Even the best of us have off days. I’m in the midst of writing six MBA application recommendations for one of my former super star consultants who is applying to the top MBA programs in the nation. As such, I am mortified to admit that I used the non-word “impactful” in his Harvard recommendation. Although not nearly as egregious as the pitiful business grammar I witness on a daily basis, I sincerely hope he is not given demerits for having a slang-infested review attached to his application.
That being said, I have to vent. The following bullet points list some of the grammatical errors I've spotted this week that have driven me to brink of bonker-dom (yes, I realize that is not a word). If I can rescue even one person from grammatical ghetto-fabulosity (yes, I realize that too is not a word) with this blog post I’ll be content.
- If you post a picture of yourself, what should the caption read? The answer is “me” or some variation thereof (e.g. “this is me” or “picture of me doing X”). So why then, when people post pictures of themselves with friends or significant others, do they caption the photo “Boyfriend and I”? Does the addition of another entity in a picture warrant a change in the subject? Would you ever say “I and boyfriend”? Exactly. You cannot use "I" without a corresponding verb. Captions like those make me want to poke knives into my eyeballs.
- I absolutely loathe the incorrect matching of pronoun to subject. I have already commented on Fergie’s blatant misuse. A singular subject requires a singular pronoun, period. When referring to a distinct person, you must use “his or her” not “their”. A doctor does not treat “their” patient; a doctor treats his patient. A child does not miss “their” blanket; a child misses her blanket.
- On a similar note, I groan audibly when I notice writers slaughtering the pronouns “who” (referring to people) and “that” (referring to groups or things). You cannot say “people that” it’s just plain wrong. You would never say something as silly as “baseball tickets who”, so why would you use the word “that” when referring to your brethren? It’s “people who”, thank you very much.
- In addition, for the love of God, when will people stop referring to a company as “they” or “their”? McDonald’s does not sell a lot of “their” Big Macs. McDonald’s sells a lot of "its" Big Macs. Seriously people, did we grow up in a jungle? If you insist upon using “their” when referring to the achievements of a corporation then please insert a human entity into the sentence. “McDonald’s managers sell a lot of their Big Macs” would be correct.
- Keep your punctuation inside your "quotes," unless otherwise directed by Arjewtino. Thanks.
I do not have perfect grammar (please comment on any flaws you might spot in my posts), but it’s pretty damn solid compared to the atrocities I read in the average correspondence (whether blog or business deliverable, 90% of you are killing me with your grade school errors!). My advice: read a few more books or newspapers instead of browsing the internet so much. At least then you’ll realize that “impactful” is not a legitimate word…
9 comments:
We hire people who supposedly can write. College grads mostly. It's a requirement that we have a 'substantial' writing sample from you before we can consider you, as most of the job entails writing for deadline. This of course eliminates 80% of all our applicants. The ones that send in the sample mind you, which is perhaps at best 1/3-1/4 of all applicants Told to include a writing sample. The easy ones are the plagiarists, we usually need no fancy program to sot them out, it's painfully obvious that they're using some sort of PR boilerplate from somewhere.
But we typically slog though misspellings in resumes and people who really have a difficult time putting together a complete and convincing simple English paragraph. Strangely enough, our best performers have been immigrants who's first language at home may not have been English, or who were trained abroad. We pay well above the prevailing wage & with good benefits too. Still we are at our wits end because these folks simply can't or won't proof their work before it goes out to some of the largest financial orgs in the world.
It's the simple stuff that was covered in our 6th grade classes that kills us. Many countless & fruitless hours are spent doing basic proofs for college grads or even grad students who write like they're still forever in their tweens. It's sad & infuriating. We might be able to afford to hire half again as many staff as we have, but for their poor proficiency in simple writing and our need to constantly watch and edit & re-proof every move they make. That and the proverbial <35hr work week for much of the staff completes the picture for many a similar average small business (FIRE sector) I suspect. It's tough considering they might be paid double what the average school teacher might be getting anywhere in the state. We're thinking about liberating some of those folks next if possible for any expansion plans.
Then we can move on to basic math skills. 'Sally why is it important that you're sums tie out at the end here in this multi-million dollar property?' 'You didn't think it was important enough to check the spreadsheets for consistency?' 'How many ways did you come to calculate this rate schedule?' 'Do you think you might replicate it for us before you leave to pick up your delicate tyke at 3PM?'
Honestly, you've got little idea of the size of the problem here! Cheers & Good Luck, 'VJ'
VJ!! My loyal and faithful reader. Dare I point to paragraph one, sentence four, which should read "The ones who..."
You did that on purpose! ;-)
Don't forget "whose" and "your vs you're."
I think you should hire me.
yes. thank you.
I would like to add another example that (who? Nah, that) has been bugging me recently. Using "her" instead of "she".
Though I agree, in principle, with your "put punctuation inside quotes" comment, there are some exceptions. For example, in my first paragraph.
We should make this a monthly feature, though I think the only people interested might just be you, myself, and Kathryn.
And Namaste, of course.
http://www.bartleby.com/61/0/W0140000.html:
Some grammarians have argued that only who and not that should be used to introduce a restrictive relative clause that identifies a person. This restriction has no basis either in logic or in the usage of the best writers; it is entirely acceptable to write either the woman that wanted to talk to you or the woman who wanted to talk to you.
http://www.bartleby.com/68/28/4128.html:
Notional agreement gives us sentences like these from British English: The government are eager to compromise. Manchester United are ahead, three to nil. Americans would use is in both sentences, having different notions of the entities government and athletic team.
Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of English Usage page 902:
The examples [of singular they] from Chaucer to the present are not lapses. They are uses following a normal pattern in English that was established four centuries before the 18th-century grammarians invented the solecism. The plural pronoun is one solution devised by native speakers of English to a grammatical problem inherent in the language - and it is by no means the worst solution.
You know I was desperately hoping to be tag teamed there! Damn, there goes my first New Year's Resolution! Cheers & Keep Smiling... 'VJ'
Don't worry VJ - I got called out for bad punctuation in my very own post...
Anon - did you find anything regarding "Boyfriend and I" style captions?
Object position "X and I" is found:
Now Margerat's curse is fall'n upon our heads
When she exclaimed on Hastings, you, and I...
Shakespeare, Richard III
It's treated as a polite fixed unit (Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of English Usage p 778). It's especially common in the construction "between you and I". It can't be due to hypercorrection since it antedates the teaching of English grammar.
I'm totally getting you "Eats, Shoots, and Leaves" for your birthday. Once I remember when your birthday is.
I only slightly disagree on one point, and that's the McDonald's point. You could be referring to the company as a collection of individuals (as in a team), which would make "their" ok. At least, that's my understanding of it.
"How did Notre Dame do?"
"They did pretty well."
To split the hair somewhat further, this is even more appropriate given that McDonald's is actually a collection of franchises, individual business owners under a corporate umbrella (ella ella).
So yeah. Sign me up next to Arj and Kathryn, apparently. People always look at me funny when they find me, the engineer, correcting their grammar (and scoring in the high 90th percentile on the verbal GMAT, even). Wordnerd, table for 1, please...
Post a Comment