Parallel Structure Streamlines Writing

Ulta's ad brochure this month contains a whole page of curling irons and crimpers ranging in price from $12.99 to $47.99. The ad for the Revlon Perfect Heat Brush Iron describes its function this way:

Curl hair under or flips it out

Even though this is not presented as a complete sentence, the two verbs (CURL..FLIPS) should match in format. The ad may be suggesting that you, the reader, can do both things. If that is the case, the phrase should read as follows:

(You can) curl hair under or flip it out.

Or, the ad may be suggesting that the device itself can do both things. In that case, the phrase should read as follows:

(This iron) curls hair under or flips it out.


In either case, BOTH verbs should match in format. Either they end in S or they don't.

1 + 1 only equals 2 if each 1 has its own article!

"The Issue" statement for an editorial in this morning's The Birmingham News caught my eye. Here is what it said:

An investment banker and lobbyist ought to pay at least $5.5 million in restitution for their part in a scheme that cost the citizens of Jefferson County dearly.

Whoops! I happen to know that the investment banker is ONE person and the lobbyist is a SEPARATE person. There is also the clue that the writer used the word "their" to refer to the part in the scheme. As written, this sentence makes it sound as if ONE person (who is both a banker and a lobbyist) should be making restitution to the county. The sentence should be written as follows:

An investment banker and a lobbyist ought to pay at least $5.5 million in restitution for their part in a scheme that cost the citizens of Jefferson county dearly.

BONUS POINT: Remember that the correct format for writing millions and billions of dollars is to put the dollar sign BEFORE the numerals and the word "million" or "billion" AFTER the numerals (as above).

I certainly hope someone figures out the sewer mess scheme soon so that Jefferson County can retrieve its dignity and its solvency.

AED = Deadly Mix; Singular + Plural = Bad Mix, Too!

280 Living http://www.280living.com/ carried a recent article about the dangers of mixing alcohol with energy drinks. This is important and useful information, but it would be more effective if the article had been well written. The source was ParentTalk, a publication of The Alabama Department of Children's Affairs and The Alabama Parent Network http://www.children.alabama.gov./.



The article contains several examples of poor subject/verb agreement or pronoun/antecedent agreement that I will share with you and then correct:

Where once energy drinks were a fad among our youth, it has now become a staple in their lives.


Whoops! If the writer refers to ENERGY DRINKS (plural), that writer must then use a plural pronoun. The verb must also change to the plural, as follows:

Where once energy drinks were a fad among our youth, they have now become a staple in their lives.



Here is another poor example from the same article:


The newest trend of energy drinks are referred to as "speedball in a can."


Whoops again! TREND (singular) is the subject of this sentence (not DRINKS, which is the object of the preposition OF). Therefore, the verb should be IS. The sentence should read as follows:

The newest trend in energy drinks is referred to as "speedball in a can."


BONUS POINT #1: Usage is also a problem in this sentence. Correct usage refers to trends IN something, not OF something.


BONUS POINT #2: Remember that the period ALWAYS goes inside the quotation marks.



The author of this article also struggled with gender pronouns, as the following sentence shows:


Without scanners that alert a store clerk to a product containing alcohol, it is left up to her/him to know the difference between each product her store sells.


Whew! This sentence has major, major problems! First, by changing A STORE CLERK to STORE CLERKS, the writer could have avoided the HIS/HER problem completely. Second, it is not possible to have a difference BETWEEN each product (singular). Third, if the writer chooses to use HIM/HER, that writer cannot then refer to the clerk as simply HER. A quick fix for this sentence looks like this:


Without scanners that alert store clerks to products containing alcohol, it is left up to the individual clerks to know the differences between the products they sell.


I hope you agree that this version is MUCH easier to read.


BONUS POINT #3: It is a good idea to avoid HIM/HER in most business writing. Use the plural or choose either HIM or HER for clearer writing.

TOME? TOMB? There is a difference!

Thanks once more to Editor Mark LaFlaur who sent along another good example of a word mixup that a spell checker would not catch. Here is the sentence from an Amazon reader review:


Many people recommended this guide to me for advice about professional writing, but until I got to read this tomb, I didn't see fully appreciate why they were so emphatic about it.


Whoops! This reader obviously meant "tome," which is, as Mark pointed out, "a highfalutin' ten-cent word" for a big book. Tomb-reading? Sounds like something the servant of a pharoah might do. The sentence should read as follows:

Many people recommended this guide to me for advice about professional writing, but until I got to read this tome, I didn't fully appreciate why they were so emphastic about it.

