Posted in Grammar, etc., tagged Definitions, Food, Signs, Travel on January 29, 2010| 1 Comment »
Thanks to my friend Heidi, I am now wearing my mascara in a variety of places. She directed me to a site that has me weeping: http://engrishfunny.com/
Here is a sample of what you will see on this site:
Enjoy!
Update: Here is a similar site, courtesy of my friend Billy: http://engrish.com/
Posted in Grammar, etc., tagged Academics, Definitions, Students on January 28, 2010| Leave a Comment »
I kept it together tonight. I did not throw my panties on the stage, or engage in any other unseemly fan behavior. I was, however, awestruck, and rendered speechless.
Stanley Fish spoke at SCAD.
The topic of his lecture was “How to Write a Sentence.” If you read his New York Times columns here (Part I) and here (Part II), you’ll get the gist of the lecture. Bottom line: Form is more important than content. People can express ideas and be creative only within the confines of syntax, and they must know syntax.
Now discuss among yourselves. I feel faint.
Posted in Grammar, etc., tagged Academics, Definitions, Requests, Rhetorical devices on January 26, 2010| 1 Comment »
No one really asked for more rhetorical devices, but I’m on a roll. Here are four more of my favorites:
To use metallage (“Meh-TALL-uh-gee”) is to use a word or phrase as an object in a sentence. I’m going to go all “Pulp Fiction” on you and mention that scene with the Gimp. Marcellus Wallace (Ving Rhames) says, “You hear me talkin’, hillbilly boy? I ain’t through with you by a damn sight. I’ma get medieval on your ass.”
In that same vein, periphrasis (“Per-IF-ruh-sis”) uses a description as a name. Think Harry Potter and “He Who Shall Not Be Named.” And I’d better not hear Eddie refer to me as “The Old Ball and Chain.” Or “Fat Ass,” for that matter.
Two more devices — metonymy and synecdoche — seem to be difficult for many people to understand, and there are plenty who say they are the same. They are not.
Metonymy (“Meh-TAH-no-mee”) refers to describing something indirectly by using similar items. For example, you can say “the deep” when you are talking about the ocean.
Synecdoche (“Sin-ECK-doh-key”) swaps a thing for a collection of things, or a part for a whole. For example, the bank foreclosed on our neighbor’s house. The representatives of the bank did it, but it is easier to say “the bank.”
The difference between metonymy and synecdoche is this: When A is used to refer to B, it is a synecdoche if A is a component of B, and a metonym if A is commonly associated with B but not actually part of its whole. Representatives are part of a bank, therefore it is synecdoche. But the ocean is deep (deep water is like an ocean), so it is metonymy.
Got it? Good, ’cause I don’t wanna go all medieval on you.
Posted in Grammar, etc., tagged Academics, Definitions, Requests, Rhetorical devices on January 24, 2010| 3 Comments »
When last I blogged, I mentioned “litotes,” a rhetorical device that is similar to a double negative. This device, pronounced “LIE-tuh-teez,” allows someone to make a point by denying the opposite. For example, if I said, all regal-like, “We are not amused,” you would understand that all is not well, and that you should perhaps vacate the scene.
There are loads of other devices. As soon as I point them out, you’ll start seeing them everywhere.
Take, for example, chiasmus (“Kie-AZ-mus”), a sentence that presents a mirror image of a concept. I often say that I work to live, not live to work, even though I do love my job.
Perhaps the most well-known chiasmus came from John F. Kennedy in his 1961 inaugural address: “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.”
Two other devices are similar: antithesis and anadiplosis. Antithesis establishes a clear, contrasting relationship between ideas. For example, original moonwalker Neil Armstrong said of the 1969 landing: “One small step for [a] man, one giant leap for mankind.”
Some examples of antithesis are chiastic, but not all. And if it is chiastic, then just call it a chiasmus. Antithesis = general contrast; chiasmus = specific mirroring.
Anadiplosis (“Anna-di-PLOH-sis”) goes one step further by repeating the last/first structure, but it is not a mirror. In “Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace” — a dreadful movie — Yoda said, “Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.”
Do you want to know more about rhetorical devices? Of course you do. And asking and answering a question is called hypophora (“High-PAH-for-uh”).
Posted in Grammar, etc., tagged Definitions, Double negative, Requests on January 23, 2010| 3 Comments »
"I don't know nothing 'bout birthin' babies!"
I don’t know nothing ’bout grammar. That’s good, because I write a grammar blog. (Well, grammar and other things.)
You might ask, “Whatchoo talkin’ ’bout Willis?”
That, my friends, is a double negative. What I really said was, “I know something about grammar.”
Pink Floyd sang, “We don’t need no education,” but what they were really saying was, “We do need education” (whether they wanted to or not). The “not” in the contraction cancels out the “no,” resulting in a positive statement.
Usually people use the construction to indicate the opposite, though, like Prissy (Butterfly McQueen) in “Gone with the Wind“: “I don’t know nothing ’bout birthin’ babies!”
So Miss Scarlett was in luck. Yet she wasn’t. You see?
