 |
|
|
 |
|
Though not always a Mr. Gradgrind in the classroom (I like Fantasy as well as Fact and taught Creative Writing as well as College Prep Composition), I occasionally brought hard times to my students, those little dickenses, when we came to matters of English usage. I subscribed to the major premise of descriptive linguistics--that we should report the actual usage of native speakers without reference to so-called norms of correctness--but couldn't help weighing in on what I regard as some of the niceties of diction and syntax. I taught for 30 years. These matters bothered me then and bother me still. At times, in discussing them with my students, I could be a regular Dr. Heckel and Mr. Snide. The usages in question are not "wrong," but are, I believe, inelegant choices made from ignorance or indifference. Here they are (in no particular order of importance, as they say on Dancing with the Stars).
1. The reason is because. Example: "The reason that we watch Dancing with the Stars is because we enjoy ogling the overdressed men and the underdressed women." What's wrong? "Because" is a subordinate conjunction used to connect an adverb clause to some other part of the sentence. However, any clause following the word "is" (a linking verb) must be a noun clause introduced by the word "that," since it is the complement, the predicate nominative, of the main clause. What should it be? "The reason that we watch Dancing with the Stars is that we enjoy ogling the overdressed men and the underdressed women."
2. Disinterested. Example: "The students were disinterested in Mr. Gradgrind's class." What's wrong? The original meaning of "disinterested" is "impartial, having no stake in," as in "The Supreme Court judges were disinterested in the case brought before them." This is a useful distinction that should not be debased. What should it be? "The students were uninterested in Mr. Gradgrind's class."
3. Whom. Example: "Whom shall I say is calling?" What's wrong? "Whom" is the objective case form, "who" the nominative case form, of the pronoun in question. "Who" may be used as subject or predicate nominative; "whom" as a direct object, an indirect object, or the object of a preposition. For most people, the confusion occurs when "who/whom" appears in a subordinate clause. To determine which word to use, ask yourself what grammatical function the word has in the clause in which it appears. In the example cited, "I" is the subject of the sentence, "shall say" is the complete transitive verb, and "who is calling" is a noun clause complement serving as direct object. In that noun clause, "who/whom" is the subject--thus "who" is correct, and the sentence should read "Who shall I say is calling?" Solving these who/whom problems can sometimes be tricky, especially in the rapid fire give and take of conversation. When in doubt, say or write "who." To use "whom" improperly is pretentious and embarrassing.
4. I could care less. Example: "I could care less that telling Polish jokes is not politically correct, Kowalski." What's wrong? Most of the time, speakers intend this expression to mean that they don't care at all. However, logically, if you could care less, then you do care somewhat. What should it be? "I couldn't care less that telling Polish jokes is politically incorrect, Kowalski."
5. Between you and I. Meant for he and I. Examples: "Keep my fondness for Harlequin romances between you and I" and "This scathing reference to pusillanimity is really meant for he and I." What's wrong? In both instances, the pronouns need to be in the objective case because they are objects of the prepositions "between" and "for." To many people, "you and I" and "he and I" sound primly and properly correct, probably because in our formative years our parents and teachers continually corrected us when we said "Me and Jimmy went fishing" or "Me and Susie played hopscotch." No, no, they told us, it's "Jimmy and I" or "Susie and I." They were right in those instances, but we kids overgeneralized and took the correction too far, thinking that with either compound subjects or compound objects the pronoun should be nominative. What should it be? "Keep my fondness for Harlequin romances between you and me" and "This scathing reference to pusillanimity is really meant for him and me."
6. Fairly unique. Example: "Having a black man elected U.S. President was fairly unique." What's wrong? "Unique" means "one of a kind." A thing is either unique or it is not. If it isn't unique, say it's unusual or rare. What should it be? "Having a black man elected U.S. President was unique."
7. Beg the question. Example: "The current financial crisis begs the question: do we need more governmental regulation of the economy?" What's wrong? To "beg the question" is a technical phrase referring to a fallacy in logic in which the proposition to be proved is assumed implicitly or explicitly in one of the premises of the statement. It is a type of circular reasoning. For example, to say that past-life memories of children prove that past lives exist because the children could have no other source for their memories than having lived in the past assumes the conclusion in the premise. What should it be? "The current financial crises raises (or prompts) the question: do we need more governmental regulation of the economy."
8. Hopefully. Example: "Hopefully, America will become less dependent on Mid-East oil in the near future." What's wrong? In this sentence, the grammatical job of "hopefully" is to serve as an adverb modifying the verb "will win." It tells us how we will win. But to say we will win hopefully makes little sense. In contrast, "They prayed hopefully" does make sense. What should it be? "We hope that America will become less dependent on Mid-East oil in the near future."
9. Decimate. Example: "The flu bug decimated the class--half of the students were absent yesterday." What's wrong? "Decimate" (from decem, "ten") means "every tenth one." It does not mean a nearly total loss, or even a very large number. I concede, however, that such a usage of "decimate" today sounds peculiar. For example, if a ten-member basketball team lost one player to the flu, it would indeed sound odd to say that the team was decimated. Best, in my opinion, to avoid using the word altogether. What should it be? "The flu bug caused half of the class to be absent yesterday."
