The
Grammar
Logs
# 356

QUESTION
In the sentence (I will reward you with a candy bar.) is the verb transitive or intransitive? If it is transitive, what is its object?
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Kuttawa, Kentucky Wed, Oct 20, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
The object of the verb in that sentence is "you." It's probably the nature of the verb itself, its meaning, that confuses you. If we said, "I will give you a candy bar," the "you" would be an indirect object and the "candy bar" would be the object. With "reward," though, the "you" receives the action directly; the prepositional phrase "with a candy bar" tells the reader how you will reward someone, so it's acting as an adverbial modifier.

QUESTION
Which is correct? I feel strongly about the issue OR I feel strong about the issue. Why?
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Brewton, Alabama Thu, Oct 21, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
Burchfield says it is "unobjectionable" to say "I feel bad about this." But he doesn't say anything about "strong" versus "strongly." "Feel" is a linking verb, which ought to mean that we can connect it to an adjective, but I don't think it works that way here. "To feel strong" means that you're feeling healthy, muscular. [E-Mail Icon]"To feel strongly" means that you have powerful convictions. I'd go with "strongly," but I'll leave an e-mail link in case someone has a better idea.

QUESTION
I'm an editor and am currently trying to determine what to capitalize in a title of one of our books. To determine this, I need to know if "than" in this title is a subordinating conjunction or a preposition. The title is: Two Hearts Are Better than One.

Could you help me with this? (I THINK it's a subordinating conjunction, but I'm not sure!)

Thanks so much!

SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Nashville, Tennessee Fri, Oct 22, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
Yep, you're right. That's a subordinating conjunction. If you added the verb (which is "understood"), you'll see how it works: Two Hearts Are Better Than One [Is].

QUESTION
When is it correct to use some time or sometime. Also, when is it correct to use every body and everybody. Also, every day and everyday. Some time ago,
Everyone needs a friend sometime.
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Forest City, North Carolina Fri, Oct 22, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
We could say "We use our everyday dishes every day." "Everyone" and "everybody" is almost invariably one word, except when you're trying to stress the singularity of the bodies: "Every body in the morgue was missing. Every one of them." "Sometime/some time" is a bit more complicated. According to Burchfield:
When used as an adjective (a sometime fellow of Balliol College. . .), it must be written solid. Most people write elements separately when the meaning is "a certain amount of time" (Some time after this interview. . . .). When the contextual meaning is "at some future time" the two words are normally run together (Let's talk about them sometime.). But this neat distinction is not always observed.
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
This morning a friend posed a question to me (I'm an English teacher). She said that she thought that the verbs "to destroy" and "to destruct" were so similar as to be troublesome (when to use each, that is). I told her that one doesn't say "to destruct something." I argued that the proper usage is "to destroy."

She wondered if there could be a British/American difference (she's British). But I stand firm that one doesn't say "to destruct." The dictionary shows me that "destruct" IS an intransitive verb. And, of course, one can say "to self destruct."

But I hold that "destruct" by itself is not a legitimate verb. What do you think?

SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Corvallis, Oregon Wed, Oct 27, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
According to Burchfield, "to destruct" is a very recent development, a product of the 1950s arms race, when it became commonplace to speak of missiles "destructing," which supposedly described what they would do when they went off course, and someone pressed a button to cause them to explode prematurely, off-target. If they blew up automatically and prematurely, they would be said to "self destruct," a phrase that we now use in all kind of contexts. Whether it's a legitimate verb or not, I'll leave to you, but I can't imagine ever using it again, now that I'm done writing this.

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
Which case of pronoun is correct when the pronoun is followed by a phrase beginning with "who", or is it necessary to also change the case of the relative pronoun as well, as in the following:
  1. Do you know whether it was him/ he who recommended that we proceed with the construction plans?
  2. Was it her/ she who distributed all the badges to our employees?
I want to use the nominative case of personal pronouns in both examples, and leave the "who" alone because it sounds correct, but that "explanation" doesn't sit too well with my students.

Thank you.

SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada Wed, Oct 27, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
Luckily, in this case it sounds right because it is right. You want the subject form to follow the linking verb — "it was he" and "it was she" — and then the relative pronoun refers to that subject form, so we need the subject form of the pronoun, who.

QUESTION
Please give me information about using 'any' other than in the tradiional rules in a question or negative with not. How does that explain: I'll accept any advice, for example, or Shakespeare's "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet."

Thank you.

SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Singhofen, Germany Wed, Oct 27, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
In those sentences, it's being used as an adjective, meaning "one or some indiscriminately of whatever kind," as Merriam-Webster's rather cryptically defines it. It is modifying whatever noun follows it ("advice" or "name," in these sentences).

QUESTION
Should the verb in the following sentence be plural or singular? Why?
Anxiety, coupled with significant processing gaps, makes academic work a real struggle for Andy.
SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Silver Spring, Maryland Wed, Oct 27, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
The verb should be singular, "makes," because we haven't really compounded the subject. Instead, we've modified "anxiety" with the participial phrase "coupled with significant processing gaps." But anxiety remains singular. (The same is true of phrases such as "together with," "along with," and "as well as.")

QUESTION
In using the term 'whether' to describe a possible scenario, is it necessary to follow with 'or not?'

Example: Whether you want to come to dinner, we will make reservations at the restaurant.

OR SHOULD IT BE? Whether or or not you want to come to dinner, we will make reservations at the restaurant.

SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Chevy Chase, Maryland Thu, Oct 28, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
Burchfield says that using whether without expressing an alternative is legitimate "in a limited range of circumstances. It is much less common than types with alternatives expressed." But then he doesn't say what that limited range of circumstances includes. I think it means that the alternative must be so clear that it doesn't need to be stated. In your sentence, for example, another alternative might be that someone else might be coming in your place, so the alternative is not so clear. Thus including the "or not" would be a good idea.

QUESTION
I know that American people don't use "Should" very often. A couple of days ago, while speaking with a friend, I happened to say something like this:
"If I shouldn't have come back by 5, please leave without me"
He looked at me and said: What??? That is not correct! Now, I know that "If I haven't come back" (instead of "shouldn't have come") would have been quite more natural, but I think that, at least in formal speech, my sentence would be fine. What is your opinion?

Thanks for the help.

SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE
Franklin Park, Illinois Thu, Oct 28, 1999
GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE
"If I shouldn't have come back by 5" means that there was something wrong about your coming back by then. (As in "You shouldn't have done that.") Because that auxiliary should is often used to express obligation (as well as the conditional), it can be confusing or ambiguous. This is especially true in negative expressions, formal or otherwise.

Previous Grammar Log

Next Grammar Log

Index of Grammar Logs

Guide to Grammar and Writing