The Grammar Logs
#544

We cannot decide whether "was" or "were" is correct in the following sentence:

Diluted earnings per share (WAS or WERE) $0.56 for the quarter ended December 31, 2002.

"Earnings" is always plural, so you want "were," regardless of the singular nature of the predicate nominative (the sum of $0.56).

My daughter is in 2nd grade and had a multisensory test. The teacher says the sentence, and the children write it with what they think is the correct punctuation and capitalization. My daughter had to write a sentence with the word "game" in it. She wrote it this way: I like to play the game chess. The teacher corrected it and said it should have been written like this: I like to play the game, Chess. I completely disagree. Also, in which section would I look up something of this nature on your website so that I wouldn't have to bother you. Many thanks for a fantastic service to our children (and those adults who have been out of school so many years their grammar rules are a bit rusty!)

The question is whether or not the word "chess" (not capitalized) is essential information or not. (See Comma Usage.) It certainly would appear to be essential; if you remove it from the sentence, the sentence — "I like to play the game" — doesn't make sense. The name of the game cannot be regarded as a parenthetical element here, so removing the comma is tempting. The sentence, however, is still a bit odd, as someone is apt to ask "What on earth is 'the game chess'?" It appears as if the noun "game" has become attributive (which isn't the case; the word "chess" is an appositive for "the game"). To avoid this problem, the teacher inserts a comma. (You, on the other hand, try to avoid the problem by capitalizing the word "Chess." If that were appropriate, it would solve the problem. Your daughter's teacher would probably write "I like the play the game Monopoly.") We'd all be better off with "I like to play the game called chess." In any case, your daughter certainly has a worthy argument with her teacher.

In the following sentence,

That meant we were on time for the party.

If the adjectival prepositional phrase is "for the party," what does it modify? "that?"

The prepositional phrase "on time" is a predicate adjective for the subject of this clause, "we." The prepositional phrase "for the party" tells us something about "on time," so I'd say it's an adverbial construction, modifying the adjective phrase "on time."

I am working with a Chinese student. Her question was:

"Many a would be bride has been left at the altar."

She questions the plural "many" and singular "a bride." We're looking for a grammar rule. Thanks.

There's really no rule here. That's simply an old and rather poetic idiom, in which a singular thing comes to represent many — but because it is singular, it takes a singular verb. It will probably be a long time before your student comes across this idiom again. Most writers would spell "would-be" with a hyphen.

Authority: The Penguin Dictionary of American English Usage and Style by Paul W. Lovinger. Published by Penguin Reference (New York: 2000).

We hear time and time again on stories of missing people..."Laci Peterson went missing on Dec. 24th," etc. Is this wrong? Our news director says it's wrong, but I hear it all over the networks. Who's right? thanks

It seems to be a rather well established idiom. I'm not sure whether the fact that I can't find anything about this phrase in my usage manuals means that it's acceptable or below their attention. Myself, I would restrict the use of this phrase to casual speech and very casual writing. The phrase "reported as missing" seems like a clumsy substitute, but I'm sure there are other improvements.

Our class was bothered by the comma usage in the following sentences:

• The name Himalayas means "House of Snow," or "Snowy Range."
• A famous "animal" of the Himalayas is the Abonimable Snowman, or Yeti.

We do not understand why the commas were placed before the conjuctions when it was not a series? Is it to show contrast?

Your students' instincts are well honed. Generally, the conjunction itself will suffice to connect two things (except for two independent clauses), and the comma is neither necessary or appropriate. For instance, we would use no commas in "The name Himalaya can be translated either as "House of Snow" or as "Snowy Range." In the two sentences you've give us, what follows the comma is meant to be read as a kind of afterthought, an alternative that's sort of tacked on — not to say that it's unimportant, but it is less important than the first alternative. Or we could read the second "translation" as a slight change of direction in the sentence. Either way, the comma is acceptable and appropriate.

I would like to know the right spelling of the word "childcare". I look in the dictionary and I can't find it. I'm making a flyer and I would like to add, "Childcare will be provided." I've seen some flyers with the word Childcare and others with childcare together.

Thank you so much for your assistance.

I'd go with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services on this and use "child care" as two separate words. See that department's Website called National Child Care Information Center.

What's the difference between "in the class" and "in class" Thank you

If you're "in class," that probably means that you're sitting in that classroom, right now. If you're "in the class," that means that you're enrolled in the course and you attend it regularly because you want a good grade and you like your professor.

When writing about a population of older people, is it more correct to write "people age 75 and older" or "people aged 75 and older"? Thanks!

The past participle form, "aged," is redundant in that construction. What would be wrong with "people 75 and older"?

Where I work, when something is not sanitary, they refer to it as insanitary. I have tried to find this this version of the word but have been unable to. I think it should be unsanitary myself. Can you help me?

I was surprised to find "insanitary" in my Merriam-Webster's. According to Garner, "unsanitary" (which is used much more frequently) means that something is dirty; "insanitary" means that it's so filthy that it's apt to cause disease.

From The Oxford Dictionary of American Usage and Styleby Bryan Garner. Copyright 1995 by Bryan A. Garner. Published by Oxford University Press, Inc., www.oup-usa.org, and used with the gracious consent of Oxford University Press.

Previous Grammar Log

Next Grammar Log

Index of Grammar Logs

Guide to Grammar and Writing