10. Bemused. Example: "Obama appeared bemused and unruffled when facing McCain's attacks." What's wrong? "Bemused" means "bewildered," "confused," "stupefied," "preoccupied," "lost in thought," "musing." For example, "Bemused, Adam contemplated his navel for an hour, wondering how in heaven's name he came to have one." "Bemused" does not mean "amused." What should it be? "Obama appeared amused and unruffled when facing McCain's attacks."
11. Feel like. Example: "Ms. Palin felt like she was a moose caught in an Alaskan hunter's gun sights when Katie Couric interviewed her." What's wrong? "Feel" in this case is a linking verb and "she was a moose..." is its noun clause predicate nominative complement. "Like" is a preposition, not a conjunction. The pronoun "that" is required to introduce the clause. Note, however, that "Ms. Palin felt like a moose caught..." would be correct, because the construction would be a prepositional phrase, not a subordinate clause. What should it be? "Ms. Palin felt that she was a moose caught in an Alaskan hunter's gun sights when Katie Couric interviewed her."
12. Should of, shouldn't of. Example: "Oh, you really shouldn't of given me that Lawrence Welk CD for Christmas!" What's wrong? "Of" is a preposition, not a verb. It sounds like (and note the correct use of "like" here) "'ve," a contraction of "have," but it isn't. What should it be? "Oh, you really shouldn't 've given me that Lawrence Welk CD for Christmas!"
13. One of the only. Example: "Mr. Gradgrind is one of the only teachers I have who actually cares about the meaning of 'only'." What's wrong? "Only" means "just one" ("one-ly"). What the speaker clearly means is "one of the few." What should it be? "Mr. Gradgrind is one of the few teachers I have who actually cares about the meaning of 'only'."
14. Grow (when used transitively with an abstract object). Example: President-elect Obama hopes to grow the economy. What's wrong? The transitive (takes a direct object) usage of "grow" in this instance doesn't make sense. We can grow tomatoes (proper transitive use) or grow old (proper linking use). The economy itself can grow (proper intransitive use), and it can grow larger or smaller (proper linking use). We can improve or develop, increase or shrink, the economy, but we can't grow it. What should it be? "President-elect Obama hopes to improve the economy."
15. Score the ball (misused primarily by sports commentators). Example: "Kobe Bryant is a player who can score the ball." What's wrong? The sentence seems to say that Kobe is one who can use a sharp object to make cuts in the ball. A player can score a basket (or a run, or a touchdown), and a statistician can score a game (keep numerical account of events). If a player puts the ball through the hoop, he's scored a basket and scored two points, but he has not scored the ball. What should it be? "Kobe Bryant is a player who can score points."
16. As good or better than. Example: "Our admittedly corrupt political candidate is as good or better than yours." What's wrong? The comparison is incomplete, therefore makes no literal sense. We can't meaningfully say, "Our candidate is as good than yours." We need to add another "as" to complete the comparison. What should it be? "Our admittedly corrupt candidate is as good as or better than yours."
17. Push the envelope. Example: "As a pilot, Chuck Yeager was always pushing the envelope, and in so doing became the first to break the sound barrier." What's wrong? To push an envelope is just to move it around, not to expand it or go beyond a norm. It is the edge of the envelope that needs to be pushed in order for the envelope to expand (imagine a force inside it pushing outward, like a balloon swelling with air)--or in general to make progress or achieve something new. What should it be? "As a pilot, Chuck Yeager was always pushing the edge of the envelope, and in so doing became the first to break the sound barrier."
As a writer, I'll certainly not make the mistake of pushing the envelope--and I hope that I haven't pushed all the wrong buttons for you, either, dear reader. At least I can look backward with satisfaction, knowing that my students all appreciated what I was trying to do for them. I still have--and cherish--a note dropped on my desk by one of those little grammar-lovers:
Dear Mr. Gradgrind:
Do we really have to keep going over this stuff? The reason I think you're pushing the envelope here is because I am disinterested and could care less about all these grammar and usage niceties. What's so nice about them, anyway? They beg the question: whom cares? Between you and I, the class really gets into those original knock-knock jokes of yours, so tell us more of them. We are all bemused by them because they are fairly unique, as the one that went:
Knock, knock.
Who's there?
Ida.
Ida who?
I dunno, because I have Alzheimer's.
Now, that was a good one! That describes so many of my teachers! Hopefully, you will not try to grow our knowledge of language any more. I feel like if you just show us some films--like highlight reels of NBA stars scoring the ball--that would be real ahsome and your class will be as good or better than my other ones and one of the only ones I actually enjoy.
With all do respect,
Ann Onymous
Ann, thank you. As a teacher I didn't make a ton of money, but knowing that I affected hearts and minds like yours is reward enough. Those Michael Jordan highlight dunks were something special, weren't they?
|
|
|