The Grammar Logs
#548

The choice of "open/opened" depends on what we're talking about. Yes, we can say (and often do) that "the store is open," but if we're talking about the actual process of someone opening the doors, we'd say "The store is opened every morning at 8 o'clock." "Close" does not function the same was as "open"; when we use "close" as an adjective, it means something else (not "closed"), something like "nearby" or "stuffy": "We live close to our neighbors" and "It's awfully close in here. Open a window." (It has other meanings, too: like "secretive," "tightly woven or organized," etc.)

The plural of status is statuses. It seems doubtful, though, that you really want the plural of the word in that sentence. You can talk about the status of more than one project in your report. And if the status changes, you can still address changes in a singular status. If your singular project actually does have more than one status, though, it is possible to speak of statuses.

Do we put a comma before and or after and? Where will we put a comma in this sentence:

Linearization is a reproduction variable that must be accomodated for in order to optimize and control image quality and achieve predictable results.

The conjunction and is capable of connecting two of anything in a sentence (except for two independent clauses). In this sentence, and first connects "to optimize and control" (two infinitives with a suspended "to" in front of "control"), and second it connects "[to] achieve" to the earlier set of infintives ("to optimize," etc.). Incidentally, the preposition "for" is neither necessary nor appropriate — or change "accommodated" (watch spelling) to "allowed for."

Would you use busted or burst in this context:

"I _____ your bubble"

I looked in the dictionary, and burst is breaking apart from pressure or force from within, NOT from the outside, so please tell me, which is grammatically correct?

I would definitely use "burst." You could also use "popped," I supposed, but "busted" would definitely be an error. Yes, something usually bursts because of force from within, but the verb can also mean that you cause something to burst in that fashion. Sticking a pin in a balloon (bursting it) would lose a great deal of its dramatic effect without all that pressure suddenly escaping.

In the sentence (quoted as published) "This is one reason trustworthiness and character is important in the people we elect into office." I assume that the second instance of 'is' should be plural. I am puzzled, though, about how to describe the relationship between the clauses "This is one reason" and "trustworthiness and character is [sic] important ..." I assume that the second clause is elliptical with an implied why, but I cannot remember enough about clauses to sort out the rest of the relationship. How is one clause modifying the other? Is the second clause subordinate? Thank you for your assistance.

The initial pronoun "this" refers to an earlier idea in the paragraph, apparently. The main clause of the sentence is "this is one reason" and the rest of the sentence is a subordinate (adjective) clause modifying "reason." It probably has an implied "that" (not "why"), but in either case, you're right about the need for a plural verb. I don't think we can say that "trustworthiness" and "character" have become one thing in this sentence. So we need "are," not "is."

Can you give me any examples of using the word RELATE using WITH as opposed to using TO. Is it common usage as I've always used "relate to" or "related to" but the dictionary lists both uses but without any examples. ie. do these two sentences have the same meaning?

The second just doesn't sound right.

"Relate to" is the common idiom, but even that phrase is a sorry and voguish substitute for "understand."

The word blurb was coined by American humorist Gelett Burgess in the early 20th century. Meaning either an inspired testimonial or fulsome praise, a blurb is named after Miss Blinda Blurb, whose image was carred on the jacket of a Burgess book.

Authority for this note: The Oxford Dictionary of Word Histories edited by Glynnis Chantrell. Oxford University Press, New York, 2002. p. 60.

When writing Washington DC in a sentence, is it grammatical to write DC , D.C. or should I write out District of Columbia?

According to the New York Times style manual, put a comma between Washington and D.C., and use the periods in the abbreviation — although you can leave it out altogether if there's no chance your reader might confuse it with the state of Washington.

Authority: The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage. by Allan M. Siegal and William G. Connolly. Times books: New York. 1999.

Is the following sentence compound, complex, or compound-complex?

"Only one thing was clear and certain—that at all costs he was going home, home to his own beloved master."

You have one independent clause — the first one — followed by a dependent clause (beginning with "that") that serves as an appositive to the subject ("one thing"). This means you've got a complex sentence. See types of sentences.

The lady moved in in 2002.

Please tell me if it is correct to use the preposition in twice.

The sentence is not incorrect, but it is hard to read, one must admit. Readers are apt to be momentarily perplexed, or wonder if there isn't a typo somewhere, or think they're seeing double. And people's attention span being what it is, you can't afford to perplex your readers. It would be better to change the phrasing or move the final prepositional phrase to the front of the sentence, "In 2002, the lady moved in" (or "moved into the house," if you don't like to end a sentence with a preposition).

Previous Grammar Log

Next Grammar Log

Index of Grammar Logs

Guide to Grammar and Writing