Free grammar lessons!

[ubercuber721]

Re: Free grammar lessons!

Hey, has anyone else ever heard of an interrobang? It's a combination of a question mark and an exclamation mark that is used in situations where both would be used, such as in "You did what?!" In informal writing, people normally just put both punctuation marks next to each other, but there is an actual way to express that type of speech. Just thought I'd pass along a tidbit of information.

[GuidoHunter]

Re: Free grammar lessons!

Hey, has anyone else ever heard of an interrobang? It's a combination of a question mark and an exclamation mark that is used in situations where both would be used, such as in "You did what?!" In informal writing, people normally just put both punctuation marks next to each other, but there is an actual way to express that type of speech. Just thought I'd pass along a tidbit of information.

Search all forums for "interrobang". Third result: ITT we embrace strange punctuation marks.

Also, you'd do well to never use one in formal writing.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[TheRapingDragon]

Re: Free grammar lessons!

Yeah I knew about it too due to that thread. Well, I'd already knew about it but had forgotten what it was called.

Still, I believe you should never use two together, no matter what the circumstances. I mean you could simply say "You did what?" or "You did what!" and both are fine. The first is a question whereas the second is still a question but asked in an accusatory (or like-wise) tone, which is still subject to being "?!".

[Ground_Breaker]

Re: Free grammar lessons!

I don't know if that has already been addressed, because I don't feel like searching through 22 pages of posts, but why, in formal writing, is it inappropriate to end a sentence with a preposition?

For example: Instead of saying, "I don't know who I can give this chair to," you should say, "I don't know to whom I can give this chair."

I was thinking about it, and all I could really come up with was that prepositions have to be the start of a prepositional phrase (i.e. "to the house", "with the family", "on the roof").

Is there another reason why you can't end a sentence with a preposition, or is that pretty much it?

[GuidoHunter]

Re: Free grammar lessons!

why, in formal writing, is it inappropriate to end a sentence with a preposition?

It never officially was. During a certain period a couple hundred years back, several prominent writers just up and decided that it should be 'illegal', despite the fact that English writers had been doing so for hundreds of years before them. The idea remained, though, but fortunately even the grammatical prescriptivists are abandoning the idea due to its shaky foudation.

The justification (and I agree with them here, but it's no justification for such a sweeping rule) was that a PRE-POSITION should not terminate a phrase, because that would make it a POST-POSITION, and our language is not constructed in a manner that allows for postpositions.

In certain cases, re-forming the sentence is certainly preferable, but in others it's just too awkward and in yet others it's nigh impossible.

For example: Instead of saying, "I don't know who I can give this chair to," you should say, "I don't know to whom I can give this chair."

You picked a really bad example there. Firstly, using "who", regardless of where the preposition is, is wrong, so that's misleading. Secondly, it's a plain awkward sentence that nobody should ever utter. As such, I'll give a different example:

"To whom should I give the chair?"
"Whom should I give the chair to?"

After a while of taking conscious note of where I place my prepositions, I've come to realize that the latter grates on my ears. I think this is a clear case of when you shouldn't end the sentence (or phrase) with a preposition.

Often, prepositions are practically a part of the verb (I heard a great word for this, but have forgotten it). Consider the following:

"He is really difficult to put up with."
"He is really difficult up with whom to put."

Here, I feel it would be plain incorrect to choose the latter, despite not ending with a preposition. It may technically be okay, but just don't do it.

There are other cases where one could move the preposition but lose clarity, too. I apologize for my inability to conceive an example, but trust me on this.

In summation, try to move the preposition back whenever you can, as it's more refined and carries better structure. You're only going to be able to do that in pretty simple situations, though, as you should NEVER sacrifice clarity for a rule that shouldn't have ever been.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[chunky_cheese]

Re: Free grammar lessons!

Geedo. Stip beng soo sm£rt!.,

*Chunkey_ches.

I'm starting to read through this thread and I'm learning a bit from it. I must ask you Guido, if I were to use an apostrophe in the possessive form such as:

"Steve's Car" that is correct way of saying it? What about "Hans' Car?" (Name = Hans turned possessive) If I am correct, I remember you (Or another) stating that "Jesus" and "Moses" are the only names in the English language that do not need an extra "S" when used in possession. Can you clarify my mishaps?

Thanks,

-Chunky_cheese

[TheRapingDragon]

Re: Free grammar lessons!

"Steve's Car" that is correct way of saying it? What about "Hans' Car?" (Name = Hans turned possessive)

Both are correct and acceptable.

