Relax, Grammar Pedant. Everything You Know Is Wrong

Rules are rules, and they exist for a reason. They create order and minimize uncertainty. They are necessary because nothing would work without them. But some people don’t seem to understand that.

They don’t understand why it’s bad to split your infinitives, or why you shouldn’t start a sentence with a conjunction, or why you can’t end it with a preposition. Some people just don’t care. Some people just want to watch the world burn, fuelled by the misuse of “good” for “well,” and “while” for “though.” But if the world really depends on people adhering to those strict and sometimes obscure grammar rules, it might as well burn. Because all of the pedantic rules mentioned above are wrong. Forget everything you know, grammar pedant, because it’s all a lie.

Okay, so maybe the world won’t burn, and maybe not everything you know about grammar is a lie. A lot of it might be, though. Some grammar rules are simply myths with little to no basis in how the language is actually used. Other grammar rules aren’t applicable across the whole spectrum of English subtypes and dialects. And there are rules with so many exceptions that they probably shouldn’t be called rules.

Take the myth about ending sentences with a preposition, for example. We know exactly who to blame for this little superstition. John Dryden, a seventeenth-century British poet, was the person who came up with this “rule.” Robert Lowth, a bishop in the Church of England and a composer of prescriptive grammar textbooks, is often blamed for perpetuating the myth, but in fact he said quite clearly that avoiding a sentence-ending preposition is a matter of style, not grammar. Why did Dryden and Lowth do this? Well, they were men of their time, and in their time it was very popular to force English to follow the the rules of another language. That other language was, you guessed it, Latin. It’s true, you can’t end a sentence with a preposition in Latin. But it’s a common and correct construction in English.

The prohibition against splitting infinitives is another one that seems to have sprung from a fondness for applying Latin grammar rules to English. In English, splitting an infinitive means inserting an adverb between “to” and the uninflected form of a verb (e.g., “to boldly go”). Latin doesn’t have split infinitives because in Latin an infinitive is a single word. But in English, rigidly avoiding split infinitives can change the meaning of your sentence or make it more difficult to understand. So go ahead and split an infinitive when you need to, Latin be damned.

Another of these hobgoblins is the supposed rule that you can’t start a sentence with a conjunction. Starting too many sentences with conjunctions will make your writing awkward, for sure, but never doing it? It’s overkill. Conjunctions glue the elements of your writing together. These elements might be words or clauses. But they can also be sentences.

The rules governing the use of “that” and “which” are also a bit shaky. The rule says that we should use “that” for restrictive relative clauses and save “which” for nonrestrictive relative clauses. This rule is sort of half-true, because using “that” for nonrestrictive relative clauses does sound a bit awkward. But the part of the rule that says you can’t use “which” for restrictive relative clauses is, well, not a good rule. You can do it, and there are situations when it’s the only choice you can make.

The point is that you shouldn’t blindly follow every prescriptive rule you come across without a second thought. Following these rules in formal writing and speaking might do you some good—people believe they’re true, remember—but in your everyday communication, you don’t have to worry about splitting infinitives or starting sentences with conjunctions. You can sometimes even let your modifiers dangle.

There are plenty of real rules to worry about, after all. Do you know the proper order of adjectives, for example? You probably wouldn’t be able to recite it off the top of your head, but if you use more than one adjective to describe something, you will intuitively arrange them in a way that just sounds good. You will say that something is big or small before you say which color it is. You will say that something is new or old before you say it’s French or British or Ugandan. There are plenty of rules you use you’re not even aware of. So relax, grammar pedant. Sit back, grab some marshmallows, and enjoy the fire if you think it’s there.

Monday Motivation Hack: Step Out of Your Comfort Zone

About three years ago, I decided to take a huge leap of faith. I sold almost everything I owned, packed my Toyota Sienna from floor to headliner with the stuff too precious to part with, and headed 2,000 miles west across rivers and mountains to an apartment I’d rented sight-unseen in a city I’d only ever driven past on vacation once. It’s the single scariest and best thing I’ve ever done.

Comfort zone annihilation level: expert.

