Today's topic: MORE Grammar Misconceptions
We all fall victim to grammar myths sometimes. Here is a list of some of the common ones. Thanks to Mignon Fogerty, the Internet's "Grammar Girl," for pointing out # 2 (all the words
and examples in this post are my own, I just got the idea for #2 from Ms. Fogerty).
*Misconception #1: "You and I"/"Johnny and I"
is always correct--never say "You and me"/"Johnny and me."
Nope! Whether to use "I" or "me" depends entirely on the sentence.
Here's a quick, easy trick to ensure that you will never use the wrong
personal pronoun again: Eliminate the other person from the sentence.
Which pronoun is correct now, I or me? Example:
There's a great portrait of my husband and I/me on the living room wall.
Let's employ our sneaky new trick, and take the husband out of the sentence (sorry, dear!):
There's a great portrait of ___ on the living room wall.
Would it make sense to say "There's a great portrait of I on the living room wall"? Of course not! So the correct pronoun in this
sentence is "me." "There's a great portrait of my husband and me on the living room wall."
*Misconception #2: Run-on
sentences are sentences that are too long (or a sentence has to be long
in order to be a run-on sentence).
Nope! This is one reason (I suspect) why many grammarians now refer to
these as "fused" sentences; the term "run-on" creates the erroneous
impression that a run-on sentence must "run on." In truth, run-on
sentences can be quite short.
A run-on, or fused, sentence is one in which two or more independent
clauses are linked without appropriate punctuation. An independent
clause (IC), by the way, is a phrase which includes a subject and a verb
and could stand alone as a complete sentence.
Since ICs (complete sentences) can be quite short, run-on sentences can
be short as well. Examples:
I love cats, they are so cute.
It was my turn to cook I made spaghetti.
Note: The first of these is an example of a comma splice. A comma
splice is a run-on sentence in which the two ICs are linked with a
comma. Commas are weak punctuation; they are not strong enough to
separate ICs. You can fix run-on sentences in a number
of different ways. You can: 1.) Separate the ICs with a semicolon (see
my earlier Writing Tip of the Week on semicolons for specifics), 2.)
separate the ICs with a period (thereby making them into two sentences),
or 3.) separate the ICs with a comma + a conjunction
(and, but, or) or other appropriate word. Which you choose depends on
the sentence, of course. In the first example above I would probably
choose a semicolon, because the two ICs are closely related. In the
second example you could add a comma after the
word "cook," then the word "and" or "so." You could also separate the
two ICs with a semicolon or period. It's a style choice.
*Misconception #3: I.e. and e.g. mean
the same thing.
Nope. As I pointed out in my blog post on this topic, i.e. means "in other words," and e.g.
means "for example." You'll find more details and examples of proper usage
in my original post: http://writingtipoftheweek.blogspot.com/2013/10/ie-vs-eg.html
*Misconception #4: You should never start a sentence with a conjunction (and, but, or).
Nope! I'm not sure why people perpetuate this myth. People have been starting sentences with "and," "but,"
and "or" for hundreds of years. As grammarian and author Patricia T. O'Conner points out in her book Woe
is I: The Grammarphobe's Guide to Better English in Plain English, it "feels
natural because it is natural," and what's wrong with that? Nothing. As long as your sentence is complete,
with a subject and predicate, feel free to start it with a conjunction.
*Misconception #5: Passive voice is always wrong (or always right).
Nope. There are situations where passive voice is correct, and situations where active voice is correct.
If you aren't familiar with passive and active voice, here's a quick primer.
Passive voice puts the emphasis on the passive recipient of an action (someone or something having something done
TO them), while active voice emphasizes the doer. For example:
Passive voice: The paper was written by Sarah.
Active voice: Sarah wrote the paper.
Passive voice: Several studies were found which examined the effects of
gamma rays on man-in-the-moon marigolds.
Active voice: I found several studies which examined the effects of gamma rays on man-in-the-moon marigolds.
Passive voice: The study was conducted at a small midwestern family practice clinic.
