Grammar Police (What ticks you off?)

Neller

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Posts
170
Media
0
Likes
127
Points
78
Location
Illinois
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
In keeping with Fuzzy's previous post of putting modifiers as close to the verb as possible, here's another thing that irks Fuzzy: the placement of only.

  1. Only Jane drives her car on the sidewalk.
  2. Jane drives her only car on the sidewalk.
  3. Jane drives her car only on the sidewalk.
  4. Jane only drives her car on the sidewalk.
Here are Fuzzy's interpretations:

1 implies that Jane, and nobody else, drives her car on the sidewalk.
2 implies that Jane has no more than one car.
3 implies that Jane drives her car on the the sidewalk and nowhere else.
4 implies that Jane performs no tasks other than driving her car on the sidewalk.

Fuzzy often sees 3 and 4 interchanged, as if the authors don't think that the placement matters, as long as the modifier is close to the verb. But the order does matter.

If Fuzzy were to convey that Jane does more than just drive her car but when she drives her car, she does so on sidewalks and nowhere else, Fuzzy would say: "Jane drives her car only on the sidewalk." However, it seems that many-- if not most-- people prefer to say: "Jane only drives her car on the sidewalk." The problem is that, looking at syntactic structure and scope, only is much broader in the latter proposition -- it is too broad because, as stated above, it suggests that Jane does nothing but drive her car.

Does anyone disagree?

I don't think your interpretation is necessarily wrong, but I think 3 and 4 mean the same thing to most people because it's not reasonable to assume that a person does just one single thing. It doesn't make any sense to think Jane drives a car on the sidewalk and that's all she ever does. I think if you wanted that interpretation you'd have to explicitly state she does that one thing in her life and nothing else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fuzzy_

Mr Fixit

Legendary Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Posts
531
Media
20
Likes
1,402
Points
138
Location
N/W Australia - on the fringe of the Indian Ocean
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
One of my pet grammatical hates is the misuse of the words "less" and "fewer". Broadly speaking, less is correct when the subject is singular or generic - eg: less money, less rain - and fewer is correct when the subject is plural - eg fewer dollars, fewer raindrops.

I hate reading or hearing things like "there are less fans here tonight" or "I wish this recipe included less ingredients".

Let's hear it for the word fewer. It's in danger of extinction!
 

yhtang

Superior Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2006
Posts
2,433
Media
32
Likes
3,182
Points
343
Location
Malaysia
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
One of my pet grammatical hates is the misuse of the words "less" and "fewer". Broadly speaking, less is correct when the subject is singular or generic - eg: less money, less rain - and fewer is correct when the subject is plural - eg fewer dollars, fewer raindrops.

I hate reading or hearing things like "there are less fans here tonight" or "I wish this recipe included less ingredients".

Let's hear it for the word fewer. It's in danger of extinction!


I was taught that fewer is used for countable nouns, while less is used for uncountable nouns.
 

Calboner

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Aug 16, 2007
Posts
9,028
Media
29
Likes
7,893
Points
433
Location
USA
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
I was taught "less in amount, fewer in number"….
This is exactly right. Certainly, one says, "My present car has had fewer [not "less"] mechanical problems than its predecessor," and "My present car has less [not "fewer"] room in the trunk," but if one is talking about the capacity of the fuel tank, one would say, "It holds less than [not "fewer than"] 15 gallons." Even though gallons are countable, in this instance one is talking about an amount of fuel rather than a number of units.
 

ConanTheBarber

Legendary Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2011
Posts
5,314
Media
0
Likes
2,110
Points
258
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male

yhtang

Superior Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2006
Posts
2,433
Media
32
Likes
3,182
Points
343
Location
Malaysia
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
I have been reading some (ahem, adult) stories on the internet written by amateur writers.

Why is it that I often see writers - and assuming art imitates life, people cannot differentiate the meaning of the nodding and the shaking of the head?

In most places - the nodding of the head i.e. the head moving in an up and down motion, indicates agreement or willingness.

The shaking of the head i.e. the head oscillating left and right, indicates disagreement or unwillingness.

Unless the events are taking place in Greece and the characters are Greek, I cannot see how anyone can mix up the two. For those interested, in Greece, and a few other nearby countries, a sharp tilt of the head upwards indicates the negative.

Apologies, for this is not quite a matter of grammar, but I just have to get it off my chest.
 

Fuzzy_

Legendary Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2011
Posts
4,253
Media
0
Likes
1,105
Points
258
Location
Wuziland
Gender
Male
"Sarah moved sexily across the room." Not only is this poor writing ("sexily" is so vague that it's useless) but "sexily" is a very lazy word.

"Linda crooked her finger at Bob." Is "crooked" the right word to motion somebody to come over? Is there such a word, or must you describe the action? "Linda made a gesture of repeatedly hooking her finger to signal Bob to come closer" is verbose and technical.