The
Grammar
Logs
# 307

QUESTION
Perhaps you could answer this question, the answer to which I've been trying to find everywhere!

Should the names of countries beginning with -s and that comprise several islands/states be treated as a singular or plural noun? In particular, I would like to know whether one could treat "the United States" as either being singular or plural. My instinct tells me that it depends on whether the USA is referred to as either a sovereign state (singular) or as a group of states (plural), but I'm not sure. For example, could one say "The United States are represented at the King's funeral by Vice-President Al Gore"?

SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Brussels, Belgium Wed, Apr 7, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
Your instincts are mostly right. When a nation's name is indicative of a collective state (usually ending in the plural s and often beginning with The), it will be treated as a singular entity when acting as a sovereign, political whole, but as a plural when it is a group of discrete geographical entities. Thus we can say "The Virgin Islands is governed by . . . .", but we would say "The Virgin Islands are very hot this time of year." Having said that, however, it is quite unusual to refer to the United States as anything other than singular. When we use the name The United States, we're very seldom referring to a collection of discrete geographical entities. We talk about the New England states, the southern states, the plains states, etc., but when we talk about the United States, we're talking about the one nation.

QUESTION
Dear Grammar,
what would you say is better:
  • Although this is one of the most common sleep disorders, apnea is often left untreated.
  • Or: One of the most common sleep disorders, apnea is often left untreated.
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Schifferstadt, Germany Thu, Apr 8, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
I'd definitely go for the second sentence. An appositive phrase does the same work -- with much more efficiency and elegance -- than the initial clause of the first version. The "this is" is a sure sign that you're spinning your wheels and not really saying anything. The second sentence is a great improvement.

QUESTION
Is this a comma splice?
She not only acknowledged her guilt, she also revealed other crimes.
My style guide says every "not only" must be followed by "but also." Are there exceptions to this rule? I don't see that the first clause is independent, because it doesn't seem to stand on its own.
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Seattle, Washington Thu, Apr 8, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
With brief and closely related independent clauses like that, comma splices is not usually a problem. The placement of "not only" can be problematic, however. What if you wrote: "She acknowledged not only her guilt [in this matter], but also her other crimes." (I would add "in this ______" because I'm not sure what it means to "acknowledge guilt." If the "not only" must appear before the verb of the sentence, the verb should be repeated after the "but (also)": "She not only acknowledged her guilt, but also revealed her other crimes." It is possible, according to Fowler, to omit idiomatically, the "but also": "Rowers not only face backward, they race backward" (from The New Yorker).

I hope this note doesn't confuse you more than it helps you.

Authority: The New Fowler's Modern English Usage edited by R.W. Burchfield. Clarendon Press: Oxford, England. 1996.


QUESTION
I want to know what part of speech and what part of the sentence the word ALL is in:
  1. We all had a good time.
    and
  2. You all come back now.
...Is ALL the subject? Is it still called a pronoun? I am most interested in how it is used. Thanks
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Fort Gibson, Oklahoma Thu, Apr 8, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
Instead of acting as a pronoun (as in "All of us had a good time."), the "all" can appear as a post-noun modifier. It works the same way as "both." ("We both had a good time.") The "you-all" of your second sentence is an idiomatic expression (substituting for the simple "you") common in all levels of discourse in the southern United States—but probably best avoided in formal prose.

QUESTION
What is the proper way to use the phrase "such that"? I edit technical material, and scientists are fond of the phrase. See in the following sentence:
The "tails" of the chlorophyll distribution were less affected by nutrient loading reductions than the median values, such that predictions of peak chlorophyll-a concentrations during blooms were only very slightly reduced by reduced nutrient loading.
Isn't the phrase "such that" to be used to make comparisions?
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Raleigh, North Carolina Fri, Apr 9, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
The phrase "such that" is useful in constructions like "The hullabaloo in the auditorium was such that Audrey couldn't hear himself speak, even with the microphone." But its use in the example you give us doesn't make a lot of sense. Wouldn't a simple "so that" make more sense in that sentence? I'm not even sure what's getting compared in the first clause. I think we'd be better off with an active verb construction:
The nutrient-loading reducation affected the "tails" of the chlorophyll distribution less than they affected the median values. In fact, the predictions of peak chlorophyll-a concentrations during blooms were only very slightly reduced by reduced nutrient loading. [Do you need the "very"?]
QUESTION
I am doing an article in a newsletter and would like to know if I should use the word "refrained" or "estrained" in the following:
"Considering there are several articles of interest in this news issue, my comments will be REFRAINED (RESTRAINED), but specific."
Thank you in advance
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Mississauga, Ontario, Canada Fri, Apr 9, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
Your comments will certainly not be "refrained." You can refrain from saying certain things, but your comments are not therefore refrained. (I don't think you can use that verb in the passive.) Your comments can be "restrained," but that usually means that they are subdued, reserved in spirit. Further, I don't think it makes sense to say that your comments will be limited in light of the many articles of interest. I think you mean that your comments will be limited (and I think that's a better word) in spite of the fact that there are many articles of interest.

QUESTION
What is the correct usage of this sentence?
The smartest girl in the class is she or her.
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Mandan, Maryland Fri, Apr 9, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
"She." But you'd have a much more effective sentence if you gave "end focus" to the really important part of the sentence: "She is the smartest girl in the class."

QUESTION
An 'eponym' describes a word that is originally a person's name but becomes the general term used for an item or object ie. sandwich (from the Earl of Sandwich) or wellingtons (from the Duke of Wellington).

What is the word used to describe a specific brand which eventually is used instead, or as well as, the generic term - eg Hoover (for vaccuum cleaner) or Sellotape (for sticking tape)?

Is this an eponym or is there another word for it?

SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Kingston, Surrey, England Fri, Apr 9, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
[E-Mail Icon]I don't know the answer to this question, but I will happily post it here in case some reader of these pages knows the answer and will use the e-mail icon to mail it to us.

QUESTION
Changing Tenses: I wrote this sentence somewhere. Is it okay? I change the tense from was to is, but that is how I meant it. Is it grammatically correct?
The reason I was confused is because I had.....
Is it okay to say "The reason I WAS confused IS" ? Thanks.
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
New York, New York Fri, Apr 9, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
The "was confused" puts your frame of reference in the past. You're much better off sticking with the past tense with "was because." Of course, you're much better off rewriting the sentence "I was confused because. . . ." but that's not what you asked.

QUESTION
Can variety be considered a collective noun, and be plural in usage at times, as in:
A variety of books (has or have) been selected from a number of fields.
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Hattiesburg, Mississippi Sat, Apr 10, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
Not that I know of. Variety is always singular. We can say several varieties have been selected. This word, then, is not like species, which can be either singular or plural.

Authority for this note: WWWebster Dictionary, the World Wide Web edition of Merriam-Webster's Collegiate® Dictionary, Tenth Edition. Used with permission.


Previous Grammar Log

Next Grammar Log

Index of Grammar Logs

Guide to Grammar and Writing