The general rule is that singular possessive requires the "s" to be after the apostrophe, for example "Steve's car". Plural or group possessive tends to require the "s" to be before the apostrophe, "The scientists' thoughts". This is where you can define between singular and plural with words that are the same in each instance. For example:

"The cat's whiskers", "The cats' whiskers". In the first instance it is a single cat and in the second instance it is more than one cat.

If I am correct, I remember you (Or another) stating that "Jesus" and "Moses" are the only names in the English language that do not need an extra "S" when used in possession. Can you clarify my mishaps?

I've always believed that you should never add a third "S", others would disagree. As far as I'm still aware you can do it either way and it is grammatically correct. Though if you read what I wrote above, it does help in certain situations to leave out the third "s".

[GuidoHunter]

Re: Free grammar lessons!

Both are correct and acceptable.

No. No, no, no, no, NO!

It's "Hans's car". Hans is a singular subject. As such, it takes an apostrophy+s. Dude, read the OP where I detail that...

I've always believed that you should never add a third "S", others would disagree. As far as I'm still aware you can do it either way and it is grammatically correct. Though if you read what I wrote above, it does help in certain situations to leave out the third "s".

It's not about a "third s", but rather about a third consecutive sibilant syllable.

It's "Tass's car", but "Jesus' miracles". The former only has two sibilant syllables whereas the latter has three.

You'll get no guff from me if you find a singular subject (proper or common) that ends in such a manner and only add an apostrophe, though; I just can't think of any examples other than Jesus and Moses.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[TheRapingDragon]

Re: Free grammar lessons!

No. No, no, no, no, NO!

It's "Hans's car". Hans is a singular subject. As such, it takes an apostrophy+s. Dude, read the OP where I detail that...

Just going to disagree with you. I will never use a third "s". I still believe it looks more correct to disregard the third "s" and still use the apostrophe. Looking at names you have Moses and Jesus. Well why should I choose a different form of speech for "Chris" or "Hans". They all fall under "names that end with s".

Though we'll agree to disagree.

[GuidoHunter]

Re: Free grammar lessons!

What do you mean by a "third s" in the case of "Hans's"?

Either way, just because it looks "more correct" to you doesn't mean that it is.

Check out Rule 2.

This is a thread about using proper grammar. I'd appreciate it if you didn't give bad advice. =)

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[TheRapingDragon]

Re: Free grammar lessons!

I'm not giving bad advice. I've seen various exceptions such as not writing "The childrens' ball". Children is already plural so due to the change you should write "The children's ball" to indicate plural, and "The child's ball" for singular.

In the same sense I just believe you can write "Chris' ball" as Chris is already singular. You can't have multiple "Chris" as it would become "Chris and Chris's ball" or "Chris and Chris' ball", so you can just as easily reverse the process and have "Chris' ball" rather than "Chris's ball". Both thus are acceptable.

You're going to disagree again, aren't you.

[GuidoHunter]

Re: Free grammar lessons!

I've seen various exceptions such as not writing "The childrens' ball". Children is already plural so due to the change you should write "The children's ball" to indicate plural, and "The child's ball" for singular.

I don't know where you saw "the childrens' ball", but that's 100% wrong. Writing "the children's ball" isn't an exception to the rule; it's PART of the rule.

The only time a word terminates in an apostrophe is if it's the possessive form of a plural noun which ends in s (and the exceptions like Jesus').

In the same sense I just believe you can write "Chris' ball" as Chris is already singular. You can't have multiple "Chris" as it would become "Chris and Chris's ball" or "Chris and Chris' ball", so you can just as easily reverse the process and have "Chris' ball" rather than "Chris's ball". Both thus are acceptable.

This gets awkward with using first names, but look at my example in the OP. You say "the Joneses' dog", not "the Jones' dog". The latter isn't correct by any stretch of the imagination. First you pluralize, then add just the apostrophe if it still ends in s.

By the same line, if you were somehow able to correctly form a sentence around it (though I can't imagine why you would use this construction as opposed to a simpler pronoun), you would say "the Chrises' ball".

"Chris' ball" just plain isn't correct by English standards. It's a mistake that's unfortunately seen in a lot of places, but it's still wrong.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[shade11]

Re: Free grammar lessons!

Search all forums for "interrobang". Third result: ITT we embrace strange punctuation marks.

Also, you'd do well to never use one in formal writing.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

I shall start using the "interrobang" now. I find such a mark very interesting.

[Bamboozler]

Re: Free grammar lessons!

It's you're. Not your.

[D.J. Cristo]

Re: Free grammar lessons!

The LAST place I thought I'd hear anything about grammar in was FFR; It appears I thought wrong. A terrific thread, indeed! *Thumbs up for Squeek!*