Beyond the Elements of Style

Subjunctive, Anyone?

A client recently confessed to me, “I wouldn’t know the subjunctive if it bit me on the nose!” He sounded, if anything, somewhat pleased with the assertion, and part of me mourned as I heard it … just as I mourn the passing of any part of the language I love so well.

It reminded me of a conversation with Terry Bates, publisher of a wonderful series of ESL books, and I happily received Terry’s permission to reprint that conversation here:

Many people insist that English use the subjunctive mood more. This will probably never happen looking at the tendency during the last one hundred years. Other languages still heavily apply the subjunctive and this can be an essential learning experience for English speakers who usually have a weak subjunctive understanding.

First of all, you must remember that the subjunctive is not a verb tense in the sense of directly expressing time. Rather, it tries more to express attitude or manner. For that reason it is called mood.

The structure of the subjunctive in English is very easy in relation to other languages. It usually uses the root or base form and that’s it. Other languages go through very complicated conjugations of which are sometimes even difficult for native speakers. Even modern English has some complicated subjunctive structures. Many wish that the subjunctive were easier to understand.

In the examples that you give (”If she finish the day without company,” “unless she be blonde,” and “whether he do it or not”), they all express condition. If, unless, and whether communicate a sense of condition. Put into their historical context, they are put into a subjunctive mood.

Modal auxiliaries are related to mood. Notice that the word modal comes from the word mood. With the modal auxiliaries we express requests, possibilities, necessities, intentions, ability, etc. The English language has developed a very complicated and intricate use of modals for daily expression. This could be a answer to the slow loss of the subjunctive mood.

Mood and modals expose a very interesting aspect of language. They go beyond the superficial act of simple communication and begin to reveal the human condition. They reflect a people, their culture and the way they deal with each other. By fully understanding mood and modals, you begin to be more aware of the language and life of a society whether it be in the historical past or in the present.

The use of mood and modals is in constant change reflecting the change of society and the communication it demands. Even though many people feel that it is necessary that language stay static, changes within the English language reflect modifications that have taken place with the cultural demands of its speakers. Language changes just don’t happen illogically. They are due to cultural and historical reasons which in many cases are deeply hidden within tradition and trends of a society.

May the subjunctive live forever!

Terry Bates
terrybates@andeanwinds.com
www.terrybates.andeanwinds.com

And I think you’ll agree that Terry Bates (and Andean Winds!) is far … beyond the elements of style!

Who or Whom? A Quick Cheatsheet

It comes up in working with clients and students alike, and over the holidays my stepdaughter asked me when to use “whom” versus “who” in writing. (There was no point in asking which ought to be used in speaking: she is thirteen, and firmly entrenched in the Sullen Adolescent Communication Syndrome, which appears to involve much more grunting, hissing, and gesturing than it does actual words.)

I gave Anastasia my standard explanation, after which she said, “huh?”

So here is my who/whom cheatsheet: for Anastasia, for students, for clients, for anyone who needs it: don’t think in terms of rules, think in terms of substitution.

And the general usage is, if you can substitute “she” for the troublesome word in the sentence, you should use “who.” If you can substitute “her,” the word should be “whom.”

Here’s an example: “Who/whom was supposed to walk the dog this morning?” Make it a statement: would you say, “She was supposed to walk the dog this morning,” or “Her was supposed to walk the dog this morning”? Clearly she; clearly who.

“To whom/whom were you speaking?” can easily be answered: “I was speaking to her,” therefore, “whom” is the correct word in that context.

There’s nothing wrong with a grammatical cheatsheet, as long as it points the user to better grammar usage! And by now I’m hoping that it will help Anastasia be … beyond the elements of style!

Alphabet Soup, Anyone?

Okay, count me in with the old fogies, the curmudgeons, those who speak of the good old days (even when, lurking in the backs of our minds, is the sure knowledge that there never was any such thing).

I love email. I love the fact that I don’t have to wait days or weeks for replies to questions I send out. I love the fact that I can email twice as many people in half the time it used to take me to write a note by hand or typewriter.

But … but. There’s email, which is a semi (at least) articulate form of communication, where typos may exist but are regarded with friendly acceptance, and yet which obey the general grammatical and stylistic rules to which we have all become accustomed.

And then there’s text-messaging-speech.

A member on a list to which I subscribe writes incessantly in text-message format. It’s not the silly abbreviations that bother me as much as the punctuation (or lack thereof) that follows no rule with which I am familiar, an almost complete absence of capital letters, and a rigorousness of thought to match.

