The
Grammar
Logs
# 319

QUESTION
I'm not sure how the last sentence should read in this paragraph:
Some credit unions do not have a clear idea who CSG is and what products are offered. Additionally, several credit unions are unable to distinguish the difference between CSG, CUNA, CUNA Mutual and NCUA.
My question is: rather than using "the difference between," should I be using "distinguish among CSG...." or some other words?

Thanks for helping!

SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Madison, Wisconsin Thu, May 20, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
Many writers insist that "between" should be used only when you're talking about two things or two people, etc. and that we use "among" when we're talking about more than two. (In fact, I may have done so myself on these pages.) However, "between" is actually quite useful and acceptable when describing specific differences that exist both individually and severally between one thing and several others. "Among," according to the OED, expresses differences that exist in a vague and collective way. So a lot depends on what you mean to say, but "between" is certainly acceptable in that sentence—if you are referring to specific differences (or people's inability to discern specific differences).

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


QUESTION
Is this sentence correct, or does the clause beginning with "after" have to modify "admission," the subject of main clause?
After four years of pre-med studies at the university, during which I received a B.S. in biological science, admission to medical school was not in the cards for me.
Thank you for your help.
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Morton Grove, Illinois Thu, May 20, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
It's not exactly a matter of "having to" modify the subject of the main clause; it does. So your instincts are right here: it appears that "admission" has had four years of pre-med studies. If you keep the beginning clause as it is, you need to begin the main clause with yourself.

QUESTION
When the terms "lake water" "river water", "fresh water" are used as adjectives, should they be joined, e.g., riverwater samples, freshwater lakes?

I an anxiously waiting for your reply. Many thanks.

SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Burlington, Ontario, Canada Thu, May 20, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
"Freshwater" and "saltwater" are definitely closed compounds (single words, no hyphens), but "river water" and "lake water" are not—at least they're not listed as compounds in my dictionary. The best bet, I think, would be to consult journals or textbooks in ecological studies and see how they handle such terms.

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


QUESTION
I mentioned to a friend of mine that I was going to visit "one of my best friends" in Dallas. He says that you cannot say "one of my best friends" both on logical *and* grammatical grounds. He also argues that you cannot have more than one "best" of anything assuming "best" means "excelling all others" (Webster). I contend that he's making a qualitative argument about the concept of friends not a grammatical argument (because he agrees you can say, "McIntosh are the best apples").

Can you help?

SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Silver Spring, Maryland Thu, May 20, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
If we say that Dilbert is the best math student in our school, it's quite clear that he excels all others. However, I can say that my math class has the best math students in the school—and since Dilbert is in the class, he is one of the best math students. The term "best," in short, can be collective; it can mean "of the most excellent kind."

Authority for this note: Oxford American Dictionary: Oxford University Press, New York. 1980.


QUESTION
I used a variant of the following sentence in a note.
"Not necessarily _____ but rather____."
Just recently I came across a rule which says "but rather" should never be used. What is wrong with it?

Should I have kept my sentence "textbook parallel" and used "not only, but also"? Had I done so, the meaning of the sentence would have been lost.

SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Memphis, Tennessee Thu, May 20, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
It's generally a good idea to avoid using the conjunction "but" with other words that express limitation or distinction ("but still," "but nevertheless," "but rather"). If the meaning of your sentence is lost with "not only, but also," you obviously need something other than that construction, but "but rather" probably doesn't help. It's hard to tell without seeing your whole sentence. Can you eliminate the "rather" altogether? or the "but"?

Authority: The New Fowler's Modern English Usage edited by R.W. Burchfield. Clarendon Press: Oxford, England. 1996. (note on "but")
QUESTION
Dear Grammar,
What is an arm's-length agreement? I couldn't find "arm's-length" in the dictionaries I consulted. Thank you.
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Bangkok, Thailand Thu, May 20, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
"Arm's length" usually means "a distance discouraging personal contact or familiarity" (as in "He kept his acquaintances at arm's length"). But it also means "on equal footing." So an "arm's-length argument" is one in which the contestants are just about equal.

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


QUESTION
In the following:
He makes his living by grinding scissors.
Could "...by grinding scissors." be construed to modify "living"?

If not, why not?

SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Los Angeles, California Thu, May 20, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
No, that's a prepositional phrase (consisting of the preposition "by" and a gerund phrase) which tells us how he "makes" something (his living). Thus it modifies the verb, "makes," not the object of the sentence.

QUESTION
I have need of a phrase that describes a person (in a positive light) who makes decisions but prefers to remain entirely anonymous in the process. Is there a literary or mythological reference to someone who was actually the brains behind another ceremonial decision maker who actually preferred this role in life? I think of someone like Eleanor Roosevelt (who probably would have preferred to be acknowledged for her mental prowess) who most likely helped Franklin make many of his decisions but chose to shun any recognition for her contributions in that process. We often hear of those in Washington or other international arenas who have enormous power in making decisions but are only known to those who act as their mouthpieces. I am hopeful that the reference is a flattering one. Thank you.
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Ocean Springs, Mississippi Thu, May 20, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
The term éminence grise (meaning "one exercising unsuspected or unofficial power") comes to mind, but I'm afraid it's not really flattering. There's probably a happier (and English) phrase out there (besides "one who works selflessly behind the scenes"). [E-Mail Icon]I'll leave an e-mail icon here in case someone has a better idea.

One reader suggests the phrases "power behind the throne" and "back-room boys," but these are not exactly flattering either.

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


QUESTION
A Greater Swiss Mountain Dog is more commonly referred to as a swissy, but there seems to be some debate as to the correct plural form of the word. I always thought that it should be "swissies", yet the majority of people spell it "swissys." Which is it?
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Berkley, Massachusetts Thu, May 20, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
If we can regard swissy as a proper noun—like Kennedy, say—then we'd simply add an "s" to form the plural: The Kennedys own two swissys. People speak of "treasurys" (meaning treasury certificates), so I think they can also speak of "swissys," but I wouldn't want to offend any swissy owners out there.

QUESTION
I came across this sentence in a local newspaper some time ago:
Joe Paterno, in his 33rd season as coach, joins Bear Bryant (323), Pop Warner (319) and Amos Alonzo Stagg (314) as the only major-college coaches to collect 300 victories.
I believe the end of the sentence is flawed and should be edited to read:
... as the fourth major-college coach to collect 300 victories.
What do you think?
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Minneapolis, Minnesota Thu, May 20, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
You're right in saying that it's flawed. Joe P. can't do anything "as the only coaches"; he can do something as a coach, but not as coaches. Your rewrite is a big improvement. Or something like, "As only the fourth major-college coach to collect 300 victories, Joe Paterno, now in his 33rd year, joins the company of coaching immortals Bear Bryant, etc."

Previous Grammar Log

Next Grammar Log

Index of Grammar Logs

Guide to Grammar and Writing