|
The Grammar Logs # 224 |
|
| QUESTION |
| I would like to know about words that end in -us but when pluralized the endings are changed to -era. example: genus to genera |
| SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE |
Turlock, California  Wed, Oct 7, 1998
|
| GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE |
| I think you need to consult a Latin textbook. The only other one I know of is opus and opera (but no one uses those words that way). Then there's corpus and corpora, but that's "ora." |
| QUESTION |
Which is correct?
|
| SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE |
| Long Beach, California Wed, Oct 7, 1998
|
| GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE |
| Yes, the possessive apostrophe is appropriate in that construction. Authority: New York Public Library Writer's Guide to Style and Usage HarperCollins: New York. 1994. Cited with permission.
|
| QUESTION |
| I'm an adult taking attending writing workshops at the local college. It seems to me they have things too worked out. Poems can have allusions that are never explained. Short stories must have every allusion explained. Don't go off on tangents in prose, paragraphs must display continuity. And, most fundamentally, a story told by writing can not be told in the same manner as a story told orally. I know what makes a good story for my own pleasure, but I don't know what story publishers will accept. Are these things true? Is the market that rigid? Or do publishers, and publisher's readers, like the same things I do? |
| SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE |
| Denver, Colorado Wed, Oct 7, 1998
|
| GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE |
| I'm not sure if you're talking about expository prose (essays) or fiction, but in any case, I'm not sure where the "rules" you mention come from. It's nonsense to say that in short stories every allusion must be explained. There's nothing wrong with sticking to the point, of course, and continuity seems like a good thing, but both rambling and discontinuity can be used to good effect from time to time. There are differences between oral stories and written stories; the conventions are not the same. But there are precious few stories that don't get better by being read out loud. No, the market is not as rigid as these "rules" that you mention seem to make it. Do publishers' readers like the same things you do? You'll have to ask them -- over and over again. |
| QUESTION |
| When you are writing a letter to a department within a company, it used to be correct to use "Dear sirs:" for the salutation. In our present environment, it doesn't seem to be appropriate as the addressee may be a lady, or a secretary could respond to the letter. One thing I have done in the past is leave two lines before the salutation line and then type the subject in caps in place of a salutation and leave two lines before the body of letter. Please help. Thank you |
| SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE |
| Salt Lake City, Utah Wed, Oct 7, 1998
|
| GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE |
| Most of the writing manuals I refer to suggest using the person's name or the person's office: "Dear Manager:" "Dear Members of the Committee:" or "To the Complaints Department:" Your solution of using a memo title as opposed to a salutation might be a good one, although it does feel more like a memo than a letter. By all means, lose the "Sirs," but don't assume the secretary is a woman, much less a lady. |
| QUESTION |
What is a faulty Parallelism?
Does either one of these sentence have faulty parallelism, and how should it be written?
|
| SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE |
| Tempe, Arizona Thu, Oct 8, 1998
|
| GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE |
| Yes, both sentences suffer from a lack of parallel form. You had to do three things before you could take a bath. Put all three things in the same infinitive form (but you don't have to repeat the "to"): I had to pick up the damp towels, gather up the loose toys, and scrub out the tub. Now put the four things you did for your headache in the form of nouns: "including drugs, meditation, exercise, and massage." If one of the things you did doesn't fit the parallel form, it would be better to put it in a separate sentence. |
| QUESTION |
In the sentence below, is the use of the 1st "have" correct? Or should it be "has"? Would appreciate an explanation of why whichever word is correct.
In this changing world there's only one asset none of your competitors have -- the unique connection you have with your customers. |
| SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE |
| Wakefield, Massachusetts Thu, Oct 8, 1998
|
| GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE |
| The word none is the subject of that verb, and the word none can be either singular or plural. I think in this sentence most writers would regard it as plural and use the verb have, but if you choose to think of it as "not one of your competitors," then you would want to use has. |
| QUESTION |
| Okay, it's a dumb question. I need to know the nine "question words." I have already thought of; who, what, when, where, why, and how. What are the other three? HELP! Many Thanks |
| SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE |
| Hamburg, Germany Thu, Oct 8, 1998
|
| GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE |
![[E-Mail Icon]](../gif/email.gif){kind=small} Sorry, but I've never heard of the nine question words. I'll leave an e-mail icon here in case someone else can help. Is which one of them? Wussup? Whither? Whose?
|
| QUESTION |
Which is correct?
|
| SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE |
| San Angelo, Texas Thu, Oct 8, 1998
|
| GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE |
| "One" is the subject of your verb, and one is singular (obviously), so we want receives as the verb. |
| QUESTION |
| I don't got nothing is a double negative. It's two words that are negative and they are included in the same sentence. Am I right so far? What else can one say about double negatives? |
| SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE |
| Valdosta, Georgia Thu, Oct 8, 1998
|
| GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE |
| There's a brief note on double negatives in the section called Confusion: Its Sources and Remedies. There's not much to say, except it's generally a good idea to avoid them. |
| QUESTION |
| My friend has this habit of using the infinitive after the phrase "feel like". For example, "I feel like to eat a steak" instead of "I feel like eating a steak." It always sounds like a poor translation of a foreign film to me. I tried to tell her the problem is that the "like" and "to" are both prepositions, and that a gerund should be used after a preposition in that circumstance. She countered that the phrases "I would like to eat a steak" and "I want to eat a steak" are both correct. In my opinion, the difference is that "like" is a verb in the former circumstance, and there is only one preposition in either sentence. Am I on track here? What's the definitive reason why one should use a gerund instead of the infinitive in this circumstance? |
| SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE |
| Berkeley, California Thu, Oct 8, 1998
|
| GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE |
| I don't think there is a "definitive reason" beyond the matter of usage. We use an infinitive form after "want" or "would like," but we use a gerund after "feel like." (The "to" in "to eat a steak" is not a preposition by the way; it's simply part of the infinitive form.) In the section on verbs and verbals, there's a considerable discussion (including quizzes) about the choice between gerunds and infinitives. Click HERE to go there. |
Previous Grammar Log