There’s good news, though. You don’t have to make a cross-country move to experience the simultaneous terror and exhilaration of stepping outside your comfort zone. We’re talking about making your Mondays a little more enjoyable here, so baby steps will do.

What is a “comfort zone” and why should you challenge it?

Your comfort zone is the space you inhabit where behaviors, activities, and settings are all familiar and routine. That familiarity becomes a buffer to reduce anxiety and stress. You embrace the status quo because you feel secure there.

Here’s a tip: Status quo is Latin for the state in which. It’s been used since the early eighteenth century to mean “the current state of affairs.” The phrase usually serves as a noun, but it can also function as a phrasal adjective preceding a noun.

If comfort is a good thing (and anyone who’s spent a day in their pajamas working from home knows it is), then why are we encouraged to take risks? The idea of challenging our comfort zones dates back to a 1908 study. It showed that while being reliably comfortable produces steady performance, ramping up the anxiety level just a bit, to a place called “optimal anxiety”, maximizes it.

As tempting as it is to stick with our familiar routines, challenging yourself to push just past that state of relative ease by taking some risks is where you’ll achieve your best performance.

Four Simple Ideas for Breaking Out of Your Comfort Zone Today

If you’re ready to edge outside our comfort zone, here are a few ways to start shaking things up . . . just a little.

1 Take a different route to work.

We’re creatures of habit. Many of us follow the same, predictable path to the office each day. We don’t see much of anything new, but at least we know approximately how long the commute will take.

I make a point to take different routes whenever I go somewhere. Google Maps usually gives me a pretty solid estimate of how long the trip will take, and then I add five minutes or so to account for the unexpected. Changing my route keeps things interesting. Bonus: I know at least six different ways to get almost anywhere around my city.

via GIPHY

2 Take a risk-taker out for coffee.

Is there someone in your life—a family member, colleague, or friend—who’s adept at taking risks? Challenge yourself to take that person out for coffee with the goal of asking them about their gutsy lifestyle. Ask them what drives them to color outside the lines, and how they cope with their fears.

Change is unnerving. We all need a little encouragement from time to time. Most risk-takers will enjoy taking a neophyte under their wing and showing them how to stretch their boundaries. When you’re trying to challenge yourself, it’s good to have someone in your corner urging you on.

3 Sign up for a class and learn something creative.

Creativity equals risk-taking. Creative people fail, and the most creative people fail all the time. You don’t think Picasso always painted masterpieces, or that J.K. Rowling wrote the Harry Potter series without a single rewrite, do you?

Think of a creative pursuit that’s always fascinated you and take time on your lunch break to look around for classes. Maybe you’ve always wanted to learn how to use your expensive DSLR camera outside of auto mode. Or it could be you’d like to get your hands dirty throwing a ceramic pot. Your thespian side may long for an improv class. Face your fears and dive in!

4 Learn a language.

Learning a new language can be fun, and the process has many cognitive advantages. With apps like Duolingo and Babbel in your corner, it’s also easy. Sure, trying to learn something new can be a little scary, and trying to speak a new language when you’re still struggling to wrap your tongue around foreign sounds is unnerving, but the benefits are clear.

Comfort is overrated.

Looking back on our lives, we rarely regret the risks we’ve taken; we only regret the ones we didn’t. Comfort kills. It leads to apathy and boredom. It strips away our motivation.

Getting outside your comfort zone is not a means to an end, but rather a goal in itself. As soon as you choose to leave your comfort zone, you form a direct friction with life, go towards the pursuit of your dreams, and in short, really start living.

—Ran Zilca for Psychology Today

So, this Monday, go ahead and shake things up a little. There’s no reward without the risk.

How Grammar Influences Legal Interpretations

Grammar is important, but it’s not a matter of life or death. Or is it? How does grammar influence the legal system? Researchers decided to find out by conducting an experiment. Does the wording of the description of a murder affect whether jurors classify a crime as first- or second-degree murder? According to their findings, “legal judgments can be affected by grammatical aspect but [most significantly] limited to temporal dynamics… In addition, findings demonstrate that the influence of grammatical aspect on situation model construction and evaluation is dependent upon the larger linguistic and semantic context.” In other words, grammar plays a part, but the study participants also paid attention to context when making their decisions. Is grammar as significant in real-life legal cases?

