We Do Grammar Right

I know! I know! The Title’s a bit sus. ‘Right’ is an adverb, qualifying the verb ‘Do’. Probably should have been ‘Correctly’. Even ‘Do’ is uninspiring.

But would you have clicked on “We Apply Grammar Correctly”? (Old Chap!)

This article is a grab bag of grammatical and English mentionables. (My use of “mentionables”, by the way, is termed nominalization, but we’re definitely NOT going to get in to that!)

A. Let’s start with some easy oddities…

• irregardless – Now, I know what ‘regardless’ means. Similarly ‘relevant’, ‘responsible’, and their respective opposites – ‘irrelevant’, ‘irresponsible’ – ‘irrespective’.
  So, ‘irregardless’ must mean ‘regardful’, or, e.g., ‘mindful’. Not what was intended, I’m sure.
  Action: Don’t use it. In a contract, it can be challenged. It’s ambiguous.
• mitigate against – makes my head go into a recursive loop. I’ve heard and seen it used in the sense of ‘being an impediment to…’. Such as: “The newly implemented policy could mitigate against our main project outcomes, but they should be low risk.”
  But ‘mitigate’ means to lessen the impact of: to make things better. What could ‘mitigate against’ possibly mean? ‘…lessen the impact against…’? ‘…make things better against…’?
  Head’s spinning.
  The correct term is ‘militate against’. ‘militate’ means to give strength to. ‘militate against’ means to give strength to the negative connotation.
  As in: “The new presidential Executive Order could militate against the perceived independence of the Justice Department.” (Probably happens all the time.)
  Action: Get it right.
• it’s – It’s a contraction. It’s simply short for something. I’ll even tell you what it’s short for: it’s short for ‘it is’. Now you know.
  Next time you see “it’s”, expand it out. Does it make sense? “The Board is waiting for it’s Mining Report”. “The Board is waiting for it is Mining Report”. Utter nonsense.
  “it’s” has nowt to do with the possessive case. It’s just a short form. We have a perfectly good word to use for the possessive when it comes to things. and it’s “its”. Just like ‘his’ for males. No such luck for females, though – just use ‘her’ – we have to have exceptions, don’t we!
  Hence we have: “The Board is waiting for its Mining Report”. Correct. Well done.
  To paraphrase the much used expression we hear a lot of these days: “It’s what it’s!”
  Action: Given how physically difficult this little section is to read (all those single and double quote marks), I would suggest thinking twice before contracting ‘it is’ in the first place.

B. Agreements – Subject your object to objective scrutiny…

• One of those widgets that… – Consider the sentence: “This is one of those cranes that has enormous height capability.”
  “What’s wrong with that sentence?”, I hear you cry. Well, it’s the “has” that’s wrong. It should be agreeing with “cranes”, not “one”.
  Separate out the clause “…cranes that has enormous height…”, and you’ll get my drift. You wouldn’t normally say that would you?.
  It should be “…cranes that have enormous height…”, and the crane under discussion is just one of them.
  Action: None really. Just realize that it’s wrong, and try to avoid it. The sentence’s meaning will probably be adequately conveyed anyway.
  A word to the wise, though – although this mistake is unlikely to have any contractual ramifications, there are educated readers out there who will spot the flub at once, potentially militating against their normally high regard for the quality of your work. Just a thought.
• The Government are… – Strictly speaking, Collective Nouns (nouns denoting a group of some sort) are singular. ‘The Government is…’. (At least anecdotally, there is evidence to suggest that American English is more adherent to the rule than British English.)
  Context can confuse. For example: ‘The Board are divided on the proposition’. Better to be clear, e.g.: ‘Board members are divided on the proposition’.
  One absolute no-no is to mix up the agreements in the same sentence. It happens. Take for example: ‘The Department is an ass, but they are working on it.’
  Action: As a rule, and to protect your reputation, I would stick to the established guideline – collective nouns are singular. However, follow any normally accepted practice. Probably not wise to say: “The Police is…”. Same for sporting teams. Technically they are teams, and ‘team’ is singular, but you won’t hear a sports commentator calling out: ‘The Penrith Panthers is…’.
• none/each – These are both singular, from an ‘agreement’ perspective.
  In meaning, ‘none’ is short for ‘not one’. Would you say ‘not one are’? If not, neither would you say ‘none are’. The verb agrees with ‘none’, regardless of how many things you stuff between them. ‘None of the stars in the Milky Way is…’.
  Same with ‘each’. It’s singular. Saying ‘each are’ is another head spinner. ‘Each of the stars in the Milky Way is…’.
  Action: Get it right.

