I’m taking a few weeks off from writing tips, but I won’t leave you grammar hungry. Can I tell you all how much I have enjoyed how many times you all have tagged me, DMed me, and shared this video with me? Yes, you’re all right. I totally love it too.
Lots of people treat the word “whom” like that crazy wife in the attic, knowing her secrets but not uttering her name. Are you one of them? Or have the differences between “who” and “whom” never really been explained to you?
First things first, how on earth have I gotten all the way to Writing Tip #82 before tackling the proper use of “whom”? Avoidance? Neglect? A master plan for grammatical suspense? No matter the reason, it’s definitely overdue.
Are you one of the few who know when to use the proper pronoun? Did you know “who” and “whom” are considered pronouns?
Understanding the usage of “who” and “whom” is easiest if you understand the difference between subjects and objects in a sentence. If your eyes just started to glaze over, I’ll make it even simpler. Think about where you would use “he” versus “him” in answering a question. “Whom” ends in “m”; “him” ends in “m.” Use it as a reminder.
Q. Who was at the door? A. He was at the door.
Q. Whom did you go with? A. I went with him.
Q. Who let the dogs out? A. He let the dogs out.
Q. Whom do you believe? A. I believe him.
It’s not really as complicated as many seem to think.
Don’t be a victim of grammatical snobbery (or evasion). Command your “who” and “whom” with pride.
Everyone knows Forrest Gump’s mama was a wise lady, but she’s also a grammarian role model, nailing a subtle rule few know or follow. Everyone likes a good simile – especially Southerners – but whether you use “like” or “as” in your comparison is not simply a matter of pure choice.
To be brief, use “like” when no verb follows, and use “as” when the following clause contains a verb. We could get more technical and discuss prepositions and objects of the preposition versus the use of conjunctions, but that’s all of the dry grammar that scares people away from English classes. I like to keep things simple.
Back to Mama Gump:
Example 1: “Life is like a box of chocolates” – note no verb follows, so “like” is correct.
Example 2: “Stupid is as stupid does.” – since “does” is a verb, “as” is correct here.
In closing, to quote Forrest, “And that’s all I have to say about that.” Got it?
However, sometimes, the addition of an “s” is not as simple as differentiating singular and plural. Let me mess with your brain here. The following equation is also correct:
Costs + Costs = Cost
Whoa. Mind-blowing, right?
A client came to me with this question earlier in the week, and I thought it was a great one. “Cost” in its singular form refers to the sum of a total group; “costs” refers to all of the pieces within that group. For example, “the cost of a service includes material costs and labor costs.”
From legal contracts to discussions of budgets, the difference between “cost” and “costs” often befuddles people. But no longer you, savvy reader. No longer you.
I’m literally shaking my head as I write this update. Yes, my head is actually moving back and forth. I know that people have been misusing the word “literally” when they mean “figuratively” in recent years, but breaking grammarian news brings a new, sad twist to the word use saga. Dictionaries have added a definition.
Traditionally, “literally” has meant “actually, without exaggeration or inaccuracy”; “figuratively” has meant “metaphorically, not literally.” You often hear people confusing the words – think Robin Scherbatsky for How I Met Your Mother fans (“That literally blew my mind.”) – but until recently, there was always a right and a wrong. Then came breaking news. Dictionaries have added a new definition to the word “literally”:
“Used to acknowledge that something is not literally true but is used for emphasis or to express strong feeling.”
What? So this second definition is the opposite of the first definition?
Perhaps, the Merriam-Webster and Cambridge dictionaries are okay with this. I’m not especially. It figuratively blows my mind. Any other reactions here?
In the days of the typewriter, two spaces were recommended between sentences. Here’s a hint for today’s tip: we’re no longer in the era of the typewriter.
Extra spaces between sentences added readability in the time of monospaced typing (where every letter took up the same amount of space). Few fonts in the digital era follow this spacing style; ergo, the two space necessity has been dropped.
It’s true. Today, most publishers – both print and online – use one space between sentences, and we recommend that you do too. This is especially significant on webpages. Web copy should be direct and concise. Extra spaces clash visually and philosophically with this tactic.
Some writers follow this old rule out of habit; others because they had teachers who taught this form long after typewriters were put to rest. But it’s time now. Typewriters are gathering dust. Don’t let your writing follow suit.More
Yes, there really is a difference here, though most people aren’t aware of it. And it’s more than just the insertion of a comma.
The difference between using an adjective clause that starts with “that” and one that starts with “which” depends on whether it is a restrictive clause or not. I’m sure I don’t need to go any further, but just in case I do, think of a restrictive clause as one that is essential to the meaning of the sentence. For example, “Frogs that sing and dance are talented.” If you take out “that sing and dance,” you still have a complete sentence, but a sentence that lost its original meaning. The writer in this instance is talking specifically about ‘frogs that sing and dance’ as being talented, not all frogs.
Non-restrictive clauses do not contribute to the greater meaning of the sentence. For example, “Frogs, which are amphibians, start their lives as tadpoles.” See how the “which are amphibians” clause could be removed and nothing would be lost? It adds information but isn’t essential to the total sentence.
So in conclusion here, with a restrictive clause, use “that.” With a non-restrictive clause, use “which.” Make sense?
Furthermore, did you know that Warner Brothers’ singing and dancing frog is named Michigan J. Frog? I did not. There you go.
If you have any more “that” or “which” questions, let me know!
There she was just a-walking down the street, and apparently bad grammar didn’t stop her. I suppose we’ve all been there – the singer/songwriter does have some major appeal – but true love can best be found within the bounds of grammar, right? No? Too much?
“I knew we was falling in love.” Does that lyric not irk anyone else every time they hear this song? It’s the only line in the song with bad grammar.
All we’re asking today, folks, is to check your subject-verb agreement. Manfred Mann may have gotten the girl, but others may not be as lucky.
Here’s one of our biggest grammar pet peeves: the use of adjectives when an adverb is correct. Getting back to basics, adjectives modify nouns; adverbs modify verbs, adjectives, or other adverbs.
Example 1:
Q: How’re you doing?
A: I’m doing good/great/terrific. (cringe – incorrect, though you hear it all the time. These are all adjectives. They cannot modify “doing,” a verb.)
A: I’m doing well/fine/fabulously/horrifically. (woohoo – correct. These are all adverbs.)
Example 2:
Q: How’d the game go?
A. I played bad/awesome. (Incorrect. Again, these are adjectives.)
A. The team played terribly/awesomely/like gods. (Correct. These are all adverbs… except for the last one, which was a simile. Who’s paying attention?)
Okay, we’ll get off our grammarian high horse now. You may now return to your normally scheduled Facebook programming.