Language is for communicating!

The cheerful disposability of email, aided and abetted by the explosion in text messaging, is changing the way people write.  Of course language is a living and growing thing – but good writing is not just for teachers and retired people who write stiff letters to the Telegraph.  Language is constructed correctly so that it conveys meaning correctly.  Good English means clarity, conciseness and lack of ambiguity, as well as richness of expression.  

Examine a grammatical rule and you will often find an ambiguity trap behind it.  

Long-windedness and the 'nervous passive'

 As a general rule, the direct approach works best:

-  The resolution of the issue was carried out by our  
        department (11 words)
     -  The issue was resolved by our department 
        (7 words) 
     -  Our department resolved the issue (5 words)
     -  We resolved the issue (4 words)  
     -  We solved it (3 words)

And a particularly excruciating example from an NHS document - 'the work is planned to be continued'.  

See how that awful passive construction costs words and time?  Using the active voice - putting people first, if you like to think of it that way - makes you and your organisation sound more human, down to earth and approachable.  It also dramatically reduces the number of words you have to write, and the number they have to read.  
    However, do not allow spellcheckers (see example below) to tell you that the passive voice should always be avoided.  There are many exceptions, usually where the focus of interest is on the object of the verb - eg 'the book was bound in leather'. 
    Avoid jargon and acronyms.  Flaunting your industry culture in public will simply alienate outsiders and newcomers, while revealing to all the world your preoccupation with your own status as an insider. 

Ambiguity

 Ambiguity is the trap you fall into when you construct your sentences badly or neglect the punctuation – and it’s a widespread failing, even among apparently well-educated professionals.  It can lead to mild amusement - or horrendous misunderstandings.  At the very least it will reflect badly on you and your organisation.  

 Four local motorists were fined for failing to wear their seatbelts in the magistrates’ court

 Local resident Kevin Williams said he spotted the big cat using binoculars

 A skilled carpenter, his labrador used to accompany him to the workshop

I often catch trout in waders (three possible meanings here)

Farmer paid for sex with 56lb of potatoes

These two letters may amuse you as evidence for the difference punctuation can make:

Dear Mr Jones
I need a boss who knows what respect is all about. You are considerate and efficient.  Managers I have worked with in the past admit to being incompetent.  You have ruined me for other employers; I will work unpaid overtime for you.  I don’t want to do any work at all when you’re out of the office.  I love it here, so please let me be your secretary. - Susie

Dear Mr Jones
I need a boss who knows what respect is.  All about you are considerate and efficient managers I have worked with in the past.  Admit to being incompetent!  You have ruined me.  For other employers, I will work unpaid overtime.  For you, I don't want to do any work at all.  When you're out of the office I love it here, so please let me be. - your secretary, Susie 

(the above is based on a passage quoted by Sir Ernest Gowers in The Complete Plain Words)

Apostrophe catastrophe  

    Texting is threatening to drive the apostrophe into extinction, because even the more grammatically-aware are getting used to seeing apostrophe-free prose.  But for now, the apostrophe is part of our language - and a useful part, because it tells you something is missing. 
     If you are uncertain about the use of apostrophes – well, you could avoid abbreviations altogether by saying ‘cannot’ instead of ‘can’t’ and ‘do not’ rather than ‘don’t’.  But the rules are really very easy.  Just remember that the apostrophe has three jobs in life.  They are: 

      1  To indicate the possessive:

Singular: Joe’s briefcase (to remember this rule, recall that the ‘s’ is thought to be a remnant of the word ‘his’)

Plural: The executives’ briefcases

(BUT irregular plural looks like the singular – the children’s toys)  

2  To stand in for ‘is’ or ‘has’:

It’s raining 
     Mike’s going home
     Maureen’s got a new car

  3  To denote the missing the ‘o’ in ‘not’:

  Don’t, can’t, won’t, hasn’t

  It is NEVER used before an ordinary plural s (the celebrated ‘greengrocer’s apostrophe’), eg ‘banana’s’, is always wrong.  You don’t need one after numbers and dates either, like the 1940s.   

  This is the one that trips people up - the apostrophe is NOT used in the possessive of ‘it’:

  The cat licked its paws  

"In the beginning was the Word. But when the second word was added to it, there was trouble. For with it came syntax" - John Simon

 > next column

How the internet is enriching 

the language >

To rigorously avoid the split infinitive?
The rule about split infinitives is rooted in their incompatibility with Latin, so it is dubious - English is not Latin, nor grammatically based on it. The New Oxford Dictionary sanctions the split infinitive, pointing out that the placing of the adverb changes emphasis and meaning.

