The Grammar Thread

[mistysakura]

Thanks to Chris 2.0 for the idea (100% not my own). Anyway, he had the idea to start a thread to ask any questions about grammar which we might have, because it's confusing stuff.

My first question is, can someone please clarify the use of inverted commas ('blah') vs quotation marks ("blah")? I understand that directly quoted conversations use quotation marks, but what if you're just quoting a single word or something?

[eevee-shayna]

May I just say I recomend William Strunk and E. B. White's Elements of Style for all your grammer needs. Truly an english major's best friend.

[Mewfour]

I think you've answered your own question.

.... no I'm not dead yet.

[Phoenixsong]

As far as using inverted commas in quotes go... it depends. Some people use them instead of the quotation mark (I know that at least some of the older English writing did... maybe it still does, I dunno). In American English, the single quote is used for quoting something within something else, i.e. "And then he told me, 'Well, you can just go ahead and do that!' and he stormed off." (In the case of using single quotes instead of double quotes, it is the opposite; the phrase above would then look like 'And then he told me, "Well, you can just go ahead and do that!" and he stormed off.')

Generally, quoting just one word would use the same kind of quotation mark you're using for the rest of the story. At least, I think so. It's a stylistic thing, really, so you could technically get away with using single quotes even if that's incorrect.

[mistysakura]

Thanks guys. Yeah I have trouble being consistent with these things, because sometimes I convince myself that I have to use inverted commas for this, and the next time I think something different. So I guess I'll just pick one style and stick to it, if it's just a stylistic thing.

[Mikachu Yukitatsu]

Heh, I didn't except so many replies but what I did except was replies like that.

It should be expect, shouldn't it, but the rest, is this grammatically correct? Should it be 'what I did expect were replies like that'? Or can I refer to a whole sentence like 'What did I expect?' by 'was'?

I also would be delighted if someone who has read my posts could point out more mistakes I made.

EDIT: And for those who don't know, my mother tongue is Finnish.

[mistysakura]

It's expect, and it's "what I did expect were replies like that". It's grammatically incorrect to say "what did I expect were replies like that".

[Mikachu Yukitatsu]

Then, which one is correct?

'I want to be a Pokémon master!' said Ash.

'I want to be a Pokémon master!' Ash said.

Or is it them both? In Swedish language, the verb is almost always in the second place in the word order, but I have forgot how it is in this English example.

[Gavin Luper]

Both are acceptable - 'Ash said' or 'said Ash'. Usually it would be the subject followed by the verb (I think) - ie. it would be 'Ash walked' or 'Ash ran', definitely never 'walked Ash' or 'ran Ash'.

I think the reason it's interchangeable with dialogue is because you've already described the words that are being said - ie. "I want to be a pokémon master!" said Ash ... the verb is describing the object ... or something ... I'm not a full bottle on grammar, but that seems to make sense to me.

Conversely, if you had the verb before the dialogue, it would almost always have to be:

Ash said, "I want to be a pokémon master!"

If you wrote:

Said Ash, "I want to be a pokémon master!"

It would sound slightly archaic or poetic or something.

Anyway, I'm not an expert on grammatical explanations, but I hope that helps somehow.

[Whisper in the Wind]

Sorry to revive this thread from the dead, but it beats making a new one.

When addressing a person of the female gender, would it be "Miss" or "miss"? (should there be a capital M or not?)

[mr_pikachu]

I had an answer for this all prepared in my head, and then I looked it up to check whether I was correct. Now I'm confused.

I'll say this much: if you use it as if it was part of the person's name (like "Miss Jane Doe"), then it must be capitalized. It acts as a title in that context. Now, I was under the impression that if it was used without being followed by a name, that it would be lowercase (as in "Can I help you, miss?"). But Wikipedia says otherwise, even though it also says that "mister" is treated in the manner I believed. Which is even more baffling to me.

The only thing I can guess is that "Miss" (and therefore its counterpart, "Ma'am") is capitalized to distinguish it from the regular word "miss." Either that, or Wikipedia's wrong. Also a legitimate possibility.

I'll have to check around, since now I'm curious about this as well.

[Negrek]

When using "miss" as a title or using it to directly address a person, it must always be capitalized. Thus, "Miss Donovan went to the park the other day." or "What can I do for you, Miss?" Outside these contexts, however, it is not capitalized, as you can see from my usage of it in the first sentence of this post, even if it refers to the word being used as a title. ("Some women are offended when you call them 'ma'am' instead of 'miss.'" for example.)

The only Wikipedia article I saw on this used "Can I help you, Miss?" as a direct example, with that capitalization, although it also capitalized the word throughout just in discussion, where it wasn't being used as a title. However, other sites confirm that it shouldn't be capitalized in such a context, generally, and that's consistent with all the other titles of which I know.

[Whisper in the Wind]

I had an answer for this all prepared in my head, and then I looked it up to check whether I was correct. Now I'm confused.

I'll say this much: if you use it as if it was part of the person's name (like "Miss Jane Doe"), then it must be capitalized. It acts as a title in that context. Now, I was under the impression that if it was used without being followed by a name, that it would be lowercase (as in "Can I help you, miss?"). But Wikipedia says otherwise, even though it also says that "mister" is treated in the manner I believed. Which is even more baffling to me.

