Ask the English Teacher

The 2010 list of banished words

After the winter solstice, the days get longer and Lake Superior State University publishes its yearly Banished Words List. Last year it included terms like "staycation," "iconic," "game changer" and "not so much" —all of which can now be used only ironically. This year's banned words include "shovel-ready" and "friend" as a verb.

What are the new words and expressions that you think should be banned?

When English is correct but awful

Stanley Fish, writing in the New York Times, has a wonderful column: And the Winner: ‘No Problem’. Here's an excerpt, but read the whole thing:

“I’m as mad as hell, and I’m not going to take this anymore!” That famous declaration by Howard Beale in the movie “Network” is the implicit and sometimes explicit message of the many hundreds of responses to last week’s column on phrases and announcements that make your heart sink and make you want to commit mayhem. 

“Rage” was a word often used as readers accepted my invitation to add their own (non) favorites to my small list. By my count, the top preferred un-preferred phrase was “No problem” in response to “Thank you” (disliked either because it suggests a problem caused by you will be graciously ignored or that no problem existed when you know it did). 

That was followed by “Batteries Not Included,” “Are you still working on that?” (asked by a waiter who wants to get rid of you), “For your convenience” (always a preliminary to inconvenience), “Have a nice day” and one I did cite, “Your call is important to us.”

Team and organization names: Singular or plural?

Zorylee writes:

I have a question that has been boggling my brother and me.

Many sports team names have an S at the end,  NY Yankees, Green Bay Packers, etc.

Now my question is when you shorten the name and just say Yankees, Packers, etc I've heard a lot of people remove the S at the end of the team name.  

For example:  "I'm a Yankee fan."  "We're Packer fans." "A Packer first down."  etc.

Now is that correct usage of the team name?  Shouldn't the S only be dropped when it's talking about a specific player on the team?

For example:  "Alex Rodriguez is a Yankee."  "Brett Favre used to be a Packer."

Can team names be singularized when it doesn't refer to a specific player on that team?

Good questions! Technically, I guess we ought to say "I'm a Yankees fan," but widespread usage makes "I'm a Yankee fan" acceptable. And of course we can describe an individual team member as a Yankee or a Packer.

But you bring up an intriguing point: Many company and organization names end in a plural but are singular: "General Motors is in a lot of trouble." "The Canadian Auto Workers is conceding some points." Logically (if English were ever logical), we should also say, "The New York Yankees is in the World Series." But we always seem to treat teams as plurals if their names end in s.

Just to make it even stranger, in Britain team names are plural: "Manchester United have been dominating the game." "Arsenal United are looking for a new striker." And "government," which is thoroughly singular in North America, is plural in Britain: "The government are rejecting the proposal." 

This is why English teachers will always have work.

What's "correct" English?

A reader wrote:

I'm sorry to disagree with some of the things you tell people, but one of your answers on your homepage is too obvious to be just ignored. You state that  "In informal English, most people would say "Neither Joan OR Jane LIKE sushi." That's all right in conversation." This is certainly bloody nonsense. I don't think you should advise people to say  "neither.......or", and it's certainly NOT all right in conversation, but just very bad and uneducated English  ........just as using a plural verb with a singular noun makes no sense. It's definitely not "all right in conversation", and it's certainly not just in "formal writing" that one should use a singular verb with "neither".   -perhaps in certain parts of America, but never in England.  I think that what you offer people here is very poor advice,telling them to be content with nonsensical phrases. ......or perhaps you think I haven't got no sense of no conversational English nowhere ??   And I replied:

