Was and Were/ My Achilles Heel

In oral communication I do, Phoenix. But it don't mean a thing. I try to be a little more careful when I commit my thoughts to paper or to cyberspace. Unless I'm trying to impress someone, I'm not particularly careful in my speech. I say ain't all the time and have convinced myself that there ain't nothing wrong with that.

Andrew- If you read my posts, I often use the word "ain't", "I dunno" and the like. It is an attempt to sound colloquial and casual. I would not use those words in writing a serious piece.

My father was a newspaper man. He was also the parent drafted to drive carloads of girl scouts, little leaguers, stranded school children...

When he heard a grammatical error from the back seat he would roar, "What", pull over to the side of the road and stop the car until the error was corrected by the offender.

I make very few grammatical errors. My father's ghost, you know.

Effect & affect are mine, Phoenix. The different meanings escape me, every single time. Any suggestions as to how I might fix this problem? A nifty little rhyme, or something, to help me remember?

I have the same problem with was and were, Phoenix, and it drives me nuts.

My papa was a newspaperman so we all had grammar drilled into us from conception. That one, however, apparently didn't get addressed.


Affect and effect - how to help you, msolga - good question.

The effect is the result of something, and affect produces an effect. That's probably no help to you. It's a tough one.

Thanks, Mame. I'll write that down & paste it on my computer. :wink:

These little ditties sure do help, don't they? For years I've relied on "30 days hath September, April June & November..." etc, etc, etc ...

I have several of them.

1. I can never remember which is which dessert or desert, and which is the food and which the arid place.

2. Also can't ever remember which is possessive and which is a contraction of "it."

3. And I sometimes mix up use of despite and in spite of.

These are the memory crutches I lean on for those:

1. Rattle Snake Pie is a dessert that causes lots of hissing complaints by the unmarried sidewinders in the dry desert. (double s in hissing reminds me that the sweet thing has two s's and the dry thing has a single "unmarried" s.)


2. It is an unadvertised (no apostrophe) possession of the noun that shortcuts contractually with the apostrophe.

3. I haven't figured out one for despite and in spite of yet. I'm still not sure when to use which of them.

Accept/except....I usually get them right, but I have to stop and think about it.


Verbally though...I routinely slaughter the Kings English.


http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/grammar/g_spelprob.html

I use 'actually' and 'really' entirely(!) too often, given that I admire spare prose. When I am typing I can edit those two words and the phrases that go with them out of the text, but, in speaking, I babble too many reallys.

dessert- Has too much sugar- Two "s".
desert- Not much there- One "s".


Its and it's- If you write "it's" substitute "it is" in your mind, and see if the sentence makes sense. "It's a shame that the dog broke its leg".




http://www.answers.com/despite?gwp=11&ver=1.1.1.377&method=3

Looks like this does not make much of a difference.

Affect/Effect- The effect of the storm would affect may of the people living in the area.







Aha- If you use the word "effect", substitute "result" in your mind, and see if that makes sense.

I've been trying to kick myself of the habit of ending sentences with prepositions, both in writing and speaking. In writing, it's always easy to correct, but in speaking (where there's no "delete" button!), I sometimes catch myself in prepositional overkill: "...the book to which I was referring to."

I hear, though, that ending a sentence with a preposition is no longer a grammar sin.

Where's Roberta?

You're right, I don't think it was ever "incorrect," strictly speaking, only stylistically preferred. But I do happen to be one of those old fashioned fuddy-duddies who prefer it, just as I prefer not to have split infinitives, even though I've been known to break the rule.

The other thing that always trips me up is subjects vs. objects in comparative statements: "I am younger than he [is]" vs. "I am younger than him." I think the latter sentence is similarly on its way to being accepted in informal speech, even though it is (according to some sources, anyway) grammatically incorrect.

weather, whether, wether

ah sheee-it!

neutered male sheep.

rain sunshine and snow.

alternatly.

As long as a preposition has an object somewhere in a sentence, it's fine.

Just remember, shapless, that in order to get the proper one, say this:

I am younger than he is. One would never say, "I am younger than him is."

Incidentally, "Ain't" is correct when used in the first person because there is no contraction for I am not. I think, however, that dlowan uses am't.

I frequently do a double-take for the following subjects before remembering if they are singular or plural:

either (singular)
neither (singular)
any (can be singular or plural)
none (can be singular or plural)

I always remember not to put the apostrophe in the possessive 'its' by recalling that I wouldn't put an apostrophy in other possessive pronouns. I mean, would you write hi's or her's? That's an easy one to remember.

Shapeless, how do you figure 'none' can ever be singular?

In common usage, "none" is treated like a singular noun when the sentence is trying to attribute the absence of a property to each member of a group individually: "None of the dishes is going to be ready in time for dinner." When "none" is intended to attribute the absence of a property to an entire group collectively, so the reasoning goes, then it is treated like a plural noun: "None of my dishes require baking soda."

The belief that "none" can serve as a singular noun apparently comes from the incorrect assumption that it is a contraction of "not one," as I found out in an interesting article. However, the article doesn't say quite say that "none" is never a singular noun; it says only that it's not wrong to use it as a plural. It seems to be one of those cases where common usage has deemed it okay to use both.

Understood, Shapeless. Thnx.