Source & Date of Question	Burlington, Vermont 13 March 1998
Grammar's Response	There is no apostrophe in "Attention, Teachers!" (although you should put a comma between the words). Where you put the apostrophe in the other words depends on whether you're talking about one or more than one employer. A single employer's needs, several employers' needs -- same with rooms. Employers are -- that's a subject, a plural noun, and we don't want an apostrophe there.

Question	When I was studying English grammar, I remember the teacher making a big deal about "Partial Negation." Examples she used: All that glitters is not gold. Both John and Mary didn't want to do it. Everthing the politician says cannot be a lie. "Not" in the above sentences negates only a portion of the subject, by the rules of grammar (or the purists' rules). If you want to be sure that's how people read them, you would want to change them to: Not all that glitters is gold. (Some that glitter are gold; others that do are not.) Only John or Mary, but not both, wanted to do it. Sometimes the politican says the truth (sadly, not very often!). Now my questions. Are these rules still valid? Or, have they gone out the window along with "Whom am I talking to?," "It is I," "between you and me," etc. I notice many people, educated ones among them, use "Both A and B are not" to mean "Neither A nor B." I've always been taught that to "both...not..." apply the rules of "partial negation." I would appreciate your reply.
Source & Date of Question	Torrance, California 14 March 1998
Grammar's Response	Another way of putting your argument is to say that the subject should be allowed to carry its weight. If we said "Not everything that glitters is gold" and "Neither John nor Mary wanted to do it" and "Not everything a politician says is a lie," our meaning would be more clear. This is an area where logic and grammar work nicely together -- when they're allowed to. I had never heard the term "partial negation," though, and I thank you for introducing the idea to me. Whether our concern for it has gone the way of the dodo bird and "between you and me," I can't say. I'll have to pay more attention.