In conversation, it takes seriously crippled social skills to keep correcting other people's usage--especially if they speak a different dialect. I can do it (one of my incarnations is the English Inquisition, which no one expects), but what's the point? I wasn't advising people to use "neither/or"--I said that most people, using informal English, would say it. And in talking with such persons, I'd say "neither/nor" and they'd understand me just as I would understand them. Unless the topic of conversation were the superiority of my particular dialect, I would no more correct their usage than I would put salt and pepper on their eggs. Whatever the usage might be in England (and which parts of England, and which classes?), English has long since escaped into the larger world. English in Singapore or South Africa has its own usage rules, mostly unwritten. A young woman in Iran sends me her poems in English; I correct her usage where she's ungrammatical or simply confusing, but Farsi-flavoured English is just another contribution to the language. Even the Oxford English Dictionary is descriptive, not prescriptive. It's the biography of the language as it was written, spoken, used and abused over a thousand years, not an outline of what English would have been if only it had been properly managed. So while I don't agree with your basic position, I'm grateful that you took the trouble to write. I haven't posted anything new on Ask the English Teacher in ages, and you've raised a point worth discussing with a larger audience.

Negatives with no positives

Florence asked:

Why is there the word Insouciant but not the word Souciant in the English language?

I don't know, but it's a good addition to a long list of negatives with no positives:

People are often disgruntled, but no matter what you do, you can never gruntle them.

No hairdresser or tailor, finding you dishevelled, can hevel you. And if you're unkempt, you will never be kempt again.

If you face your opponents and find yourself dismayed, even if allies come to rescue you won't be mayed. 

If you face a challenge badly, you may be disconcerted. Face it well, though, and no one will ever say: "You were very concerted!" 

You're nonchalant when you don't show emotion. Even so, no one will say "You were really chalant," if you get upset.

If you feel bad about something, you have misgivings. But however optimistic you are, you never say: "I have givings about this."

When you take something apart, you dismantle it. But you'll never mantle it by putting it together again.

Did something startle you? You were disturbed. But when were you ever turbed?

Give the teacher the wrong answer, and she'll say: "No, I think you're mistaken." Give her right answer, and she'll never say: "Excellent! You're taken!"

Your room will never be immaculate, at least in your mother's eyes, but she never told you: "Your room is maculate! Clean it up right now!"

Can you think of any other negatives with no positives?

Does President Obama make English errors?

Russell Smith in the Globe and Mail often writes about English usage, and I thought I'd share this morning's column with you: Obama stands corrected. Here's the start of the column:

Barack Obama's supposed grammatical gaffes have stirred up the hornet's nest of disagreement between grammarians and historians, and we're back to arguing about an old topic: I and me. 

It has been pointed out by various reporters that Obama, like a nervous junior librarian, has a tendency to hypercorrection. At his first press conference as President-elect, he said, “President Bush graciously invited Michelle and I to meet with him and first lady Laura Bush.” 

He should have said “Michelle and me,” of course, according to contemporary convention. He frequently makes this mistake, actually, in phrases such as “a very personal decision for Michelle and I.” 

You say I when it's the subject of the verb, me when it's the object, direct or indirect. The preposition “for” takes an object – you don't say “a very personal decision for I.” 

People probably make this mistake because they are trying to sound educated, and they were told in childhood not to say “Me and Johnny are going to the store,” but “Johnny and I are going to the store.” (Hence the term hypercorrection.) Or at least that's what we all agree today.

It's a widespread usage; I've even heard my English-teacher colleagues say "for John and I." As Smith points out, the rigid "I-me" distinction didn't appear until the late 19th century. As a student I got the distinction drilled into me, and it grates a bit to hear it ignored.

But as Smith points out in his article (and as I used to tell my students), it's much more "natural" to say "It's me" instead of "It's I," which is technically the correct usage.

When English is Scottish

Today is New Year's Eve, and it's traditional in English-speaking to sing "Auld Lang Syne." But very few people really know what "auld lang syne" actually means.

According to Wikipedia, the expression is actually from a Scottish dialect of English. Literally, it means "old long since," but we would normally say "a long time ago." The lyrics are also in the Wikipedia post, complete with a pronunciation guide.

A "cup of kindness" means the custom of drinking something alcoholic in honour of someone or some thing. We may also hold a drink in our hand and say: "Here's to you," or "To your good health!" or  "Cheers!" or "Happy new year!" before taking a sip of the drink.

