The Grammar Logs
#568

I took this sentence from Time magazine.. is this right?

Because some people do read them, and a tiny fraction actually respond — which in the world of direct marketing is like money in the e-bank.

Mathematical expressions like "majority" and "percentage" and "a fraction" can be a bit tricky. Are you referring to the singular mathematical entity or are you referring to the individuals who make up that entity? In this case, I have to go along with Time (although I'd much rather agree with you). We're thinking of the individuals within that tiny fraction and how they respond (plural verb).

What is the plural of Content? Is the followoing correct: "The page displays a list of contents provided by the Content provider"?

The noun "content" usually refers to something nonmaterial: the content of a book, of a legal case, etc. And it takes a singular noun. The word we use much more frequently, "contents," refers always to material things: the contents of a box, the table of contents, etc. And it takes a plural noun when it appears by itself. Your "list of contents provided by the content provider" is fine. Because the phrase "list of contents" refers to a countable list of things, it requires that countable sense of material objects, so we want "contents."

What comes after "rather than" is always grammatically equivalent to what comes before the phrase. For example, "They must combine their efforts rather than fight each other," and "I am watching TV rather than preparing for the test tomorrow." Collins Cobuild English Dictionary illustrates the phrase by offering a few sentences, only to bewilder me. There are two sentences that are inconsistent with each other:

1. Rather than break her appointment and disappoint me, Katie again took the car.
2. She made students think for themselves, rather than telling them what to think.

One of my friends suggests that (1) is grammatically wrong and (2) is correct, for he argues that a gerund should go after "rather than." Still, I remain confused. I am aware of the rule that "rather than" connects two grammatical equivalents as shown in the sentences in the above passage. If we should stick with this rule, then both (1) and (2) are ought to be modified a little bit. The two sentences in the above passage are derived from a grammar book. I cannot understand why these four sentences seem to contradict with one another in the use of "rather than."

When "rather than" is used as a conjunction, it is important to make the two things thus connected parallel in form: "I like working in a bakery rather than working in a factory." But sometimes "rather than" is a preposition, and then the two things being compared will not necessarily be in the same form. That's what happening in your second sentence about the students thinking for themselves. A nearly identical sentence is in Bryan Garner's guide: "Rather than staying home on a Saturday night, we went out to six different bars."

From The Oxford Dictionary of American Usage and Styleby Bryan Garner. Copyright 1995 by Bryan A. Garner. Published by Oxford University Press, Inc., www.oup-usa.org, and used with the gracious consent of Oxford University Press.

Is it correct to use "to be" after "consider"? And which one of the following sentences is good:

• He reached the office "in" time.
or

• He reached the office "on" time.

Thank you

Let's say we're talking about the viability of a candidate for political office. We could say "We considered him the best candidate," "We considered him to be the best candidate," and "We considered him as the best candidate." The last one changes the meaning somewhat and is the least common and desirable of the three, but all three are in general use and are acceptable.

As for your question about being "in time" or "on time," the difference is that "on time" means that he arrived there punctually, exactly when he was supposed to get there. "In time" probably suggests that he was supposed to be there for a specific purpose or reason and he arrived just when he had to. Or it could mean that something happened that required his services or attention (an emergency, perhaps) and he arrived in a timely manner so that he could take care of the matter. Both idioms are quite acceptable.

Authority: The New Fowler's Modern English Usage edited by R.W. Burchfield. Clarendon Press: Oxford, England. 1996. Used with the permission of Oxford University Press.

I would like to know what is the specific use of Inverted word order, or the negative words. For example: rarely, scarecely, hardly ever, never, seldom, not until, nowhere and nowhere else. Some have said that its inteded use is to stress the negativity of the sentence, while others say that it is to express strong emotion.

• Ex. I rarely go to my girlfriend's house.
• Rarely do I go to my girlfriend's house.

When negative words like "scarcely, rarely, seldom" precede the subject, they are attended by an inverted word order (as you point out). If there is an additional emphasis on strong emotion, however, it is due to the use of the emphatic "do," as in that example you give us. Without that "do," however, the negative word coming at the beginning of the sentence will still tend to emphasize the negative quality of the adverb a bit, yes.

• I have seldom seen our people work this hard.
• Seldom have I seen our people work this hard.

If the Center had to pay for this venue, which is ideal, it would cost close to $10,000 for the week.

It is ambiguous. We can't say for sure whether the "which" is referring to only the venue or the notion that the Center will have to pay for the venue. It appears to be the latter, but one is left with the impression that the former is intended. The sentence will have to be recast, perhaps with an appositive:

If the Center had to pay for this venue, an ideal location, it would cost close to $10,000 for the week.

I am aware that in a correlative conjunction pair, the verb agrees with the subject closest to it. Does the same rule apply to pronoun reference (gender)?

Example:

Neither John nor Sally did HER work. (?)

How about "their" work?

The problem with the "her" is that it leaves us wondering if John was just pitching in on work that had been assigned to Sally or is he simply being left out. The problem with the "their" is that we really shouldn't use a plural possessive pronoun in a situation where there is no plural antecedent. In casual speech and in most informal writing, we would probably use "their," and no one would object or even notice. The best solution to the problem, however, would be to rewrite the sentence and use another modifier: "Neither John nor Sally did the work that had been assigned."

Which is correct?

1. We would like to wish all our tenants a safe & happy holiday weekend.
or

2. We would like to wish all of our tenants a safe & happy holiday weekend.

Thanks!

The "all of" construction is simply a more casual (and slightly less preferred) version of "all" without the "of." The only exception is when a possessive noun follows the "all," and then you really need the "of," as in "All of Proulx's novels are worth buying." May I suggest that instead of liking to wish your tenants a nice weekend, you simply do so.

"Classification as contained above is based upon the degree of independent control that a teacher has to develop his own schedule as well as class size and the availability of an aide."

Question: Does classification depend upon a combination of all three factors, or could one or two factors stand alone to determine classification?

I have to believe that the intent of the sentence is to say that classification depends on three things. But the effect of the "as well as" (as opposed, say, to "and") is to make the last two factors more or less ancillary. We have another problem with the verb "has" because we tend to read "has to develop" as an expression of obligation, but that's not how it's being used. Wouldn't we be much better off simply enumerating the three factors that determine classification? 1) a teacher's independent control of his own schedule, 2) class size, and 3) the availability of an aide. I also hope the word "contained" makes sense in context.

In the following sentence, please tell me if the appropriate word is its or their and why: Hughes Supply hosted yet another event to celebrate ITS/THEIR 75th anniversary and to highlight their services to prospective and current customers in the Tampa market.

The name of a company can be either singular or plural (take singular or plural verbs and have singular or plural pronouns refer to it) depending on whether we're thinking of it as a singular entity or as a group of individual people (workers, stockbrokers, managers, etc.) Usually, it's singular, but the plurality in your sentence, the sense of people doing something together, argues for the use of "their." Consistency is important, of course, and I wish I could say I've been consistent in my answer to questions like this.

Authority: The Gregg Reference Manual by William A. Sabin. 9th Edition. McGraw-Hill: New York. 2001. Used with the consent of Glencoe/McGraw-Hill. p. 241.

Previous Grammar Log

Next Grammar Log

Index of Grammar Logs

Guide to Grammar and Writing