Mark suggested a moral for this story: "Sometimes it's simpler to use the common word (uh, "book"?) than a highfalutin' ten-cent word if you can't spell the ten-cent word."

I agree. The only time for a ten-cent word is when you need something very specific and the simpler word won't carry the meaning. And then, you MUST check your spelling!

ALSO plus AS WELL ---Bopping It Twice When Once Will Do!

While proofreading a document for a client recently, I noticed a problem with wording that I have seen many times before. Writers seem to have trouble knowing when and WHEN NOT to use the phrase "as well."

Here is one quick and simple rule that can help: It is not necessary to use "as well" in combination with "also." One or the other will do. Using both confuses the meaning.

Here is a good example:

The Master Critical Path Method schedule can also provide a schedule-driven cash flow tool as well.

This is what I refer to in workshops as "bopping it twice when once will do." Here are the two acceptable ways to write this sentence:

The Master Critical Path Method schedule can also provide a schedule-driven cash flow tool.

The Master Critical Path Method schedule can provide a schedule-driven cash flow tool as well.

My personal preference in this sentence would be "as well."

Decor? Decorum? There IS a Difference.

A friend in Winston-Salem sent me a clipping last week from Richard Creed's column in the local newspaper there. Creed is a retired Winston-Salem Journal editor and writes about grammar and usage. http://www,richcreed@triad.rr.com

One of Creed's readers had seen this statement about cell phone intrusiveness in USA Today: "Aside from the noisy interruption of musical ring tones, the technology poses new challenges for judges, who must maintain courtroom decor and consider other legal issues in a world where Facebook, Twitter and cameras are now at the fingertips of many cell phone users."

Whoops! Creed's reader spotted the incorrect use of DECOR (a decorative treatment) where DECORUM (proper behavior) should have been used. The reader said, "I pictured a judge frantically comparing paint swatches and fabric samples while attempting to render judgments over a cacophony of cell phone chimes."

The sentence should have read as follows:

"Aside from the noisy interruption of musical ring tones, the technology poses new challenges for judges, who must maintain courtroom decorum and consider other legal issues in a world where Facebook, Twitter and cameras are now at the fingertips of many cell phone users."

Be careful with your choice of words so that people remember your MESSAGE, not your poor choice of words.

Parallel Structure Tangles

Editor Mark LaFlaur recently shared some examples of poor parallel structure (false comparison). Here are two that clearly illustrate the confusion when "than" is used incorrectly:



"Both candidates spent as much time in recent days competing there (Washington state) than in Virginia."



This sentence appeared in an article by Richard L. Berke entitled "Party Faithful Give Bush a Win in Virginia Primary." New York Times on the Web, February 29, 2000. The use of THAN does not fit with AS in this sentence. It should read as follows:



Both candidates spent as much time in recent days competing there (Washington state) as they did in Virginia.





And then there is this sentence written by Josh Marshall in his TalkingPointsMemo.com as he explained Stephen Colbert's 13% ranking in polls of young voters in the South Carolina primary:



"Americans in their twenties would prefer a normal person pretending to be a Republican buffoon than the real thing."



The use of THAN does not work with PREFER in this sentence. It should read as follows:



Americans in their twenties would prefer a normal person pretending to be a Republican buffoon to the real thing.



Or, even clearer:



Americans in their twenties would prefer a normal person pretending to be a Republican buffoon to a real Republican.

Or:

Americans in their twenties would rather listen to a normal person pretending to be a Republican buffoon than to a real Republican.

Crossword Editor STILL not Proofreading Well Enough!

Last August I did a blog entry about the careless proofreading of Timothy Parker, editor for USA Today Crossword. (See August 24 blog "Crossword Editor not Proofreading Well Enough.) Apparently, this editor still has a problem with the distinction between singular and plural.

In yesterday's puzzle, Clue #4 Down was "Artists with skin canvases." http://puzzles.usatoday.com/ I knew the answer would have something to do with the word "tattoo," but I wasn't sure whether these artists should be called "tattooers" or "tattooists." I was sure, however, that the answer needed to be PLURAL.

The words going across suggested that the first seven letters should be t-a-t-t-o-o-e. Okay, but that would make the artists tattooes, which didn't sound right to me. That sounded more like designs than the people who create them. I fiddled a while with the rest of the puzzle and finally concluded that the last letter for the answer to Clue #4 down had to be an "r."

