Introductory Phrases and Clauses Have Their Purpose

The following sentence appeared in a news article during the recent campaign leading up to the primary run-offs in Alabama:



Senior staff just before his news conference was set to begin were quietly informing reporters that (Tim) James had decided to end his challenge.



This sentence is difficult to read because the inserted dependent clause (printed in red) separates the subject STAFF from the verb WERE INFORMING for no good reason. It just does not fit in this position, and the focus ends up in the wrong place.



I would suggest rewording it this way and using a comma to set off the resulting nine-word introductory clause before the main idea:



Just before his news conference was set to begin, senior staff were quietly informing reporters that James had decided to end his challenge.



I hope you agree that this sounds much clearer. This is the kind of improvement that can be made if you make time to proofread what you write.

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."

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.

Watch Your Word Choice

I hope all of my readers had a wonderful Christmas. I also hope you are looking forward to a good New Year.

Birmingham will elect a new mayor in a run-off election on January 19. The two candidates are very different--William Bell is a political veteran, and Patrick Cooper is an attorney with a background in the business sector.



In a recent interview article about the candidates' opinions on economic growth, the reporter made the following statement:



They agree on many economic development fundamentals, but they come at economic development from different approaches.



This is confusing wording, mainly because "come at" and "approach" mean the same thing. What the reporter wants to get across is that these two candidates approach the issue FROM DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS or maybe that they HAVE DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES. The sentence should read like something close to one of the following:



They agree on many economic development fundamentals, but they approach economic development from different directions.



They agree on many economic development fundamentals, but they have different perspectives on how to achieve economic development.



I hope you agree that either of these would be clearer.

Be careful not to tangle up your prepositional phrases!

If you create a sentence that contains several prepositional phrases, it is important to arrange them in a clear and logical order. If you don't, the reader will end up wondering what goes with what.



Here is a good example from a recent article in a Birmingham newspaper:



Jimmerson, the film's writer and director, has interviewed immigrants, academics, politicians and others for her documentary at the U. S.-Mexico border and across Alabama.



I've highlighted the prepositional phrases in this sentence in different colors so you can spot them easily. The problem is that the focus of the sentence is supposed to be on WHERE the interviews took place, NOT on where the documentary was filmed. By inserting "for her documentary" between the interviewees and their locations, the reporter has thoroughly confused the sentence.



It would be much clearer written as follows:



For her documentary, film writer and director Jimmerson has interviewed immigrants, academics, politicans and others at the U. S.-Mexico border and across Alabama.



Another solution would be to drop the phrase "for her documentary" completely from this sentence because the reporter makes it clear in the previous sentence (The 58-year-old spoke over coffee in Birmingham, where she came recently to tape the last interview for her documentary.") that the interviews are for her documentary.



Happy Prepositional Phrase Placing, Everyone!

Job Hunting? Use Grammar Knowledge to Spot Internet Scams

The New York Times News Service reported this week that criminals are setting up "increasingly sophisticated traps" to catch those surfing for job opportunities on the Web. Although your Spam filter offers some protection, many of these creeps are still getting through.

The article suggests that one good way to protect yourself is to notice which of these offbeat ads use poor grammar and bad spelling. Also watch out for e-mails from addresses that don't match that of the company they are supposed to represent.

So--IF THAT THEIR OFFER'S TWO GOOD TOO BE TRU, IT PROBABLY ARE!

Good luck with your job search--on reputable sites from reputable companies!

That Clauses Confusion

Be careful when using "that clauses" in your writing. It is easy to confuse the meaning. Here is a good example from a letter to "Miss Manners" in a recent column:

My biggest concern is that I don't want her to think that she was an afterthought and that we really did send her an invitation.

This bride was worried about insulting someone whose invitation to her wedding was returned because of a postage issue. What she meant was that she did not want the person to think that she HADN'T sent her an invitation in the first place. The first "that clause" works, but the second one is confusing.

Here is a better rewrite:

My biggest concern is that I don't want her to think she was an afterthought and that we sent her invitation later than all the others.

I hope you agree that this is much clearer. One less "that" helps a lot, too!

Have You Turned Your Pet Into Shelter Yet?

The June 8 and 15, 2009 edition of The New Yorker magazine has a great example of something I pointed out several weeks ago--the difference between "into" and "in to." The New Yorker quotes a headline from the Great Falls (Montana) Tribune:

"ECONOMIC SLUMP HAS MORE OWNERS TURNING PETS INTO SHELTER"

This headline conjures up some weird images--a dog being used as a tent? A cat sitting on its owner's head to keep it out of the rain? Maybe a pet elephant letting its owner string a hammock between its thick legs?