For Avondale Lockhart, whether or not he would spend the next ten years of his life in prison came down to a question of grammar. Federal law requires a minimum ten-year sentence for repeat sexual offenders convicted of “aggravated sexual abuse, sexual abuse, or abusive sexual conduct involving a minor or ward.” How would you interpret the phrase? Does “involving a minor or ward” apply only to the part of the sentence immediately preceding it (abusive sexual conduct) or does it apply to all the crimes listed? Lockhart, previously convicted of attempted rape, contended that because his previous crime wasn’t against a minor, the minimum 10-year sentence did not apply to him.

In Canada, a cable television provider and a telecommunications company disputed the import of a single comma in their contract. Bell Aliant, the telephone company, wanted to cancel their contract with Rogers Communication. This is the sentence in question:”This agreement shall be effective from the date it is made and shall continue in force for a period of five (5) years from the date it is made, and thereafter for successive five (5) year terms, unless and until terminated by one year prior notice in writing by either party.” How do you understand the sentence? Does Bell Aliant have the right to cancel the contract at any time, provided they give one-year notice? Or does the one-year notice apply to cancellations enacted after the first five-year term? The difference amounts to about $900,000 US dollars.

How well can you explain the passive voice and the subjunctive mood? In an article published by the Loyola University Chicago Law Journal, law professor Robert C. Farrell observes that “there is widespread unfamiliarity among lawyers and law students with the terminology that describes verb forms.” In most contexts, this doesn’t matter. Native speakers use and understand grammar constructs instinctively, even if they cannot explain why saying something in a certain way is correct. However, in “a small percentage of cases, including some important ones, courts explicitly rely on grammatical terminology to explain their decisions.” If law students aren’t familiar with the classifications of grammar, how will they respond to arguments based on grammatical interpretation? The article highlights one case where grammar played a life-or-death role. In 1995, a jury convicted Michael Kelly Roberts of aggravated premeditated first-degree murder and first-degree felony murder. He received a death sentence for the crimes. Did the jury really have the authority to issue a capital punishment? Notice the passive voice in this phrase from their instructions that defines aggravated first-degree murder: “[when the] murder was committed in the course of, in furtherance of, or in immediate flight from, a robbery … or a kidnapping.” According to Robert’s defense, the use of passive voice mistakenly conveyed the impression that a death penalty could be applied to the accused even if he was not an active or major participant in the illegal events. Because there was another man involved, no one could say who had actually committed the murder.

Are you wondering about the verdicts of the cases mentioned? In the case of Avondale Lockhart, the Court applied the “rule of the last antecedent,” which states that “a limiting clause or phrase . . . should ordinarily be read as modifying only the noun or phrase that it immediately follows.” While the rule can be overruled by other “indica of meaning,” the Court found nothing to indicate that it should be reversed in this case. Lockhart received the minimum ten-year sentence. The Canadian telephone pole contract dilemma reached a resolution when Rogers Communications presented the French version of the same contract. The wording in the French contract was clear enough that the court reversed an earlier decision allowing Bell Aliant to terminate the contract before the end of the five-year term. As for Michael Kelly Roberts, the courts vacated his death sentence and reversed his conviction of first-degree murder. His first-degree felony murder conviction was upheld. How did the rulings match your interpretations of the legal language?

6 Email Etiquette Tips that May Surprise You

Email correspondence makes it simple, easy, and convenient to quickly contact coworkers and family members across the world. However, it isn’t all roses with email. If you don’t follow proper etiquette, you can end up annoying your recipients. You’ve probably already heard about basic email etiquette tips, like using a specific subject line and replying as quickly as you can, but there is more you can do to ensure that your emails resonate with the people you send them to.

Don’t Be Sorry to Bother Someone

When you start an email with “sorry to bother you,” chances are that the recipient already feels bothered by that opening line. Those four words take seconds to read, seconds that the person could have used to find out the real point of your email. Furthermore, if you are sending a business email, you should never apologize for asking someone to do their job. You want to be polite, not obsequious.