C. Subject/Object – 2 observations, but will you change?

• than me – How often have you heard: “Yes, but she is smarter than me”? No gender bias intended.
  If you care to finish the sentence, you’ll get: “Yes, but she is smarter than me am”. Correctly, this should read: “Yes, but she is smarter than I am”, the slightly shorter version being: “Yes, but she is smarter than I”.
  I know some folks who can’t bring themselves to say ‘than I’. Sounds overly posh. But it’s correct.
  This seeming oddity comes about because the verb ‘to be’ doesn’t follow the ‘subject/object’ paradigm. You can’t ‘is’ anyone. It’s more of an equivalence. The case doesn’t change.
  So the ‘me’ in the previous example is still in the subjective case. You can’t use ‘me’ as a subject. “Yes. Me went to the pictures yesterday”. (Me no save?)
  Action: Over to you. Just finish the sentence, and you will comfortably stay out of trouble.
• The possessive gerund – The WHAT? Sounds like a precocious wild animal. Stick with me on this – same theme as the previous little section.
  Unpretentiously, a gerund is a verb form ending in ‘-ing’. Glad I cleared that up?
  Consider this sentence:
  “We’re worried about him going into this important meeting.”. Clearly ‘going’ is the gerund (not ‘meeting’, which is not a verb form).
  So what’s wrong with this sentence? Well, it’s the ‘him’. ‘him’ is always an object. ‘him’s have things done to them. ‘him’s can’t actually do things themselves. “Where’s Hugh?”. “Oh, him just went into that meeting, and we’re worried.” So ‘him going’ is a nonsense.
  The fact is, they’re not worried about Hugh (him) at all. He’s probably a nice enough fellow – just the wrong man for the job.
  What they’re actually worried about is his going into the blessed meeting. Who knows what he might mess up.
  ‘his going’ – the old possessive gerund!
  Note also that this discussion applies not only to pronouns (in this case ‘him/his’), but also to any subject – e.g. Hugh himself: “We’re worried about Hugh’s going into this important meeting.”.
  The potential issue with getting this wrong, is that contractually (legally) it could be argued that the ‘worry’ (in this case) refers only to the specified object (Hugh, here), and not to what the object is actually doing, which is where the crux of the problem probably lies.
  Action: If you need to be precise, weed out all those missing possessive gerunds.

D. “If she was to do that…” – The Subjunctive

Do you really need to know what it’s called? Subjunctive? Probably not (impress your acquaintances), but it’s such a common error, clarification is called for.

The problem with beginning a sentence with ‘If…’, is that it introduces a scenario that hasn’t happened yet. A future possibility. To quote the OED (Oxford English Dictionary):

“The subjunctive is used to express situations which are hypothetical or not yet realized, and is typically used for what is imagined, hoped for, demanded, or expected.”

The word ‘was’ is the past tense of the verb ‘to be’. Describing a future scenario cannot be framed in the past tense. So, “If she was to do that…” needs to be recast as “If she were to do that…”. The verb ‘were’ is said to be in the subjunctive mood. Probably better to have said “Had she done that..”.

Not convinced?

Consider: “I wish I was taller than I am.”. Does this mean she wishes she used to be taller than she actually is now (for whatever reason – might have joined the army), but now everything is fine? That’s how it reads, or at least can be read.

Make it clear. Stick to the future – “I wish I were taller than I am.”.

Action: Apply the subjunctive mood to avoid any ambiguity.

E. That’s enough of a gaggle for one day…

There’s plenty more I could rabbit on about, but we’ll leave that for another day. Maybe you’d love to hear about ‘nominalization’?. Gadz!

(I know you can’t wait to be the GGG – ‘Go to’ Grammar Guy – Read on…)