When you turn something INTO something else, it becomes that thing, as in turning a wild rabbit INTO a household pet.

When you turn something IN TO something else, you give it to that something else, as in turning your pet IN TO the animal shelter because you can no longer care for it.

I hope your pets are still with you and definitely NOT being turned INTO something else!

Who is the Felon? Who is the Judge? Verb Confusion!

Corruption in local government runs rampant these days, and the City of Birmingham is no exception. John Katapodis was convicted here last week of using a charity designed to donate computers to needy children as his own personal cookie jar.

Unfortunately, the reporter who wrote about the guilty verdict got his noun and verb relationships confused and wrote a sentence that suggested the JUDGE rather than the convicted FELON was led away after the verdict was read:

"He (Katapodis) showed no reaction after Bowdre announced the verdict and was led away by marshals as a convicted felon."

In order to fix this sentence, the reporter needed to put the TWO actions involving Katapodis next to each other. Judge Bowdre needed to be somewhere other than in the middle between the two. The two Katapodis actions were these:

1) He showed no reaction.
2) He was led away by marshals.

I should also note that the judge (Judge Karen Bowdre) is a woman.

This sentence would be much clearer and more effective written this way:

After Bowdre announced the verdict, he (Katapodis) showed no reaction and was led away by marshals as a convicted felon.

Be Picky About Prepositions!

My favorite produce market sent out an e-mail this morning about its holiday weekend schedule. The e-mail contained the following sentence:

We will be open normal business hours now until Friday the 3rd but will be closed Saturday July 4th and re-open Monday July 6th at 8am.

The preposition "until" means "up to a certain point in time." As used in this sentence, it suggests that normal business hours are only in effect UNTIL Friday, but I suspect the market plans to conduct normal business hours on Friday and then close on Saturday.

Therefore, the better choice would be to say:

We will be open normal business hours now through Friday, July 3, but will be closed Saturday, July 4, and reopen Monday, July 6 at 8 a.m.

If you look closely, you will see that I tweaked a couple other things in this sentence:

1) It is not necessary to write "rd" or "th" after a day, even though you say the ending out loud.

2) "a.m." should be written with periods so it does not look like the word "am."

3) The word "reopen" is usually written without the hyphen.

Now I'm being picky!

Once you've smoothed out your grammar, I do hope you will get outdoors and take advantage of the wonderful farmers' markets and produce stands available this time of year. Around here, it's time for Chilton County peaches as well as local blueberries and other summer goodies.

I'd like to welcome any new blog followers from the ALDOT office in Mobile. I did a workshop there last week and thoroughly enjoyed working with them.

Spell Checker Disaster in Utah

I've said it before, but I'll say it again: Be careful using a spelling checker. If your spelling checker catches a misspelled word, it will give you several choices for a correction. Be SURE the correction you choose is not a word that means something entirely different.

The student newspaper staff at Brigham Young University in Provo, Utah learned this lesson in dramatic fashion last week. A caption on the front page of The Daily Universe identified leaders of the Mormon church as apostates instead of apostles.

Whoops! The student copy editor caught a spelling error in the caption. The word "apostle" was misspelled, but the computer spell checker offered "apostate" as a correct replacement.

Unfortunately, the definition of apostate is "a person who has abandoned religious faith, principles, or a cause."

The Quorum of the Twelve Apostles is a governing body of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, so it is highly unlikely that that quorum would be made up of apostates rather than apostles.

Some sentences are so awkward, it is best to "throw the baby out with the bath water" and start all over again!

Here is a question that appeared recently in a USA Today Q&A column written by Edward Iwata:

Is the bailout plan's limits on executive pay for companies that receive money a wise or dumb move?

What was that again? After three read-throughs, I figured out what the writer was trying to say, but I should have been able to follow the point the first time through.

First problem: The SUBJECT of this question is the word "limits," which is PLURAL. Therefore, the VERB that goes with that subject should be "are," not "is."

Second problem: How can "limits" (PLURAL) be described as "a wise or dumb move" (SINGULAR)?

Third problem: This sentence does what I usually refer to as "going around your elbow" to say what you mean. The subjects and verbs are all out of balance in this statement. I would suggest fixing the subject/verb agreement issues but ALSO doing what I often refer to as "throwing the baby out with the bath water" and starting all over again.

Here is my suggestion:

Is it a wise or dumb move to limit executive pay for companies that receive money from the bailout plan?

That seems much clearer to me. If you have another suggestion, please send it along.