"When I split an infinitive, goddamn it, I split it so it stays split" - Raymond Chandler

And through it all, I did it my way
‘And’ or ‘but’ at the start of a sentence? Avoiding this is not a rule of grammar as so many seem to think, but it may be poor style.

You shouldn’t do it, but...
It is quite legal to put a comma before ‘and’ or ‘but’ if you need one - the practice should be avoided in simple sentences, but in longer ones it may be needed to avoid ambiguity.

A number of applications were received
Strictly speaking, the above is correct - the subject noun is the plural ‘applications’, not the singular word ‘number’.

For whom are you writing this?
The objective or accusative form of ‘who’ is becoming an endangered species, and one which some believe is not worth saving.

The couple was evicted from their home
Please! (this was from a newspaper). Technically, collective nouns are singular - but this example shows that common sense must sometimes prevail.

"To whom do you wish to speak?" is usually regarded... almost as something frozen, archaic, stifling or artificial’
- H W Fowler, Modern English Usage

He could not walk, due to an accident
Technically ‘due to’ cannot be used as a prepositional phrase and should be replaced by an alternative such as ‘owing to’ or ‘as a result of’. So few people now know or care about this rule that perhaps we should accept it as another little piece of decay imposed by the brute force of linguistic change.

But you’ll never, never love him like I do
Because it refers to a verb, she should have sung ‘as I do’.  It was a hit anyway.

As common as it is, it’s wrong
Expressions like ‘big as you are’ and ‘incredible as it seems’ do not take ‘as’ before them - this very common error is the result of a confusion with the straight comparative sense, eg ‘as strong as an ox’ and seems well on the way to becoming accepted usage.

Capitalitis

Many words are mistakenly capitalised because they sound important, e.g. Council, University, Cathedral, Royal, Doctor, Company, Board, Director, Headmaster,  Local Authority. None of these words should take capitals unless they form specific place names or titles - so write 'Jim Smith, Managing Director, Smithco' but 'only 17% of British managing directors speak a foreign language'.

Some words that are often used redundantly: 

• He successfully passed his exams
• On two separate occasions
• She is currently unemployed
• It was situated at the front
• We are working in conjunction with the architect
• This is a potentially dangerous practice
• During the course of the day
• Work colleagues
• The local area
• The other alternative
  

Some commonly-confused pairs of words:

• 'Alternate' (the adjective) means 'every other', as in 'we meet alternate Tuesdays'. It is not a substitute for 'alternative', which refers to a particular other choice, as in 'the alternative is to eat out'.
• 'I am not adverse to…' should be 'averse'
• There's no such word as 'bouyancy' - 'buoyancy' may not look right, but it is (it's Dutch in origin)
• Convince to - say 'persuade... to' or 'convince... that'
• 'Criteria' is plural - the singular is 'criterion'
• Different than – should be 'different from' (though ‘than' is usual in the US)
• Don't use 'effect' when you mean 'affect' - only 'affect' is normally used as a verb, as in 'the lost business will affect our profits'
• 'Enormity' means 'awfulness', not 'hugeness'
• To 'flaunt' is to show something off - to 'flout' is blatantly disregard a rule or convention
• 'Forensic' means relating to the law or courtroom - not 'scientific'
• 'Fortuitous' is not a synonym for 'fortunate' – it simply means 'by chance'
• A 'mute' point would be a silent one - the right word is 'moot', an old word for a meeting
• 'Prevaricate' means to avoid the truth, not to put off a decision, which is to 'procrastinate'
• Impact on - say 'affect' or 'have an impact on
• There's no such word as restauranteur  - ditch the 'n'

Why use one word when half a dozen will do? 

• a majority of = most
• a number of = some
• a small number of = a few
• adjacent to = near
• it is believed that = we think
• prior to = before
• so as to = to
• at the present time = now
• at this point in time = now
• causal factor = cause
• it has long been known that = I haven't bothered to look up the reference

Hyphen grief

Hyphens - silly little things.  Do we really have to worry about where they go, or even use them at all?  Very often we do, if we want to avoid ambiguity - as here:

   Bird eating spider
   Fried fish merchant
   Long dead snake
   A woman may give birth at 12 monthly intervals

A semi-colon or a comma?  How a tiny dot of ink can make a big difference:

"The law requires you to declare all earnings received during the tax year.  This means paying it into your wife’s bank account; salting it away offshore or hiding it under the bed is illegal."

Lost leaders

"Quotas are bad for America. It is not the way America is all about. So let’s be clear then: if affirmative action means what I just described, what I’m for, then I’m for it" - George W Bush

“I’ve already mentioned, quite frankly there may be 100, previously, then it was down to one yesterday, now it’s no. Not. And I think we should welcome that as a fact.” – John Prescott