EDITORIAL: "7 Grammar Rules You Should Really Pay Attention To"

[achacunsagloire.livejournal.com]

I don't normally like the “x-number-of-things-that-you're-doing-wrong” articles that make up the side links of many a gossip site, but there's a certain charm in Ben Yagoda's 2013 “7 Grammar Rules You Should Really Pay Attention To.” In this article (which he wrote for TheWeek.Com), Yagoda uses a gentle but firm—not to mention cheeky—voice to address seven big grammar goofs that he often sees in professional writing. And we're not talking creative writing, either; we're talking employment applications, business letters, and opinion pieces meant to make an argument. In other words, places in which grammar faux pas such as lying books on a table or spinning through the air, Tommy swung the bat and hit the ball out of the park are a big No-No.

I myself view a ton of professional writing over the course of a week's time: mostly wills, petitions, orders, land contracts, and other legal documents of that ilk. And no joke: some of the grammar that I see in them is so embarrassingly bad that when I come across the name of the person who prepared the document(s) in question, I just stare at his or her name and shake my head. I admit, there are some rules of grammar that are more difficult to master than others, and modern language standards render them at least flexible in the correct usage thereof. But others have remained rigidly stiff in their dispositions, and they have remained that way for a good reason: they make the meaning of the sentence or phrase absolutely clear.

Two of these steely rules include those of bad parallelism and dangling modifiers. Bad parallelism, which entails the jumbling of verbs and objects, most often occurs when the writer is making a list of actions and gets carried away. It can be caught by making sure each one of your verbs is paired with the object that it affects. Dangling modifiers are phrases tacked onto the beginning, middle, or ending of a sentence to give it more language variety. They can be confusing as they often start with the present participle of a verb (which is basically any verb that ends with “-ing,” such as “hiking,” “sailing,” “eating,” etc.). With a few exceptions, dangling modifiers almost always describe the subject of a sentence; those that don't should be placed near the noun or action that they describe so as to avoid confusion that placement elsewhere might (and probably will) create. As long as you keep that in mind, you're good to go.

One thing on which I must respectfully disagree with Yagoda is his advice to avoid the usage of semicolons. On the contrary, I don't think we emphasize semicolons enough and that is part of why we are prone to slapping a comma in any spot that feels like it needs some sort of punctuation. One of these places is between two complete sentences that are meant to be said or read together quickly. In fact, this is the place where semicolons belong; a comma placed here creates a run-on sentence, which is a huge grammatical No-No.

But overall, the article is a nice glance-over lesson for the grammatically-impaired looking to sharpen their writing skills in preparation for a more professional setting.

Comments

[40yearslater.livejournal.com]

7 Grammar Rules to Which You Should Really Pay Attention

[achacunsagloire.livejournal.com]

I thought about that while writing the entry. xD

[40yearslater.livejournal.com]

Even though no one really talks that way. :)

[achacunsagloire.livejournal.com]

I've tried talking that way. It's incredibly hard when you've said "that" + (ending preposition) all of your life. xD

[40yearslater.livejournal.com]

Not nearly as bad as my biggest pet peeve: "Where you going at? Where'd you put it at?" ARGH! When I was a kid, my mother broke me of that by answering, "In front of 'at'."

[achacunsagloire.livejournal.com]

LOL, I still say that. Occasionally I write it, but "at" gets chopped off like a dead finger when I edit.

[livejournal.livejournal.com]

Hello! Your entry got to top-25 of the most popular entries in LiveJournal!
Learn more about LiveJournal Ratings in FAQ (https://www.dreamwidth.org/support/faqbrowse?faqid=303).

[achacunsagloire.livejournal.com]

Whoo, party-time!

[vaysh]

Thanks for the link and your fascinating post.

I am always intrigued by the no-go for the comma splice in English. In German (and as far as I know, in French), the comma splice is the rule: In German the correct usage is to put a comma between two complete sentences. The semicolon between two complete sentences is used to emphasise the distinctness of the two sentences; the distinction is weaker than with a full stop, but stronger than with a comma.

[starduchess.livejournal.com]

Vaysh, I think you are confusing the comma splice, which is where a comma is placed where it absolutely should not go (like between a subject and its verb), and just overusage of commas. In English, you would put a comma between two complete sentences, but you also need a transition word: and, but, yet, or, nor. The semi-colon replaces the comma and transition word. You are correct in thinking that the semi-colon helps to emphasise the two sentences more than the comma/transition word version.

Example:
Joe brought the water cup to Marcy, but she swatted it away. -- shows two actions, one after the other
Joe brought the water cup to Marcy; she swatted it away. -- shows same actions in sequence, but more distinct.
Joe brought the water cup to Marcy. She swatted it away. -- shows both actions, but more independent from each other.

All three are properly formatted, but they give slightly different connotations when read.

A true comma splice would look like this:
Joe, brought the water cup, to Marcy, she swatted it away.

Does that help?

[vaysh]

Here is the definition of comma splice from Wikipedia: "A comma splice is the use of a comma to join two independent clauses." This is how I understand it. Is that not correct?

[starduchess.livejournal.com]

Okay, I went and looked and yes, the splice is a comma used in between two independent clauses without using the conjunction words. Everything else wrong is just comma misuse. Sorry I was wrong about that. (I could have sworn I'd read it the other way around somewhere, but I can't find that right now.)

In my "true comma splice" example, then, the first and second commas are just wrong and the third one is the splice.

So in German, you don't need a conjunction word with the comma?

[vaysh]

I just added a comment when you commented. :)

Yes, in Germany you don't need a conjunction word with the comma. It's really the nuances of language uses but still so important.

[vaysh]

Just to make it clearer: This German phrase
Hans stellte das Glas vor Marcy, sie wischte es vom Tisch.
is perfectly correct German. Two independent clauses, joined by the comma, without a transition word.

In English, I understand, the same phrasing
Joe brought the water cup to Marcy, she swatted it away.
is incorrect.

Joe, brought the water cup, to Marcy, she swatted it away.
Wow. I actually cannot think why anyone would place commas like this. But it's not what I think "comma splice" means. :)

[starduchess.livejournal.com]

(We're so silly to respond multiple times with the same answers.)

Yeah, that last one is weird, but I've seen it happen when the subject is much more complicated than just "Joe". For instance, I've seen this sentence: That last that was eaten by the president, turned John's stomach. Somehow the writer got confused because the subject "that last ..." is really long and may seem like an entire sentence by itself, when it really isn't. There should be no comma in that sentence. But I checked several grammar pages, and that is just comma error, not comma splice.

[vaysh]

(*grins*)


Ah, in that more complicated example I can better understand why someone would use commas so oddly.

[achacunsagloire.livejournal.com]

Thank you! Glad you enjoyed it. :)

GRAMMAR: Bad Parallelism?

[livejournal.livejournal.com]

User vaysh referenced to your post from GRAMMAR: Bad Parallelism? (http://vaysh.livejournal.com/631915.html) saying: [...] has a great post on important grammer rules [...]