Foul! Not fair! As I said in my previous blog on this subject, crossword puzzle solvers rely on crossword puzzle creators (and their editors) to use correct grammar. The answer to Clue #4 Down "Artists with skin canvases" turned out to be "tattooer," which is SINGULAR.

This is the third error I've found in six months in puzzles edited by the same person. I'd like to suggest that Timothy Parker join forces with the headline editor at Fox News and plan a seminar on Grammar Glitches.

More Incompetence with Apostrophes

My friend Mark LaFlaur, a free-lance editor in New York City, is also disgusted with the lack of understanding about when to use apostrophes. He and his wife recently spotted an ad poster for cable or cell phone service on the Long Island Railroad that read:

OPTIMUM?
ABSOLUTELY!

Beneath the headline, an apparently disgruntled customer had scrawled:

STINK'S

Again, as this blog has pointed out numerous times, it is NOT necessary to put an apostrophe before the S in a simple verb. Even a graffiti artist ought to have known it should be written STINKS.

Mark e-mailed a friend and commented that the new "rule" on this subject seems to be that, with any word ending in S, whether it's a noun, verb, or other part of speech, insert an apostrophe before the S in order to play it safe. You can't go wrong!

But the truth is, if you use that rule, you do indeed go wrong and create a Grammar Glitch that highlights your ignorance.

Mark's friend responded by commenting that "Today, huge numbers of people think that the possessive of IT is IT'S. (See yesterday's Fox News blog entry.) English language competence in the U. S. has taken another wrong turn, with some people now thinking that the way to make a plural of a noun is to add 'S. He backed up his point with two example sentences from a recent Huffington Post blog entry:

Agents are not career coach's.

Follow in the foot-step's of Tom Brokaw.

NOTE: When I checked the Huffington Post blog site, these two goofs had been corrected. They now read correctly as follows:

Agents are not career coaches.

Follow in the footsteps of Tom Brokaw.

Stay tuned. Mark LaFlaur is an excellent editor, and he has shared some other good examples of "Incorrect (or Questionable) Usage in Print." I will share more of them in coming days.

Fox News Headline Creator Needs Apostrophe Refresher

Last evening's Fox News broadcast had a story about Sarah Palin speaking in Nashville. The on screen headline read as follows:

Sarah Palin Brought Tea Party Convention to It's Feet.

This is my 23rd blog entry on grammar glitches featuring apostrophes. If you use ITS to refer to something belonging to an IT (in this case, the feet at the Tea Party convention), you do NOT need an apostrophe.

As I have reminded many times before, the ONLY time the word IT'S should have an apostrophe is when it is used as a shortcut (contraction) for IT IS or IT HAS

This headline should have read as follows:

Sarah Palin Brought Tea Party Convention Delegates to Their Feet.

BONUS POINT: If you want to be technically correct, a convention does not have feet. Its (no apostrophe!) delegates do.

I hope Fox News will run a Grammar Glitch course for its (no apostrophe!!) writers.

Pay Attention to Verb forms

This morning's newspaper suggests again that we need to be more careful about the FORMS of the verbs we use. The first glitch appeared in a teaser on the front page. Sadly, it had to do with the first fatal shark attack off the Florida coast in five years:



Lifeguard said he could see several (sharks) swarming the victim as he approach him in the Florida surf.



Because this statement is in the PAST tense (SAID...COULD SEE), the verb in the dependent clause (APPROACH) should also be in the past tense. The lifeguard was speaking about something that had already happened. The sentence should read as follows:



Lifeguard said he could see several (sharks) swarming the victim as he approached him in the Florida surf.





The second verb glitch appeared in a Washington Post wire article about President Obama's speech yesterday at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington. It read as follows:



Much of his agenda is snared near-unanimous Republican opposition in Congress.



The helping verb here should be HAS, not IS because the verb "snared" has a object (OPPOSITION). The helping verb IS would only be used in a sentence without an object, like "Much of his agenda is snarled by Republican opposition." The above sentence should read as follows:



Much of his agenda has snared near-unanimous Republican opposition in Congress.



I would guess that the Washington Post reporter knows the correct grammar but perhaps started to rewrite the sentence and then forgot to follow through on all of the changes.



That brings me to today's BONUS POINT: Whenever you rewrite a sentence or a paragraph to make it read more clearly, take the time to proofread and make sure you didn't actually do just the opposite--make the sentence less clear by only partially changing the wording.