A related custom is called "drinking a toast," which is somewhat more formal. At large celebrations, a "toastmaster" may lead the drinkers: "Gentlemen, a toast to Her Majesty the Queen!" followed by "A toast to the Duke of Edinburgh!" (the queen's husband), and so on. As mentioned on the page about toasting, if the person being toasted is present, he or she is expected to stand up and offer a brief reply.

Wherever you may be, and however you celebrate it, I wish you a very happy, prosperous and peaceful new year.

Going "a-calling"

Gloria asks:

What is the meaning of the following phrase:

Suitors went ‘a-calling’

The “a-” prefix was once common in many English words. It can mean “out,” “in,” “on,” “up,” or “of.” We still see it in some very old writing: “Let’s go a-Maying” (let’s go out and enjoy the spring weather); “he went a-hunting” (he went out to hunt). So in your example, suitors went “out calling” on some attractive woman or women.

We also have the prefix “buried” in other words: aboard (on board a ship), asleep (in sleep), arise (rise up), akin (in a family), anew (from a new start).

Be careful not to confuse this usage with another “a”  and “an” prefix that comes from Greek and Latin and means “not” or “without”: amoral (without morals), anarchy (without government), apathy (without feeling or interest).

Thanks for a good question!

Subject-verb agreement

A reader sent me the following sentences and asked if the underlined words are the subjects. They are, and here's why:

1. Neither of my two suitcases is adequate for this trip.

"Neither" means "not this one and not that one." "of my two suitcases" is just a prepositional phrase, explaining what "neither" means, but a prepositional phrase can't be the subject. (However, as we'll see, it can So when "neither" refers to two, the subject has to be singular.

2.  Neither the teacher nor the students seem to understand this assignment.

Here, "neither" introduces two possible subjects, "teacher" and "students." In this case, the subject is either singular (teacher) or plural (students). In this case, the verb has to agree with the closer of the two possible subjects...in this case, "students." So "seem" is the correct verb form.

3. Some of the grain has gone bad.

"Some" can be singular or plural depending on the number of the noun in the prepositional phrase that follows it. "Grain" is singular, so the verb is "has gone." But if we wrote "Some of the students ___ gone home," the verb would be "have," to agree with "students."

4. John or his brother is going to be responsible for this.

The subject is "John" or "brother," but not both. Each is singular. So a singular subject takes a singular verb.

5. Has either my father or my brothers made a down payment on the house?

Like #2, the verb agrees with the closer noun, which in this case is the singular, "father." Turn it around, and the verb is plural: "Have either my brothers or my father made a down payment on this house?"

6. A few of the students are doing so well they can skip the next course.

"Few" is plural, so the verb is "are." But here are some variations:

"One of the students is doing so well that he or she can skip the next course." (If we know that the student is male or female, however, we can use just the right pronoun.)

"A number of students are doing so well that they..."

But if we need to use "The number," we switch to singular:

"The number of students who can skip the next course is very small."
  

"You know"

Art asks:

When did "you know" enter the English language?  When I listen to  people talk, "you know" is spoken about 25 times a minute!  It irritates me to no end and I want to respond that NO I DON'T know!  I would think an English teacher would put a stop to this in our schools!  What gives?

"You know" is a "vocalized pause"—a sound we make when we're trying to think of the next word or phrase. In some people, it becomes an ingrained habit, and yes, it can be irritating.

But don't expect English teachers to stamp out vocalized pauses! If we tried, we wouldn't have time to teach anything else. (Besides, we English teachers are major producers of vocalized pauses. Anyone who's survived an English course knows that.)

While "you know" is a familiar vocalized pause, it's not the only one. Other popular noises include "uh," "um," "like," "Omigod," and (at least in Canada) "eh?" Among politicians, "going forward" is a big hit.

In my public-speaking classes, I urged students not to resort to vocalized pauses in their presentations. They make the speaker sound nervous, and the vocalized pause becomes distracting. When you're reaching for that next word, I told them, you'll get more attention if you ... remain silent ... until the next word comes to you.