It’s like reading messages written with alphabet cereal … in the bowl.

Perhaps as we move toward a new year we can remember that the point of all this is communication, and that rules of grammar and usage are in place for a reason: to facilitate said communication. And then we’ll be … beyond the elements of style!

How Happy I Am To See You, He Burbled

A recent conversation with an editing client who was unsure as to when “said” could be replaced with “stated” brought up a whole lot of responses when I shared it with some colleagues. And it seems that a number of those responses are worth sharing here.

Many writers believe – mistakenly, to my point of view – that using “said” as a dialogue tag is to be avoided. Not so! The point of a dialogue tag is to be invisible: what you want readers to focus on is not how something was said, but on what was said. Using too many other words, some of which require mental gymnastics to read and assimilate, calls attention to the wrong place altogether.

One colleague introduced me to “Tom Swifties”: a word game where people compete to come up with particular apt over-the-top ways to avoid or embellish “said,” in the manner of the Tom Swift series of boys’ books, as in:

There’s room for one more, Tom admitted.
I like modern painting, said Tom abstractedly.

And so on. I know what we’re playing the next time my family is on a long car trip!

“I am of the school,” says Chad Skaggs, a writer from Decatur, Georgia, “which maintains that “said” never can be overused. I will allow use of such words as “he screamed” or “she shouted” when that is what happened. When I was professing journalism I used to tell my students that “said” is like bread: It will go with almost anything without affecting the flavor. It adds no flavor of its own. In these ways it is unlike such terms as “he noted” (implies that it’s a fact of which he took note), “she retorted” (implies a snarkiness which may be inappropriate to her reply), “he stated” (suggests formality which may not have been there). Like bread, “said” will go with every meal without our being likely to notice it or tire of it. That’s not true of most other terms of attribution.”

My friend Katie, who teaches writing, has a lot to say on the topic. “I was first introduced to all these said-substitutes under the delightful term said-bookism. Apparently there was a spate of books published in the early years of the twentieth century listing alternatives for “said” so that writer could avoid the dread repetition.

Some writers whose work I enjoy and admire have a problem with said-bookisms, but I try to squelch the tendency among my students. In particular, I get rather emphatic on said-bookisms that are not methods of speaking. As I tell them, no one can smile a sentence.

Some verbs that produce sound also need be handled with extreme care: hissing sentences that have no S sounds in them, for example. Or my favorite, from one of my books. (This was a copy-edit from hell, from the writer’s POV.) By the third page, I’ve already established that my protagonist is irritated and has been dealing with prank phone calls. So the phone rings yet again. I had “She snatched it up. ‘Hello!’”

I thought this was perfectly clear. The CE felt it necessary to change this to “She snatched it up. ‘Hello!’ she barked into the phone.” YOU try barking that word. I promise, you’ll sound like Scooby-Doo. I got it put back the way I’d had it.

I cannot cite chapter and verse, alas, but I’ve read studies that have been done with readers that show the humble “said” is damned near invisible. Readers absorb it as a marker, without losing the thread of the dialogue. I believe they tracked eye movements. ALL the said-bookisms disrupted the flow.

For “state” and “say” specifically, I would point out that to state something implies a Jovian assurance. Take this pair of sentences:

“It’s cold,” she said.

“It’s cold,” she stated.

The first simply makes a simple declaration of an opinion. The second defies argument and makes the susceptible feel as though they’re personally responsible for the temperature!

One final note: when I warn my students about said-bookisms, I also tell them that one way of avoiding an overuse of “said” is to use what I call “action tags.” Took me a while to come up with a good concise definition and I’m open to suggested alterations, but here’s what I currently use. An action tag is one or more sentences that do NOT contain a quotation but which identify the speaker by means of a non-speech verb.
Example:

“It’s cold.” Katie shivered and crossed the room. The thermostat insisted it was seventy degrees. She shook her head. “I don’t care what that thing reads, it’s still cold in here!”

No confusion about who is speaking, action is incorporated into the dialogue, and I didn’t use the word said or any said-bookisms. Action tags are a fiction-writer’s friend. (But they work just as well in nonfiction.)

******
So there it is, she said. Use tags correctly and you’ll be … beyond the elements of style!

Grammar Factor? Any Takers?

