What Are Your Subject Line Pet Peeves?

Imply vs. Infer—What’s the Difference?

• Imply means to suggest or to say something in an indirect way.
• Infer means to suppose or come to a conclusion, especially based on an indirect suggestion.

---

Implying and inferring are both common elements of communication. One means to state something, and the other to conclude something. But it’s surprisingly easy to confuse these two verbs.

What Does Imply Mean?

When we imply something, we’re hinting at what we mean but not saying it directly:

I didn’t mean to imply that your grasp on grammar is bad.

He didn’t make any promises, but he did imply that he’d be back for the holidays.

What Does Infer Mean?

When you come to a conclusion based on something you think someone implied, you’re inferring:

Am I right to infer that you think my grammar is bad?

We inferred that he’d be back before the holidays because he didn’t leave with enough luggage for a long trip.

Examples

Even at face value, well-intentioned repairs surely imply why repairs were necessary.

Chicago Tribune

But the inclusion of the term “migration” was not meant to imply a general federal power to restrict migration, but was a euphemism intended to bolster the pretense that the Constitution did not endorse slavery.

The Washington Post

Current technology uses radars on satellites to infer wind speeds, and both sending and receiving these signals is a more costly process.

NBC-2

You can probably infer from its R18 rating that Verhoeven doesn’t shy away from the sexual violence aspects of the narrative, and the film’s repeated flashbacks to the assault seem a little gratuitous.

Stuff

Parallel Structure and Prepositions

When prepositional phrases are used in a parallel series, prepositions (with, to, of, over, under, by, etc.) should be repeated with every element of the series unless all elements use the same preposition. A common error is to repeat prepositions unnecessarily, resulting in a stilted style.

I am making a stew with beef, with carrots, and with onions.

In this sentence, there are three prepositional phrases complementing I am making a stew. If written separately and not in a single, parallel structure, they would read:

I am making a stew with beef. I am making a stew with carrots. I am making a stew with onions.

When combining these elements into a single sentence, there is no need to repeat the preposition with because it is used identically for each element.

I am making a stew with beef, carrots, and onions.

Writing the sentence this way ensures a clear, uncluttered style.

What to Avoid: Mixing Prepositions in a Parallel Structure

Mixing prepositions improperly in a parallel structure is a common writing mistake. If a writer allows multiple phrases to share a preposition and then introduces a different preposition with another element, the result is a clumsy sentence.

The baby flung spaghetti strands on the walls, the counters, and under the table.

If we separate the elements of this sentence, we have:

The baby flung spaghetti strands on the walls. The baby flung spaghetti strands on the counters. The baby flung spaghetti strands under the table.

The first two elements require the preposition on, but the last element requires the preposition under. Therefore, it is necessary to repeat all three prepositions when combining the elements into a parallel sentence structure.

The baby flung spaghetti strands on the walls, on the counters, and under the table.

Double Negatives: 3 Rules You Must Know

You probably have been told more than once that double negatives are wrong and that you shouldn’t use them. However, usually, it’s left at that — without any explanation of what exactly a double negative is or why it’s considered incorrect (in standard English). We want to fix that. Here is the essential list of things you must understand about double negatives.

1 In standard English, each subject-predicate construction should only have one negative form.

Negative forms in English are created by adding a negation to the verb.

I will bake a cake.

I will not bake a cake.

I can go anywhere tonight.

I cannot go anywhere tonight.

We are planning a trip.

We are not planning a trip.

Sometimes there are negative forms of nouns — such as “nowhere,” “nothing,” and “no one” — that are used. If these are in a sentence, it is important that the verb in the sentence is not negated.

He’s going nowhere.

He’s not going nowhere.

2 A double negative is a non-standard sentence construction that uses two negative forms.

Double negatives are created by adding a negation to the verb and to the modifier of the noun (adjectives, adverbs, etc.) or to the object of the verb.

I won’t (will not) bake no cake.

(verb negation + object negation)

I can’t (cannot) go nowhere tonight.

(verb negation + modifier negation)

3 Learning standard English negation is difficult because many languages and some English dialects use double negatives conventionally.

Though it’s easy to assume that double negatives are simply unnatural aberrations, this assumption is wrong. In many languages worldwide, it is grammatically incorrect to use anything but the double negative! (This is called negative concord.)

No hay ningun problema. (Spanish) “There isn’t no problem.” meaning “There isn’t a problem.”

Я не хочу нічого їсти. (Ya ne hochu nichogo yisty.) (Ukrainian) “I don’t want nothing to eat.” meaning “I don’t want to eat anything.”

To make it more complicated, it’s not just foreign languages that conventionally employ double negatives but some dialects of English do as well! African American Vernacular English (AAVE), Southern American English, and some British regional forms use negative concord constructions. Negative concord is even used several times in Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales. (For example, a line about the Friar, “Ther nas no man no wher so vertuous,” literally means “there wasn’t no man nowhere as virtuous.”)

So, while double negatives are not correct in standard English, that doesn’t make them any less useful in other dialects. We encourage writers to learn how to negate sentences using the standard grammar — especially for professional settings — but we love the diversity of English (and language in general) and think that use of dialectal grammar is fine in open, less formal environments.

How do you remember not to use double negatives? Do you think double negatives should be considered incorrect?

Welcome to LitMas, the Bookish Holiday Season

’Tis the season . . . to read! The holiday season means colder nights and more time inside for some, so why not spend it with your nose buried in a book?

We know the winter season can be tough for many people, with its short days and long nights. We also know bibiliotherapy is both real and wonderful. So, in the spirit of the holidays and bookishness, we’ve decided to create a new holiday focused on bibliophiles, bookworms, and jokesters of all sorts. Put on your reading hats and pour a new cup of cocoa, because LitMas is here!

Of course, LitMas would be terrible fake holiday without gifts! Today, we have one gift for our loyally nerdy bookworms. Instead of a partridge in a pear tree, here’s a poem on the beauty of snow by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow.

Source: “Snow-Flakes” by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, via The Poetry Foundation

What’s your favorite holiday read? Send us your favorites with #LitMas, and we’ll post some of them later this week.

Would Have or Would of?

When spoken aloud, would of and its fellows should of and could of sound exactly like would’ve, could’ve and should’ve. But even if no one can tell the difference when you’re speaking, the mistake becomes obvious as soon as you write it down.

The Right Way to Spell Would of, Should of, and Could of

When people write would of, should of, could of, will of or might of, they are usually confusing the verb have with the preposition of. So would of is would have, could of is could have, should of is should have, will of is will have, and might of is might have:

I would of come earlier, but I got stuck at work.

He would have stayed if he’d known you were coming.

You should of called yesterday.

You should have finished your homework by now.

This common mistake is likely caused by the similar pronunciation of the words of and have, especially when have is contracted, as in should’ve. This mistake also happens with the negations of modal verbs:

Stella couldn’t of known she was going to win the lottery.

John couldn’t have come any earlier.

Tell us what you think about traditional language rules.

This poll is part of a series that Grammarly is running aimed at better understanding how the public feels about writing, language learning, and grammar.

Please take the poll and share your thoughts in the comments. We can’t wait to hear from you!

If you are interested in more, check out last week’s poll.