The
Grammar
Logs
# 334

QUESTION
I am not sure if the following sentence is punctuated correctly:
I was very impressed with the professional manner in which my interview was handled and, in particular, your candor in responding to my questions.
The above is how I believe it should be punctuated. Do I need the "and"? Can you point me to a topic in the grammanr guide that contains a "rule of thumb". Keep up the excellent and important work.
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Houston, Texas Sun, Jul 18, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
I don't know if I would want to congratulate an interviewer for being "professional"; it seems to me that's the least you should expect. The sentence has problems other than punctuation, beginning with "with which" (often a sign that you're headed for trouble). You might try something simpler, like "I was impressed by the professional quality of the interview and by your candid response to my many questions." To answer your question, the "and" would not be necessary if you changed "In particular" to "especially," which is probably a good idea in any case.

QUESTION
Do the rules of grammar always prohibit the starting of a sentence with the word "and"? I have argued with our ad agency over this but they insist that as poetic license it is permissible. Examples:
  • "The proactive dedication to excellence can often lead to modification of part design and production techniques to improve a part's performance and its manufacturability. And, in many cases, this results in a complete process conversion."
  • "These are all reasons that componentry must be designed to withstand an intense, abusive workload. And reasons that (company name) should be your source for suspension componentry."
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Roscoe, Illinois Mon, Jul 19, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
The "And" in your first example seems quite unnecessary. In the second example, I think that the fragment introduced by "And" would be better off tucked into the previous sentence—or attached, perhaps, by means of a dash. The prohibition against beginning a sentence with "And" has weakened considerably, and over the years it's never been closely followed anyway, even by great writers. Ad agencies tend to live in their own little grammatical world, so if that's the least of their sins, I'd be happy. I tell my students that if they begin a sentence with a conjunction, that's fine, but they should always ask if the sentence doesn't sound better without it (the conjunction), or if the sentence shouldn't be tucked into the prior sentence.

QUESTION
I give you the following sentence as an example of what confuses me about the use of the conjunction, "and" :
Technology, Inc. provides enterprise software and e-commerce implementations.
What I'm trying to say is that Technology, Inc. provides enterprise software implementations as well as e-commerce implementations, but I don't want to repeat "implementations". Is that what the above sentence says or does it say that Technology Inc. provides enterprise software (the product) and also provides e-commerce implementations? I guess the question is -- does the noun "implementations" apply to the desciptives on either side of the conjunction "and"? Can I make it clearer using a hyphen?

Please help!

SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Tue, Jul 20, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
I don't see how you can say what you want to say without repeating the word "implementations"—unless you write something like "provides implementations in enterprise software and e-commerce," but I'm not sure you can use the word "implementations" that way. I'll leave that up to you since you're dealing in a new vocabulary anyway. Using a hyphen only makes it worse, making it appear that you don't know when to use a hyphen.

QUESTION
Hello. Would you let me know the difference in meaning of the following?
  1. It is nice of you to help others.
  2. It is nice for you to help others.
If #2 is wrong, then how about the following?
  1. 3. It is nice for you to have some friends to talk with.
I'd appreciate your comments on this. Thank you very much in advance.
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Sapporo, Japan Tue, Jul 20, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
They can mean the same thing, but the first one suggests that you are kind, gracious, etc. to help others, while the second one can suggest that things are nice for you (because you feel good) when you help others. Otherwise, I'd say the difference between these two sentences is not worth bothering with, but the "of you" is certainly more common and probably what you mean.

QUESTION
I keep reading in books sentences containing e.g.
  • different types of networks
  • various kinds of drinks
and have noticed such expressions on your pages too. However, to me, the above sound incorrect:
  • different types of network
  • various kinds of drink
etc. In particular, I think the difference is even clearer in the singular:
  • this type of network (this type of networks yuk!)
  • this kind of drink (similarly yuk!)
Am I right, wrong, or are both correct? Or is this an English / American thing?

Cheers

SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Tokyo, Japan Tue, Jul 20, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
Although I see the distinction you make about the singular (this type of network is, indeed, what we mean—not "this type of networks"), but I don't see anything wrong with "these types of networks." The word kinds works in the same way. Let's say I want to draw attention to run-on sentences and sentence fragments. Would I write about these two kinds of mistake or these two kinds of mistakes? I would argue that "mistake" makes the word sound like a non-countable entity ("two kinds of furniture" makes sense to me), but it is not.