Active voice: We conducted the study at a small midwestern family practice clinic.
Most of the time, active voice is clearer and more concise. I know what
you're thinking: "But I was told never to use "I" or "we" in scientific writing!"
And you are right; for decades, science writers avoided the first person in favor of passive voice constructions
like "The study was conducted..." and "The following search terms were used..."
However, now many style guides (including the latest edition of the APA handbook) specifically recommend active
voice, which means first person is now on the table for scientific
writers. I know some of you are going to balk at this, but don't shoot
the messenger. If you don't believe me, check the
6th edition APA style manual!
That said, sometimes passive voice works better. Sometimes you want to put the emphasis on the recipient
of the action, not on who or what did it. For example:
"The king was assassinated." In this case, we don't care that Joe Nobody assassinated the king. The important
thing is that the king is dead. So the passive voice works better here.
"The lights were installed on the top and sides of the cabinet." Again, here we want
the emphasis on the recipient of the action (the lights). We don't care that John Doe
installed the lights; we care where they are. Passive voice wins again. Passive voice also wins when you don't know
who is responsible for the action.
So. Active voice is usually better, but passive voice is fine in certain situations.
I hope you found this post helpful. Happy scribbling!
Thursday, October 30, 2014
Wednesday, October 8, 2014
Professors' Writing Pet Peeves: Part II
Today's topic: Professors' Writing Pet Peeves, II
As you may recall, in the spring I devoted one of my "tips of the week" to this same topic: http://writingtipoftheweek.blogspot.com/ It's an enormous topic, though; if I got all the UK faculty together and had them list their pet writing peeves, I could probably put together a book the size of the Oxford English Dictionary. For now, I offer you part deux in hopes of helping you polish your writing (and your grade point average).
Many thanks to the CON faculty for offering these.
1. Phrases like "this study found," "this study said," "this study stated," etc. This was a popular one. Remember, studies are inanimate. They aren't alive, so they can't find or say or do anything. The researchers and authors can, though, so say "The authors stated..." instead.
2. Using "many," "a few," "some," etc. instead of including actual data. This one falls under the "show, don't tell" rule. Specificity is crucial in scientific writing. Don't tell us that many researchers found X. Show us which ones.
3. Confusing plural nouns with possessive nouns, a.k.a. misusing apostrophes. Remember, apostrophes have only two uses: to create contractions (don't, can't, isn't, etc.) and to show ownership (as in Sarah's car, the cat's bowl, the university's policy). It is incorrect to use apostrophes for simple plural nouns (as in "I love cupcakes" or "Journal editors can be harsh critics"). The only time an apostrophe is appropriate in a plural noun is when you need to indicate ownership by multiple parties. For example, let's say Jeff just bought a new toy for his three dogs. He might say "Check out the dogs' new toy." Note that in this case the apostrophe goes after the s.
It is also incorrect to use an apostrophe to indicate the plural of an acronym or abbreviation. WRONG: APRN's. RIGHT: APRNs.
Here is a full blog post on apostrophes: http://writingtipoftheweek.blogspot.com/2013/05/apostrophes.html
4. Wordiness and redundancy. Conciseness is important for both clarity and readability. When you read your work, look for places where you can trim the language. If the sentence would mean the same thing without a word or phrase, that word or phrase can go. One quick tip: Avoid "ly" adverbs (extremely, totally, absolutely, actually, basically, completely, etc.) and words like "very." These are filler words. Use stronger verbs and adjectives instead. For example, instead of "very important" say "crucial." Instead of "completely finished" just say "finished." Instead of "extremely useful" say "invaluable."
5. Inconsistent grammar in lists. This one came up four times on the survey. Lists can be tricky, especially when the sentence is long and complex. It's important to make sure that each item in a series fits the grammar of the rest of the sentence. For example, let's look at this sentence:
The patient must be educated about the disease, the risks and benefits of various treatment options, and actively involved in self-management.
