The Grammar Logs
#525

Is sneaked or snuck correct?

"Snuck" sneaked into the vocabulary in the late nineteenth century, we're told by Merriam-Webster's, and now enjoys just about equal acceptance and common use. Use whichever sounds better to you.

Authority: Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, Electronic Edition, Version 1.5. 1996. Used with permission.

Should I say, "Not all grants are created equally." or "Not all grants are created equal."?

Surely Jefferson knew what he was doing when he wrote, "All men are created equal." The adverb "equally" would try to modify the verb, and we're not really talking about the verb here. We want the adjective "equal" to reflect upon the subject, "men" — or, in your case, "grants."

The Court, having read and considered the document, now rules as follows:

What is "having read and considered the document" called?

My friend says the following is a complete sentence: "The Court, having read and considered the document." Of course, it doesn't have a verb. She says "Having read and considered" are the verbs. Well, I know they're not. But I don't know how to prove to her that her setence is not a complete sentence.

Thank you.

That phrase is a participial modifier. An "-ing" verb form without a preceding auxiliary (as in "We are having a barbecue this afternoon") is never a verb unto itself. It's always something else, a gerund or a participle. You're right: "rules" is the verb for that sentence, and without it you've got an incomplete sentence.

Here is a sentence in a research paper. Is it correct?

Often Borders's public image includes participation with organizations and functions that involve books and/or music.

The name of the bookstore chain you're referring to is Borders, the plural of border. Since it's already a plural, we would form the possessive simply by adding an apostrophe, as in "Borders' policy . . . ." The "and/or" construction should be limited to legal language; a simple "or" would suffice — or "and," take your pick. The sentence says something about "organizations . . . that involve books or music," and I'm not sure what that means. I would modify "organizations" separately: "organizations that do something and functions that do something else." And, finally, I'm not sure what it means for a public image to "include" something. Perhaps it's the image that involves (or is characterized by an involvement in the community, especially a collaboration with organizations, etc.). I've done enough shilling now for Borders, a corporation that has spelled doom for small-town bookstores across America.

My question regards the following sentence:

At the present time there is an existing structure at this site. It is our understanding that this structure will be torn down and a duplex with a garage and basement is planned for construction.

The question is, does there HAVE to be a comma after "...torn down" and before "and a duplex..."

If so, can you please explain the rule? Thank you!

No, a comma is not called for in that sentence. The subordinating conjunction "that" is actually in control of two subordinate clauses in that sentence: "this structure will be torn down" and then "a duplex with a garage, etc." The "and" (after "torn down") is connecting two parts of a dependent clause, both of which are begun with "that." The sentence does suffer from a lack of good parallel form, however. "That this structure will be torn down and a duplex with garage and basement will take its place" would be an improvement.

(1)Why are pretzels shaped so weird. Is "shaped" here a passive verb? If so, should it be "so weirdly" instead.

(2)Since fanatics usually regard themselves as selfless patriots eager to die for their beliefs, fanaticism can rarely be controlled, [however ruthless the countermeasures].

Is the word "are" needed here to complete the sentence?

Thanks in advance for your help,

"Shaped" is a passive verb, but that doesn't affect the choice of the word "weird." An adverb, "weirdly," would modify the action of the shaping, as if it were done in an odd fashion. You want the adjective form to modify the shape of the pretzel. A similar sentence might be "How did you get so beautiful?" in which the adjective beautiful does not modify the verb "get." And in your second question, the "are" or the "might be" can be left as understood and the sentence is perfectly comprehensible without it.

What is the correct way to write eastern, central, pacific time?

The meeting will be held at 3:00 p.m. eastern.
or
The meeting will be held at 3:00 p.m. (eastern).
or
The meeting will be held at 3:00 p.m. Eastern.
or
The meeting will be held at 3:00 p.m. (Eastern).

The Gregg Reference Manual recommends the use of abbreviations set off by a comma: 3:00 p.m., EST (for Eastern standard time). If daylight saving time is in effect, use EDT instead. The other zones, in the U.S., are CST (Central), MST (Mountain), and PST (Pacific). If you wish, you can eliminate all references to standard and daylight time and just use ET, CT, MT, and PT. This is useful for materials that you don't want to change from one part of the year to another.

Authority: The Gregg Reference Manual by William A. Sabin. 9th Edition. McGraw-Hill: New York. 2001. Used with the consent of Glencoe/McGraw-Hill.

Which is correct, please, "one in the same" or "one and the same"? Thank you.

You certainly wouldn't be the first to use "one in the same" for the phrase "one and the same," but "one and the same" is the accepted idiom for "the same thing."

I want to know the correct usage of the verb "tout" in a sentence. For example, suppose I am speaking of somebody who is hired to seek out Spanish tourists and take them to a store specializing in gifts and souvenirs. How would I use the verb form of "tout"? "Touting for Spanish tourists?"

I would also like to know the use of the same word — "tout" — as a noun, in the same context. Is "He was a tout for Spanish tourists" correct?

The most common use of this word would be in the intransitive form, something like "This store is highly touted for its gifts and souvenirs." A less common usage would be the transitive form: "He touted this store for its gifts and souvenirs for Spanish tourists." If he did that, the act makes him a "tout," but that noun usage is rare, indeed, in my experience. You might look up the verb and noun "shill," but it's not a particularly pleasant word.

There might be differences between British and American uses of these words that I'm not aware of and that my Merriam-Webster's does not indicate.

Could "where" be used as a relative adverb?

Indeed. Adjectival clauses are sometimes introduced by what are called relative adverbs: where, when, and why. Although the entire clause is adjectival (used to modify a noun), the relative word itself fulfills an adverbial function.

The relative adverb where will begin a clause that modifies a noun of place:

My entire family now worships in the church where my great grandfather used to be minister.

The relative pronoun "where" modifies the verb "used to be" (which makes it adverbial) but the entire clause ("where my great grandfather used to be minister") modifies the word "church."

When will modify nouns of time:

My favorite month is always February, when we celebrate Valentines' Day and Presidents' Day.

And why will modify the noun reason:

Do you know the reason why Isabel isn't in class today?

We sometimes leave out the relative adverb in such clauses, and many writers prefer "that" to "why" in a clause referring to "reason": "Do you know the reason Isabel isn't in class today?" or "I know the reason that men like motorcycles."

Authority: Understanding English Grammar by Martha Kolln. 4rth Edition. MacMillan Publishing Company: New York. 1994.

Previous Grammar Log

Next Grammar Log

Index of Grammar Logs

Guide to Grammar and Writing