The Grammar Logs
#507

What is the grammatical difference between "this" and "these" or "that" and "those" ? I know "these" is the plural form of "this". However, we usually say "these days", not "in these days", while we say "in those days" not "those days". I have seen the grammartical term "advervial object". According to some reference books, "this +noun" is an adverbial object, so we say "this morning" not "*on* this morning."

Could you please tell me why "this+N" and "that+N"are used without prepositions, while "these+N" and "those+N" need preposition when they denote "time"?

I'm not familiar with the term "adverbial object," but I see how it works, at least in this idiomatic temporal sense. I'm afraid I'll have to rely on the cowardly explanation: usage. We can combine "this" and a period of time to create an adverbial construction: "We're going to the movies this afternoon," "We've already spent our paycheck this month," "We've gone heavily into debt this year." There are certain periods of time for which this does not work, however. We have created "today" and "tomorrow," for instance, and seldom use "this day" as an adverb (although you can find it in older pieces of text, as in "Give us this day our daily bread.") And, as you point out, the construction doesn't seem to work the same way in the plural.

Hi. I'm a newspaper copy editor and I'm struggling with a verb tense issue. I'm hoping you can help me see the light.

This came up a week ago during efforts to rescue the Pennsylvania miners. The story was written and edited on a Saturday night. We knew that by the time readers picked up their papers on Sunday morning, the situation would likely be resolved, one way or the other, but we did not yet know whether the story would have a happy ending or a sad one. For all we knew, the rescue effort could have failed.

Can you tell me, please, how you would have handled the verb tenses? Thank you very much.

"Schweiker said when the rescue shaft reaches/reached the miners' chamber, rescuers will/would decide how to enter a protective air pocket where they believed the miners are/were huddled."

There's an excellent resource on reported speech by Professor Sorensen at the University of Washington. It appears that the use of the past or present tense in reported speech is a judgment call, depending on how close, in time, we are to the actual spoken word. Generally, according to Sorensen, "If the reporting verb (the main verb of the sentences, e.g., said, is in the past, the verb in the noun clause will usually be in a past form." However, if the writer reports something immediately or soon after it was said, the noun clause verb often remains as spoken.

He said that the next stop is Northgate.

(Still quoting Sorensen. . .) "If will is the modal in the reported utterance and expresses future time, and if the situation described in the quote still holds true at the time of the indirect report, the will may not be changed to would even though the reporting verb is in the past tense."

In order to avoid this problem with "will" and "would" (which is the only verb in your report that would perplex your readers, I believe), I'd stick with the present tense because, for all you know, the situation described in the quote might very well still prevail at the time your readers read the quote. (And that would include "believe," wouldn't it?)

Handful — it it always considered singular? the sentence that prompts this question is below

A handful of managers spread the word to controllers.

If the managers are acting as individuals — which certainly seems to be the case here, you want to use the plural "spread." It seems like an odd way to refer to managers, by the way.

I've been pondering the use of "share" together with "common."

E.g. The two share a common goal.

It strikes me as redundant to use both "share" and "common." Does that form say anything that can't be expressed by "The two 'have' a common goal" or "The two share a goal"?

I had never thought of that before, and I suppose you have a point. On the other hand, there is a level of reciprocity, of co-ownership that is conveyed by "sharing" that is not so evident in "having" a common goal, and even "they share a goal" doesn't seem to convey the same kind of information as "they share a common goal." Perhaps "share the same goal/goals" is an improvement? In The Careful Writer, Bernstein uses the phrase, "have a common goal" (but doesn't comment on "sharing" and "common" in the same sentence).

Some of our efforts on behalf of company XYZ may be redundant to Chello Consulting. (Should Consulting be possessive?) (Is it "understood" that we would add the word "efforts" in our mind after Consulting?)

Example:
Some of our efforts on behalf of company XYZ may be redundant to Chello Consulting's (efforts).

I can only find examples of possessives when they are modifying a noun that comes after them! Thank you!!!!

Your instincts are right here. For the purpose of parallel form, you need the possessive there: Chello Consulting's. And don't worry about the "missing" noun; the reader will provide that mentally. It's quite similar to saying "My car is cheaper than his [car]."

My fond regards to Erie, Pennsylvania, from a graduate of Strong Vincent High School (forty long years ago!).

Would I use commas in the following sentence:

"Over two million children of all races and creeds in third world countries are welcomed into Salesian programs."

It was suggested that I use a comma before "of" and after "countries." Is this correct? Please advise.

I would go one way or the other with this sentence. I would either not use the commas (as in your example) or I would make that information even more parenthetical by setting it off with a pair of dashes. Some people might insist that you use "more than" (rather than "over"), but that advice can be safely ignored.

Is there a rule for using "O" or "Oh" versus "You"? I assumed that "You" was used for people or humans and "O" or "Oh" was used for personified clauses. For example, "Bless the Lord, O Sun." and "Bless the Lord, you nations" I also heard that it's better to leave it out totally for proper names. "Bless the Lord, John and Mark" vs. "Bless the Lord, O John and Mark". Which is right?

According to Burchfield, there are no "exceptionless rules" for such usage, but generally, the "O" is used as a vocative for both animate and inanimate things, as in "O Little Town of Bethlehem" and "O Lord," etc,, whereas "Oh" is used as a separate, parenthetical exclamation, "Oh, boy! We're in trouble now" and "Oh, the places we'll see!" The "you" is working in an entirely different way, as in "You guys are driving me nuts."

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.

Is this a correct sentence?

• He would like to know if you are available for dinner tomorrow night with Mr. Clark and himself.
or

• He would like to know if you are available for dinner tomorrow night with Mr. Clark and him.

Generally, the easy "test" for pronoun usage like this is to eliminate, temporarily, the "other noun," in this case Mr. Clark. You would say "He would like to know if you are available for dinner tomorrow night with him." When you add "Mr. Clark" to the company, don't change the form of "him." If it sounds odd to you, you might change the order to "with him and Mr. Clark."

I type for a physician who dictates:

"98 milligrams of adenosine were infused over 6 minutes."

I think it should be:

"98 milligrams of adenosine was infused over 6 minutes."

Who is right, and what is the rule? Thank you so much.

Since these milligrams are being administered over a relatively lengthy period of time, perhaps the physician is thinking of these 98 milligrams as separate units, one at a time. If that is so, then the plural "were" that he used is appropriate. Generally, a measurement like this is regarded as a lump sum, a singular quantity, and we would use the singular "was." I certainly don't know enough about the infusion of adenosine to render a verdict here. I suspect, though, that you are correct. I also don't know the rules about correcting what the physician dictates.

I am in the process of starting a small home craft business. As dumb as this may sound, I am having a problem on how my business name should read. I want it to be called: The Crafts Nest. Now, which is the proper way to word it? Should it say, The Craft Nest or The Craft's Nest or The Crafts' Nest? Can you help me as to which way is the proper way? Thank you very much.

I vote for The Craft Nest — partly because there really is no role for a possessive form there, and partly because the name becomes hard to say when that "s" gets snuggled in between all those other consonant sounds.

Previous Grammar Log

Next Grammar Log

Index of Grammar Logs

Guide to Grammar and Writing