Do you see the problem? The sentence sets us up with the phrase "the patient must be educated about." So we expect each item in the list that follows to be an example of something about which the patient needs education. We're fine for the first two items--the disease and the risks/benefits of various treatment options--but then we get to the phrase "and actively involved in self-management," and now we're confused because that phrase does NOT seem to relate back to education.
To avoid this problem, test the sentences that include lists. Pretend that each list item stands alone and follows directly after the first part of the sentence, and see if the wording fits. Like this:
The patient must be educated about the disease. Check.
The patient must be educated about risks and benefits of various treatment options. Check.
The patient must be educated about actively involved in self-management. Nope.
How could we fix this sentence? One way is to rearrange the list items. For example:
The patient must be actively involved in self-management and educated about the disease and the risks and benefits of various treatment options.
Another way is to turn the sentence into two sentences. For example:
The patient must be educated about the disease and the risks and benefits of various treatment options. He or she must also be actively involved in self-management.
Another way is to just reword the whole thing (and in this case, we could also change the passive voice to active voice by specifying WHO is educating the patient):
The nurse must educate the patient about the disease and the risks and benefits of various treatment options. He or she should also ensure that the patient is actively involved in self-management.
6. Incorrect punctuation--use and placement. I can't cover something this huge in such a small space, so I encourage you to view the punctuation guides on the Purdue OWL if you are less than confident in your usage. However, I can say that commas, semicolons, and colons seem to be the most frequently mistreated punctuation marks. You may want to just brush up on those.
Here's my blog post on "Mystery Punctuation," which may be of some help: http://writingtipoftheweek.blogspot.com/2013/03/mystery-punctuation.html
And my post on semicolons: http://writingtipoftheweek.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-dreaded-semicolon-pink-plastic.html
7. Saying something is common without citing any supporting evidence. Remember, your reader can't just take your word for it. Show support for your claims. This one goes back to the "show, don't tell" rule from # 2.
8. Being general rather than specific. For example, saying that something is "a major problem" without giving any specific statistics is a bad idea.
9. Saying that two means are different when the p value is >0.05. Okay, I confess I don't know enough about research methods or statistics to fully understand this one. But I assume that most of you do, so avoid doing this.
10. Citing websites (especially non-authoritative ones) as references to support an argument. I know the Internet is a convenient source of information, but here's the thing. Many websites are unreliable and there is a ton of misinformation out there. So when you cite a non-authoritative website to support your argument, your reader then has to go and look up that source to make sure it's reputable. As you can imagine, that gets tiresome.
Here are some resources to help you determine the value and trustworthiness of a web source. https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/553/04/ and http://www.library.georgetown.edu/tutorials/research-guides/evaluating-internet-content
I hope you've found this week's post helpful. Happy scribbling!
As you may recall, in the spring I devoted one of my "tips of the week" to this same topic: http://writingtipoftheweek.blogspot.com/ It's an enormous topic, though; if I got all the UK faculty together and had them list their pet writing peeves, I could probably put together a book the size of the Oxford English Dictionary. For now, I offer you part deux in hopes of helping you polish your writing (and your grade point average).
Many thanks to the CON faculty for offering these.
1. Phrases like "this study found," "this study said," "this study stated," etc. This was a popular one. Remember, studies are inanimate. They aren't alive, so they can't find or say or do anything. The researchers and authors can, though, so say "The authors stated..." instead.
2. Using "many," "a few," "some," etc. instead of including actual data. This one falls under the "show, don't tell" rule. Specificity is crucial in scientific writing. Don't tell us that many researchers found X. Show us which ones.
3. Confusing plural nouns with possessive nouns, a.k.a. misusing apostrophes. Remember, apostrophes have only two uses: to create contractions (don't, can't, isn't, etc.) and to show ownership (as in Sarah's car, the cat's bowl, the university's policy). It is incorrect to use apostrophes for simple plural nouns (as in "I love cupcakes" or "Journal editors can be harsh critics"). The only time an apostrophe is appropriate in a plural noun is when you need to indicate ownership by multiple parties. For example, let's say Jeff just bought a new toy for his three dogs. He might say "Check out the dogs' new toy." Note that in this case the apostrophe goes after the s.