 

Be Small-Screen Friendly

Email is not the exclusive to desktop computers and laptops. People are always on the go, and they read their emails on mobile phones and tablets. It isn’t easy to read long blocks of text on a tiny screen. Keep that in mind when you’re composing your messages. Keep your paragraphs short and your message brief. If you must send a longer message, give a succinct summary near the beginning of the email so the recipient knows what’s in store and can go back to read the rest later.

Also, think about the font you use. Some artsy fonts may look fabulous on a computer screen, but they could strain the eyes on a mobile screen.

Think Before You CC

A blogger for Lifehack describes being copied on emails: “I’d say about 90% of messages I’ve received where I’m not in the To: field but the CC: field were completely and totally useless to me.” Indeed, oftentimes those emails, intended to keep people in the loop, just end up being irritating white noise in the inbox.

This doesn’t mean you should never CC anyone, but you should carefully consider who exactly needs the information you’re about to send.

Use BCC for Bulk Mail

Want to use email to invite the universe to your upcoming party? Maybe you want to share your vacation photos with a long list of people. Whatever the reason, don’t paste a novel-length block of email addresses at the top of a message. BCC everyone in your list. This also respects the privacy of your recipients, which is especially helpful if not everyone who receives the email knows each other.

Do Not Overload on Cuteness

Fancy graphics and fonts do not look good on all browsers and devices and can make an email difficult to read. If you cannot resist the urge to embellish, use small adorable touches that add character but don’t overwhelm a message.

Along the same lines, if you are sending photographs, it’s better to send them as an attachment rather than in the body of an email, so the email itself doesn’t take a billion years to load.

Stick to Your Grammar Guns

Email is not as formal as a handwritten letter, but you should still respect the English language. Capitalize when needed, use punctuation, and give all your emails a read-through before you hit the send button. This applies to both business and personal emails.

Email isn’t complicated, but there are some rules you need to follow to get the most out of it. Did any of these tips surprise you?

This Week in Writing, 8/29-9/4

Happy Friday! Once again it’s time for our weekly roundup of stories about writing, books, and authors. Have something you’d like to see us cover here? Let us know in the comment section!

Our Favorite Stories:

1 Tips for Aspiring Writers in 12 Infographics (Ebook Friendly)

2 Writing Tips from a Supreme Court Justice (Time)

3 J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter Trivia Tweets (Salon)

4 Good Grammar Can Keep You Out of Trouble (Grammarly)

Staff Book Picks of the Week:

The Shepherd’s Crown (Fiction) Terry Pratchett

“Terry Pratchett’s final Discworld novel, and the fifth to feature the witch Tiffany Aching. Deep in the Chalk, something is stirring. The owls and the foxes can sense it, and Tiffany Aching feels it in her boots. An old enemy is gathering strength.”

On the Move: A Life (Nonfiction) Oliver Sacks

“On the Move is the story of a brilliantly unconventional physician and writer—and of the man who has illuminated the many ways that the brain makes us human.”

Author & Illustrator Birthdays:

Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley – August 30, 1797 Virginia Lee Burton – August 30, 1909 Robert Crumb – August 30, 1943 Malcolm Gladwell – September 3, 1963 Richard Wright – September 4, 1908

Stop Confusing These Words: Immigrate and Emigrate

The difference between these two words is all about coming and going. When you immigrate, you’re coming to a new country. When you emigrate, you’re leaving your home country.

Immigrate: to move into a country from another one to stay permanently.

My ancestors immigrated to the United States sometime in the 1800s.

Emigrate: to leave the country in which one lives, especially one’s native country, to reside elsewhere.

My ancestors emigrated from Denmark in search of a fresh start in another country.

To learn more about confusing word pairs, read this post about the difference between verses and versus.

6 Plagiarism Gaffes That Will Make You Gasp

With the revelation of Melania Trump’s alleged plagiarism of a 2008 Michelle Obama speech, plagiarism is suddenly front-page news. Although this may be the most talked-about instance of plagiarism at the moment, it’s far from the first. Plagiarism has existed as long as intellectual property has, and there have been numerous public figures accused of this academic transgression, including the United States’ current president and vice president.