Similar to this concept is a rhetorical device called “litotes.” I’ll tackle that topic in an upcoming post.
Posted in Grammar, etc., tagged Academics, Bright ideas, Kids, Peeves, Punctuation on January 20, 2010| 5 Comments »
Tonight I became “that person.” But I did what I had to do.
I couldn’t just sit there and let it continue to happen.
I answered the call. The call of the abused apostrophe.
Though I love, LOVE my children’s school, I am sometimes surprised by the notes that come home. Notes about “Dress-down Fridays” bothered me greatly. They bothered me because they advertised “Dress Down Friday’s.”
I could hear the abused apostrophe screaming.
I let it go, for a time.
But tonight in the PTO meeting, I heeded the call. The chair asked for corrections to the minutes. I saw my opportunity and took it. I begged him to allow Friday to be plural, not possessive. “Let the minutes reflect the change,” said the chair. And the apostrophe and I wept.
Afterward, a couple of other parents thanked me. And there was much rejoicing.
Posted in Grammar, etc., tagged Academics, Bright ideas, Kids, Parenting, Peeves on January 3, 2010| 6 Comments »
In the words of that prophet Whitney Houston, “I believe that children are our future. Teach them well and let them lead the way.” Yet how are they supposed to learn correct English when adults don’t even know?
Case in point: The “top secret” file that came with Dominic’s Iron Man action figure.
There are two glaring errors of the homonym variety. The first readers of this blog who identify the two errors win lovely virtual prizes.
Posted in Grammar, etc., tagged Academics, AP Style, Bright ideas, Food, Kids, Peeves, Signs, Students on December 22, 2009| Leave a Comment »
Dominic asked me last night what I asked for from Santa Claus for Christmas. I said I had everything I needed. That’s true. But like most folks, I have an Amazon wish list in case Santa wants to reward me for being a good girl this year. (Though I’m sure I’ve spent time on the naughty list too.)
There are a couple of things I can’t add to Amazon, though, that are in keeping with my role as the grammar guru. One is a Grammar Nerd Corrective Label Pack. (I actually thought about making my own.) In that same vein, another site sells copyeditor marks, but the site appears to be down right now (in the biggest purchasing season of all, no less). And there are a bunch of other funny grammar-themed items out there. There’s also the AP Stylebook iPhone app. For regular readers of this blog who wondered if I won the Thanksgiving contest with my haiku, I did not. I was a little pissed, because I did not think the winning entries were better than mine. Yes, I know I’m biased. Judge for yourself. Here are the winners:
What I really want is time. Or maybe a clone. The clone could work on the research for my dissertation, and I’ll do the fun stuff like teaching, preparing for class, and hanging out with Eddie and the boys. I implemented a No Work Week this week, and I plan to make gingerbread people with the boys today. Wish me luck!
Posted in Grammar, etc., tagged Peeves, Requests, Who vs. whom on December 19, 2009| Leave a Comment »
(Another “by request” post!)
People really seem to have a hard time with “who” and “whom.” The difference is that “who” is the subject and “whom” is the object.
Examples:
Who ate all the banana bread? “Who” is the subject who did the action. (In this case, it was Eddie.)
To whom did Tom give head lice? Here, “Tom” is the subject who gave lice to some unfortunate soul. (And that’s just a joke.)
Here is a trick: If you can replace the word with “him,” use “whom” (think “m”). If you can replace it with “he,” use “who.” Rewrite the sentence to see if it makes sense.
To whom would you like to speak? I would like to speak to him.
Who shall I say is calling? You can say he is calling.
Now I’m off to make more banana bread before the phone starts ringing and my head begins to itch.
Posted in Grammar, etc., tagged Academics, Peeves, Requests on December 18, 2009| 2 Comments »
By request (A request! How exciting!), here is a tutorial about “that,” “which” and “who.”
First, let’s tackle “that” vs. “who.” It is easy: Use “who” when you are referring to people, and “that” when you are referring to things. If you feel strongly about your pets, they can be “who” too.
Examples:
The man who gave me “The International” now lives in Richmond Hill.
Trish is the chicken who lives with us.
The cops shot the chimp that ripped off that lady’s face. (You could use “who” here, but I prefer not to give that level of respect to that particular chimp.)
The book that sits on my nightstand is some trashy romance novel.
Now let’s talk about “that” vs. “which,” which seems to be more difficult. THAT was the proper use of “which.” Use it only when you can use a comma before it. Otherwise, use “that.” In other words, “that” is a crucial part of the sentence and describes a particular kind of thing, and “which” begins a clause that could be thrown out if necessary.
Examples:
Heidi and John held a New Year’s Eve party that resulted in a five-alarm fire.
Heidi and John’s New Year’s Eve party, which resulted in a five-alarm fire, was the talk of the neighborhood.
See the difference? Many academics don’t. Now you are smarter than a 20th grader.
 | Beth on You like sarcasm? You’ll… |
 | Martha Kennedy on You like sarcasm? You’ll… |
| Beth on I’d like my taco to go … |
 | kfirebaugh2015 on I’d like my taco to go … |
| Beth on I’d like my taco to go … |
Observe and report 