Okay: I know that no one’s being taught to diagram sentences anymore, and that most people apparently believe in scattering apostrophes randomly when making nouns plural (a restaurant down the street from me is currently advertising Martini’s, which raises a whole lot of questions that I need to regretfully put aside for another essay); but as the geeks at Slashdot have pointed out this weekend, there’s little wonder when teachers – as one in California has done recently – issue homework “expections.” (Slashdot included the link, but I expect that the text will soon change; and that’s not the point here anyway: I come not to criticize errors but to bury them.)

Typo, you say? Hardly: the menu bar was carefully retyped with the same spelling. And the teacher doesn’t stop there: children, she notes, should be reading a minimum of 15 every night. Fifteen what, exactly? Not one to limit her enthusiasm as she limits her usage, she uses three exclamation points to emphasize her directions (most of us generally feel that one suffices). Puzzles are “fun activities that parents can help”– um, help do what? One could go on and on – it’s far too much fun, and too patently unfair, to pick something like this apart.

And it’s worse than you think. I entered “expections” in Google in order to locate this article — and came up with several more examples of its usage. All from teachers.

Don’t get me wrong: I’m glad that there are “expections” of students. And I have made errors far more grievous than these, myself, and just as publicly, so I feel for the teacher in question – and will even more so on Monday morning when she discovers that over the weekend her errors became internationally famous. But this is an example of why the restaurant down the street offers Martini’s, and why no one in this country could diagram a sentence — unless, perhaps, they were doing so as part of a reality-show challenge.

Maybe that’s what we need. “Grammar Factor” — the thrilling new program where you can win a million dollars by showing that you actually have some command of your native language.

Think anybody would apply?

Correct Grammar: Back in Style?

“Clauses and Commas Make a Comeback: SAT Helps Return Grammar to Class”

Yesterday’s Washington Post (http://tinyurl.com/y62s8j) carried an article about grammar coming back into style. The teacher profiled isn’t unique (and thank goodness for that – perhaps a new trend is starting!); and the article itself is full of generalizations and oversimplifications; but it’s a trend worth noting and applauding. Anything emphasizing the value of learning correct grammar, usage, and so on can only be… beyond the elements of style!

The Dreaded Apostrophe

Okay. I just have to start today with a rant.

If you’re going to correct someone, be sure, first, that you are correct.

I’ve been out of town for two weeks, and happened to be at a wonderful Portuguese bakery in Provincetown, Massachusetts, for breakfast one recent morning. A sign near the tables noted something to the effect that diners were asked to put the tray back in its place. Some cleverer-than-thou person had added an apostrophe between the “it” and the “s.”

No, no, a thousand times no!

I would venture to say that the weapon of choice for those whose intent is to mangle the English language is, was, and shall probably always be the apostrophe.

Let’s all take a quick refresher class on its use. Please also follow the link I have provided to the Apostrophe Protection Society: bookmark that link and go back and reference it any time you have any doubt as to whether or not an apostrophe is called for.

Contractions take apostrophes:

• It’s going to rain today!
• I’m reading that book now.
• She’s happy to be leaving at four.
• He can’t finish the assignment.

All of these sentences involve contractions: A contraction is a device showing us that some letters have been omitted, and is used in speaking and in informal writing. It is becomes it’s; I am becomes I’m; she is becomes she’s; cannot becomes can’t.

Noun possessives take apostrophes:

• Mary’s car is in the repair shop.
• My mother-in-law’s letter was short.
• We went to Clara and Tom’s show. (Note that only the second name takes the apostrophe and the s.)
• James’s music is still in the hall. (Note that even though James ends in an s, we still add an apostrophe and an additional s. James is still a singular, and the singular follows this rule.)
• It took five hours’ walking to get there! (Note that a plural places the apostrophe AFTER the s.)

Pronoun possessives DO NOT take apostrophes:

• The book should be in its place.
• That raincoat is his.
• Those are ours!

Dates do not take apostrophes (The exception appears to be the unfortunate style guide employed by the New York Times):

• I haven’t seen him since the 1990s.
• He was born in the 80s.

Master these few rules and you will not make the common mistakes we all see out “in the wild,” to wit:

• Banana’s are .49 a pound!
• Put it back in it’s place!
• That book is her’s!

By now, you should be able to tell why the three examples above are incorrect. Do that, and you’ll be… beyond the elements of style!

THIS JUST IN: Amazingly enough, even people who should know better make errors. Check out the jacket copy on a recent Philip Roth novel here: http://tinyurl.com/j5t4g