It is also incorrect to use an apostrophe to indicate the plural of an acronym or abbreviation. WRONG: APRN's. RIGHT: APRNs.
Here is a full blog post on apostrophes: http://writingtipoftheweek.blogspot.com/2013/05/apostrophes.html
4. Wordiness and redundancy. Conciseness is important for both clarity and readability. When you read your work, look for places where you can trim the language. If the sentence would mean the same thing without a word or phrase, that word or phrase can go. One quick tip: Avoid "ly" adverbs (extremely, totally, absolutely, actually, basically, completely, etc.) and words like "very." These are filler words. Use stronger verbs and adjectives instead. For example, instead of "very important" say "crucial." Instead of "completely finished" just say "finished." Instead of "extremely useful" say "invaluable."
5. Inconsistent grammar in lists. This one came up four times on the survey. Lists can be tricky, especially when the sentence is long and complex. It's important to make sure that each item in a series fits the grammar of the rest of the sentence. For example, let's look at this sentence:
The patient must be educated about the disease, the risks and benefits of various treatment options, and actively involved in self-management.
Do you see the problem? The sentence sets us up with the phrase "the patient must be educated about." So we expect each item in the list that follows to be an example of something about which the patient needs education. We're fine for the first two items--the disease and the risks/benefits of various treatment options--but then we get to the phrase "and actively involved in self-management," and now we're confused because that phrase does NOT seem to relate back to education.
To avoid this problem, test the sentences that include lists. Pretend that each list item stands alone and follows directly after the first part of the sentence, and see if the wording fits. Like this:
The patient must be educated about the disease. Check.
The patient must be educated about risks and benefits of various treatment options. Check.
The patient must be educated about actively involved in self-management. Nope.
How could we fix this sentence? One way is to rearrange the list items. For example:
The patient must be actively involved in self-management and educated about the disease and the risks and benefits of various treatment options.
Another way is to turn the sentence into two sentences. For example:
The patient must be educated about the disease and the risks and benefits of various treatment options. He or she must also be actively involved in self-management.
Another way is to just reword the whole thing (and in this case, we could also change the passive voice to active voice by specifying WHO is educating the patient):
The nurse must educate the patient about the disease and the risks and benefits of various treatment options. He or she should also ensure that the patient is actively involved in self-management.
6. Incorrect punctuation--use and placement. I can't cover something this huge in such a small space, so I encourage you to view the punctuation guides on the Purdue OWL if you are less than confident in your usage. However, I can say that commas, semicolons, and colons seem to be the most frequently mistreated punctuation marks. You may want to just brush up on those.
Here's my blog post on "Mystery Punctuation," which may be of some help: http://writingtipoftheweek.blogspot.com/2013/03/mystery-punctuation.html
And my post on semicolons: http://writingtipoftheweek.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-dreaded-semicolon-pink-plastic.html
7. Saying something is common without citing any supporting evidence. Remember, your reader can't just take your word for it. Show support for your claims. This one goes back to the "show, don't tell" rule from # 2.
8. Being general rather than specific. For example, saying that something is "a major problem" without giving any specific statistics is a bad idea.
9. Saying that two means are different when the p value is >0.05. Okay, I confess I don't know enough about research methods or statistics to fully understand this one. But I assume that most of you do, so avoid doing this.
10. Citing websites (especially non-authoritative ones) as references to support an argument. I know the Internet is a convenient source of information, but here's the thing. Many websites are unreliable and there is a ton of misinformation out there. So when you cite a non-authoritative website to support your argument, your reader then has to go and look up that source to make sure it's reputable. As you can imagine, that gets tiresome.
Here are some resources to help you determine the value and trustworthiness of a web source. https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/553/04/ and http://www.library.georgetown.edu/tutorials/research-guides/evaluating-internet-content
I hope you've found this week's post helpful. Happy scribbling!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)