For one reason or another, I found myself thinking of
grammar this week (who am I kidding? I think of grammar every week!). I also
thought of the complication in being a linguist involved mostly in descriptive
pursuits and then coming up with a list of prescriptions.
However, to me the fact remains that language changes (and
change is great and healthy) to both better serve societies with which it is
associated and also further signal social phenomena that have already occurred.
In that sense, when a new concept or object comes about (e.g. computer), we
need a word to name it. When a certain group wants to show identity markers,
slang, to which (initially) only group members are privy, appears; and when a
term does not reflect a given social climate anymore or becomes unacceptable in
the eyes and ears of a given group, it is dropped (e.g. changing terms for
ethnic groups).
All right, I am making it a lot simpler than it really is,
but you get the idea: we don’t have to mess up with language just for the heck
of it! (This is probably the least elegant sentence I've ever written.)
The point here is that a belief in change and the evolution
of language does not preclude an attempt to avoid that which does not make
sense or, just plain and simple, irritates a person (and if that person is me,
then just don’t do it!). That is why I am calling this entry Patty’s Pet Peeves
(it will reoccur when need be). These are to be sure not the most serious
things in the world: we do have famine, conflict and great injustices to
contend with. But when it comes to
little mishaps, these are the ones I could live without. Here are two of the
top offenses:
The dangling
participle/modifier – This is the king of all my pet peeves, and an
irritatingly common occurrence in day-to-day discourse, on TV, and in books. It
usually takes the following forms:
By painting the walls, it makes the room much brighter.
(Imagine me cringing as I write this.)
As a new writer, the work is very intensive.
While leaving the house, the key disappeared.
What do all of these constructions have in common? They all
beg the question, “who the heck is painting the wall, doing the writing, and
leaving the house?”
To make it better, just ask the question and respond by
inserting that individual as a subject:
By painting the walls, the artist makes the room much
brighter.
As a new writer, I find the work very intensive.
While leaving the house, Tom realized his key had
disappeared.
No, do not change the order of the clauses. The
key disappeared while leaving the house still makes the key the subject,
and I see with my mind’s eye a little key carrying a red purse and wearing
sunglasses being kidnapped as it tries to make its way through the door.
Countable/uncountable
nouns
With dangling modifiers out of the way, allow me to get even
pickier. To me nothing says, “don’t buy this juice” more than reading on the
carton “less sugar and calories.” I understand orange juice companies and the
like want to save on ink, but would it take all that much more money to write,
“less sugar, fewer calories?”
You see, I am a stickler for respecting the fact that some
nouns are countable while others are not. If a noun is countable, we use
few/fewer/number/many. For example: “I would like to consume fewer calories,”
or “I won’t have that cake because it has too many calories,” or still “The
number of people at the party surprised me.” If I had a dime each time I hear
“the amount of people….” Yes, rich woman.
These are only two of the items in my long list of grammar
pet peeves. I will share them parsimoniously so I don’t bore you to tears. But
now that you saw them here, you are obligated to pay it forward by teaching
someone else. Languages, in this case the
English language, thank you.