Although some instances of plagiarism involve more text than others, many result in some sort of legal action, or at least an in-depth apology to the plagiarized party. Plagiarism is, after all, an error that many find not only incorrect, but dishonest. Here are some of the worst instances of plagiarism in music, political, and media history.

1. The First Recorded Instance of Plagiarism

We don’t know the name of the first plagiarist, but we do know the first poet to be plagiarized. According to PlagiarismToday, his name was Martial, and he became one of the best-known poets of the first century AD. He accused several other poets of copying and distributing his work without his permission, which was a common practice in the era. Instead of sitting idly by and allowing these plagiarists to steal his work, Martial wrote several scathing verses about their practices and characters, beating them down with his words. He effectively coined the word “plagiarism” in one of these verses, using the Latin word for kidnapping (“plagiarus”) to describe the act of stealing another poet’s work.

2. Political Plagiarism Hops the Pond

Of course, any discussion of famous plagiarism cases would be incomplete without mentioning Vice President Joe Biden’s famous slip up in 1987. The then-senator alleged that the plagiarized words “came to him” on the way to his Iowa State Fair speech. But after Maureen Dowd compared his speech line-for-line with a speech by UK Labour Party Leader Neil Kinnock in The New York Times, it was widely accepted that his remarks were lifted from Kinnock’s work.

Biden’s response to the situation showed significant remorse for emulating the popular UK politician. He reportedly responded with a simple “All I had to say was ‘Like Kinnock.’” Biden also reportedly visited Kinnock in 1988, presenting him with a bound copy of his speeches and encouraging him to “use them whenever he liked.”

3. Turn A-Dowd Is Fair Play

Although Maureen Dowd was instrumental in discovering the similarities between Biden and Kinnock’s speeches, she also became the subject of a plagiarism scandal of her own. According to The Guardian, Dowd was accused of borrowing a paragraph in a 2009 column from Talking Points Memo blogger Josh Marshall. Dowd responded to the accusation by saying that she got the paragraph from a friend and recognized later that her friend was probably quoting Talking Points Memo. Unfortunately, friendly fire did not save Dowd from considerable professional anguish over the thought of plagiarizing another prominent political columnist.

4. Viva la Sampling

Literature and music both have a long history of borrowing and stealing that isn’t, strictly speaking, plagiarism. For example, the ethics of sampling in hip hop have long been debated, with some deeming samples polite nods to prior artists and others declaring them instances of blatant melodic thefts. However, when an artist “writes” a song that borrows a major melody from another artist’s song, accusations of plagiarism will fly. Coldplay was recently the recipient of these accusations, when Joe Satriani alleged that their song “Viva La Vida” borrowed significantly from the guitar parts on his “If I Could Fly.” The two groups settled the resulting lawsuit out of court, and Coldplay never admitted wrongdoing, but Satriani fans insisted that the group had plagiarized.

5. Less Journalism, More Fiction

Although Maureen Dowd’s brush with plagiarism is notorious, one name has become synonymous with questionable ethics in the journalism world—Jayson Blair. The then 27-year-old New York Times reporter committed multiple instances of what the paper called “journalistic fraud,” including fabricating quotes, scenes, and entire stories from the field. His plagiarized facts and passages mostly came from other publications and wire services, but Blair pretended they were his own reporting and writing. As “one of the most brazen fabulists in the history of journalism,” according to one Washington Post reporter, Blair’s legacy lives on in a chilling documentary about the numerous failings that led to his fabricated reports.

6. Putin on a Show

Even world leaders aren’t immune to the allure of plagiarism. According to a study by the Brookings Institute, Russian President Vladimir Putin plagiarized large portions of the thesis that resulted in a degree described on his website as a “PhD in economics.” Although the degree title itself has been debated, the content of his thesis, “Strategic Planning of the Reproduction of the Mineral Resource Base of a Region under Conditions of the Formation of Market Relations,” has been shown to borrow liberally from a 1978 textbook on the same topic. Brookings researchers found “evidence of extensive plagiarism” in the thesis, which they further alleged that Putin did not write himself.