The only thing I can guess is that "Miss" (and therefore its counterpart, "Ma'am") is capitalized to distinguish it from the regular word "miss." Either that, or Wikipedia's wrong. Also a legitimate possibility.

I'll have to check around, since now I'm curious about this as well.

When using "miss" as a title or using it to directly address a person, it must always be capitalized. Thus, "Miss Donovan went to the park the other day." or "What can I do for you, Miss?" Outside these contexts, however, it is not capitalized, as you can see from my usage of it in the first sentence of this post, even if it refers to the word being used as a title. ("Some women are offended when you call them 'ma'am' instead of 'miss.'" for example.)

The only Wikipedia article I saw on this used "Can I help you, Miss?" as a direct example, with that capitalization, although it also capitalized the word throughout just in discussion, where it wasn't being used as a title. However, other sites confirm that it shouldn't be capitalized in such a context, generally, and that's consistent with all the other titles of which I know.

Thanks for clearing it up for me. I assume this applies to "mister", "master", and "missus" as well as corrupted variants of them (e.g. "missy", which is the only example I can think of >.<)?

[Negrek]

Yes, it's the same for every title of which I'm aware.

[Mikachu Yukitatsu]

I have a question! Is the word bra signular or plural? In Finnish language, it is 'rintaliivit', which is a plural, but in English, is it OK to say 'her bra was red' or 'her bra were red'?

[mistysakura]

It's singular. Upper-body garments are generally singular for some reason.

[mr_pikachu]

I think that's because a shirt, for instance, is considered a covering primarily for the torso. It only has to cover one thing. Pants, on the other hand, primarily cover both legs, so a single "pant" would cover one leg. Sort of.

Let me know when they actually create something like that, as it would be a very ineffective pair of pants. I'll refrain from explaining further.

[Weasel Overlord]

Although, saying that, a bra does tend to cover two boobs...

Okay, leaving now. *shuffles away after successfully lowering the tone*

When I have access to the OED again, I shall look up the etymology.

[mr_pikachu]

Hmm. Perhaps the origin has something to do with a corset. Or... something. I dunno.

[Lady Vulpix]

Quotes and punctuation

This came up at the November writing contest. 10 years ago, I learned the following from an English text book (paraphrasing because I can't find the book now):

1) Quotes followed by reporting verbs don't end sentences, even if the quoted sentence ended there. (Example: "Hello," he said.)
2) If the quoted sentence ends there, replace the period by a comma. If, on the other hand, the quoted sentence continues, don't put a period after the reporting verb. Instead, put a coma.
3) If the quoted sentence ends with "..." you can leave is as it is, since "..." may or may not finish a sentence.
4) If the quoted sentence ends with "!" or "?", keep said mark but add a comma afterwards to show that the sentence doesn't end.

I've been following those rules for 10 years, but now I've leant that rule 4 is either wrong or outdated. I couldn't find the book, but I searched the web and checked several different websites to make sure.

Apparently, rules 1 thru 3 still apply, but rule 4 should be:

4') If the quoted sentence ends with "!" or "?", leave it as it is, but don't capitalize the reporting part. (Example: "How are you?" he said.)

That will take some getting used to, but I'll do my best to follow the new rule. I'd just wanted to cross-check it with you people, to make sure I got it right.

And also, since I'm at it, is it true that reporting verbs, when used, have to go either before or right after the first quoted sentence ends? In other words, that it's not right to type more than 1 sentence in quotes before the "s/he said" or equivalent? That was not in the book, but I learned about it on the web.

Thanks in advance.

[mr_pikachu]

First of all, regarding rule four, there's generally no comma after a quoted section - any such commas would go within the quote itself. However, there may be an exception if you're listing quotes, as in the following:

John talked about the "Damn pirates!", the "Blasted kids!", and more.

I'm honestly not sure if that's correct. It might be legitimate in a list, but I could just as easily see the commas omitted. Just wanted to mention that it's a possible exception, and that I don't know the rule offhand. It certainly isn't a very common occurrence, anyway.

As for the reporting verbs, that's a matter of style. For instance, AP (Associated Press) style dictates that they go after the first sentence in an excerpt, and that any additional quoting in that excerpt goes immediately after the reporting verb. For example:

"This is bogus!" Mitchell protested. "How are we supposed to function under such a system? You're asking us to go out of our way for no good reason!"

While the AP and some other styles make you use this method, it is perfectly legitimate in free writing to place the reporting verb anywhere else (as long as it's somehow connected to the quotation, of course). It could go before the first sentence, after the second, after the third... you get the point. Just follow whatever guidelines are appropriate for the type of piece you're developing - a research paper, for instance, has different criteria than a newspaper article - and use whatever leeway you have remaining for the best possible effect.

Hope that helped!


EDIT: Rule three may have changed as well, now that I think of it. Technically, "..." does not end a sentence, while "...." does. Different reference manuals may say different things about that, so it may be worth checking.

[Lady Vulpix]

Does "...." even exist? I know it didn't when I was in school. Then again, perhaps it exists in English and not in Spanish. And perhaps rule 4 still applies in Spanish. It's hard to keep track of the grammatical subtleties of 2 different languages.