According to Burchfield, there is no difference in this usage except in "kind of a," which is acceptable in the U.S., but which would read "a kind of" in the UK.

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.
QUESTION
Tense. I notice that restaurant reviews are both in the present and past tense. To me such material is not date sensitive nor is it to the reader. Can application of the rules pertaining to tense go either way? Is an adherance to the past tense obligitary? My wife and I are in serious disagreement. Thanks for your help.
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Wayland, Massachusetts Tue, Jul 20, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
I suppose the restaurant reviewer writes in the present tense for the same reason that one writes in the present to talk about a poem or a movie: "the poem suggests such-and-such," "Eyes Wide Shut demonstrates again that. . . ." "Cappucino's dessert trays are a delight . . . ." I think it's easy to argue that the culinary adventure is a kind of artistic experience. The present tense creates the happy illusion that what one is describing is there, now, in the present; as the reader is reading, he or she can reach out to the dessert tray and lick the icing. A review in the past tense, on the other hand, would create the sense of a past experience, an evening spent at a restaurant some time ago. It's when the tenses get mixed in the same review that the reviewer could get into dirty dishwater. I certainly see no reason, though, to avoid the present tense in a restaurant review.

QUESTION
The difference between I tried locking the door and I tried to lock the door.
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Somewhere, Egypt Wed, Jul 21, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
[I've changed your present tense "try" to the past tense "tried."] Both sentences can mean the same thing, but they can also mean something a little different. "I tried to lock the door" means that you intended to lock the door, but you had difficulty doing so (and perhaps you even failed to do so). "I tried locking the door" means you intended to lock the door, you even succeeded in doing so, and you are now telling us about the difference that that effort made: it made you feel more secure (or not), etc. If you mean the sentence in this way, you would probably put more stress on the word "tried."

QUESTION
The word "full time" can be found in Webster's as a noun. It is also in Webster's as an adverb and an adjective (full-time). I understand how it is used as an adjective. And I thought I understood how it would be used as an adverb (i.e., worked full-time). In what case is it a noun and therefore not hyphenated? My feeling is that it should always be hyphenated. Do ya' think?
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Denver, Colorado Wed, Jul 21, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
I have to admit I'm guessing here, but can't it be used as a noun in the same sense that "whole time" is?
When you were in the Navy, were you a cook the full time?
[E-Mail Icon]I'll leave an e-mail icon here in case someone has a better suggestion.

Bruce Marsland, who now lives in Espoo, Finland, writes that "as a Brit I am quite used to "full time" in the sense of "the end of the match" (usually football - sorry, soccer!). Hence "The referee blew the whistle for full time", which I think is noun-like usage!

The Cambridge International Dictionary of English gives the spelling in this sense as unhyphenated, but contrasts it to "half-time", which includes the hyphen.


QUESTION
I reviewed your information on plurals and collective nouns, but couldn't find an example to match my question, so here goes.

When using the word "any", are we to consider this a singular noun? For example, is the phrase "If any of these fields appear incorrect" correct? I have been asked to change "appear" to "appears", but I would argue that the word "any" implies either singular or plural and therefore it would reason that the plural usage would win out. Besides, I believe it sounds better the way it is. Could you help out on this?

Thanks in advance, and thank you for producing such a great site!

SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Chicago, Illinois Wed, Jul 21, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
If you were to say "If any one of these fields. . . ," you would definitely want a singular "appears." However, with the construction you give us, without any further context, "any" can be either singular or plural. I'm not sure I agree with your argument that given a choice of singular or plural the plural always wins or that "appear" sounds better, but I do agree that you are not wrong.

QUESTION
I remember being taught (eons ago) that the correct preposition following the word "concur" depends on the object following the proposition. The rule I've always used is you concur "with" someone (emphasis on "one"), but you concur "in" something (emphasis on "thing").

I use the GREGG Reference Manual (7th Edition) as my "bible," but can't find anything about this in there. I'm being challenged by one of my supervisors regarding this (he wants to CONCUR WITH THE DATA).

Help! Am I living in the dark ages?

SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Minneapolis, Minnesota Wed, Jul 21, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
The online Merriam-Webster's uses the example "concur with an opinion," which suggests that "concur with the data" would be acceptable. (It also uses "concur in a statement.") I would concur with you, but I'm not sure that your nice distinction can be so universally applied.

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