The
Grammar
Logs
# 330

QUESTION
I am having difficulty with the comma and the word "because." In the Gregg Reference Manual, they give this example:
"'I'm not taking that course of action, because I distrust Harry's recommendations.' BUT 'I'm not taking that course of action because I distrust Harry's recommendations. I based my decision on another reason altogether.'"
These examples have got me spinning. Do these examples imply that if there is a negative used in the independent clause, then you will need a comma before the word because? Should there be a comma (other than the first) in the following sentence :
According to the surgeon general, women should not drink alcoholic beverages during pregnancy because of the risk of birth defects.
When do you use a comma before this word? I am crazed.
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Denver, Colorado Sat, Jun 26, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
That's a pretty good example, really, of what is really a fairly simple test. Is the clause that is introduced by because essential to the meaning of the sentence or not? In Gregg's first sentence, the "because clause" is added on; the main, first clause can stand by itself without it—so the "because clause" gets set off by a comma. In Gregg's second sentence, the "because clause" is absolutely necessary to our understanding of why you took "that course of action" (or didn't, in this case—but it really has nothing to do with the use of the negative).

Let me change your surgeon general statement a bit, turning the "because" element into a full clause:

"Women should not drink alcoholic beverage during pregnancy because the risk of birth defects doubles with alcoholic consumption."
(The information is essential, no commas.) I hope this helps. You're not crazed, just confused like the rest of us.

QUESTION
Is this a proper use of 'which':
  • An argument started among them over which of them would be the greatest.
    Or would this rewrite be better:
  • An argument started among them over who would be the greatest of them.
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Nashville, Tennessee Sat, Jun 26, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
That's one situation where the "which" works better than its replacement. The separation of the "who" and the "of them" is clumsy, in my opinion, and the "over who" is just asking for trouble.

QUESTION
Which choice is correct? "Throughout my career, I have ______ to accomplish tasks promptly and precisely." (Should I write strived or striven?)
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Owing Mills, Maryland Sun, Jun 27, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
You can use either. Burchfield makes it a toss-up; the online Merriam-Webster's seems to prefer "strived."

Authority: The New Fowler's Modern English Usage edited by R.W. Burchfield. Clarendon Press: Oxford, England. 1996. Used with the permission of Oxford University Press.

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


QUESTION
What rules govern the use of "such as" versus "like"? For instance: This has been bothering me for years.
  1. Contract merchandisers such as UBI and RepsUSA...
    or
  2. Contract merchandisers like UBI and RepsUSA...
Which is better? Thanks
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Stamford, Connecticut Sun, Jun 27, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
When writing about my own college, I once wrote that we were surrounded by neighbors like the Mark Twain House, the UConn Law School, and St. Francis Hospital. Someone pointed out to me that our neighbors were not like these places at all: they were the Mark Twain House, the UConn Law School, and St. Francis Hospital. I should have used such as, of course. Like is helpful for making comparisons, such as for giving examples. It's a useful distinction.

QUESTION
When should the pronoun "He" be capitalized in reference to God? Or should it ever be capitalized?
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Clemmons, North Carolina Sun, Jun 27, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
It is a common practice in religious writing to do so. Many writers of different stripes are now getting away from the habit of referring to God with masculine pronouns, capitalized or otherwise. Burchfield says that it is now the trend to get away from the use of such capitals.

Authority: The New Fowler's Modern English Usage edited by R.W. Burchfield. Clarendon Press: Oxford, England. 1996. p. 129. Used with the permission of Oxford University Press.
QUESTION
I am tutoring a Chinese man in the subject of English and I can't seem to answer a question that he has. In the sentence "Judy leads a charmed life" can he replace "charmed" with "charming?" Also the sentence, "His disease is in an advanced state" Can "advanced be replaced by "advancing?" I don't think these words can be replace by the others but I can't quite explain why, does it have anything to do with passive voice? My student is very good at understanding the "technicalities" of English, but I just don't have the answer! Can you help?
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Port Coquitlam, British Columbia, Canada Wed, Jun 30, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
This doesn't have anything to do with the passive voice. The choice of present participle or past participle can be crucial, however. Consider the difference between someone who says "I'm bored." and the person who says, "I'm boring." Or "I'm excited." versus "I'm exciting." Is this person's life "charmed"—have things happened in and to her life that cause it to appear extremely fortunate? Or is her life "charming"—she charms others? A disease that is "advancing" is in the process of getting worse; an "advanced" disease has already gone bad. I hope that helps.

QUESTION
In the sentence, "I almost always get to school on time.", are the words "almost and "always" used properly.
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
San Antonio, Texas Wed, Jun 30, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
At first it appears to be a logical absurdity: either you're on time always or you're not. But "almost," in the sense of "not quite" or "close to being," makes sense here.

QUESTION
Hi,
Is it correct to say
"In times passed..."or is it "In times past..."?
I've noticed both and I'm not sure which is correct. Thank you
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
New York, New York Wed, Jun 30, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
I suppose either could be correct. Do you mean "in times that have passed" or "times in the past"? I'd go with "passed" or rewrite the phrase so the ambiguity doesn't bother me: "In times long passed. . .."

QUESTION
What is correct:
  • higher-order thinking
    or
  • higher order thinking
When I read the rule I say higher-order thinking, but books always say higher order thinking. Where am I going wrong.
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Saginaw, Michigan Wed, Jun 30, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
The Chicago Manual of Style says that an adjective compound comprising an adjective followed by a noun is always hyphenated. (I can't find this particular phrase in CMOS, though.) On the other hand, the CMOS pretty consistently says, too, that when you can leave out the hyphen and still not be ambiguous, leave it out. I would think we don't need the hyphen in that compound.

Authority: Chicago Manual of Style 14th ed. U of Chicago P: Chicago. 1993. p. 221.


QUESTION
Why is an infinitive (to run, e.g.) called "infinitive"?
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Huntington, West Virginia Wed, Jun 30, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
I have no idea, nor do I have the kinds of resources that would give us an answer. [E-Mail Icon]I'll post your question here in the hopes that some kind soul with a really good dictionary will write us the answer.

A friend from Japan writes that "My understanding is that the infinitive is so called because it is not limited to a particular person, number, tense or even part of speech [Latin 'infinitus', in the sense of 'indefinite']."


Previous Grammar Log

Next Grammar Log

Index of Grammar Logs

Guide to Grammar and Writing