Some people are pedantic twits when it comes to the squishy rules of grammar.
Truth is, grammar is a powerful tool that lends clear meaning to quality copy, but it’s also far more flexible than most people realize. And a lot of what people claim as hard, fast rules can be completely ignored.
It is important to ensure your writing is easy to understand and that you set the proper tone for your audience. Outside of that, the page is your canvas to paint. Despite conventional wisdom, here are some rules you can safely ignore:
1. Never end a sentence with a preposition. Bow down to this rule without question and you’ll end up with unnatural sentences that are more difficult to understand. If the meaning of your sentence is clear and it sounds natural, go ahead and end it with a preposition.
Consider “What are you waiting for?” versus “For what are you waiting?”
Both are correct, but the second sounds like part of an 18th Century soliloquy.
2. Don’t start a sentence with “and,” “but” or other conjunctions. Starting too many sentences with “and” or “but” will make your writing sound like a second grader’s. But use it in moderation and you will have the voice of the everyman.
This can be particularly useful when you are trying to add emphasis or give your writing a conversational tone.
3. Don’t use double negatives. While you’ll probably want to avoid sentences like “I don’t got none,” there is a place for double negatives, particularly if you enjoy being snarky. “Twilight is a not unpopular series of books,” or “I’m not unfamiliar with your blog.”
Be sure to use it sparingly unless you want your readers to become not unwilling to kick you in places you’d rather be licked.
4. Never split infinitives. You can go always split infinitives when doing so will make your meaning more clear or allow you to be more concise. And yes, sometimes a split infinitive simply sounds better as in the most famous example “to boldly go where no man has gone before.”
More often than not, keeping infinitives intact is the smartest way to write, yet there is never a need to go run outrageous lengths to hold them together.
5. A paragraph must be between three and five sentences long. If you wanted, you could use the word “Malarkey” as a paragraph and that would be just fine with me. Use single word paragraphs sparingly and remember that a wall of text is excruciating to read and you’ll be just fine.
6. Never use the passive voice. As a general rule this is correct – a sentence like “Cookies were eaten by Tracy” sounds awkward and puts the emphasis on the cookies rather than Tracy. On the other hand sometimes you want to deflect blame to the cookies, so using the passive voice would be a valid choice.
7. Never use slang or colloquialisms such as “y’all” or “ain’t.”
A bit of the vernacular can add color and flair to your copy. The trick is knowing when it will enhance and when it will distract.
8. You can’t use a plural to refer to a singular. It’s perfectly acceptable to use “they/their/them” to refer to a singular. “A driver should always check their rear view mirror” sounds far more natural than “A driver should always check his or her rear view mirror.” You can avoid this in some cases by using “one” but using “one” in all but the most formal writing does tend to sound a bit Hyacinth Bucket, no?
9. Never use sentence fragments. Nonsense! As long as most of your sentences have a subject and a predicate, feel free to use the occasional fragment for effect. No worries.
10. Avoid run on sentences. Run on sentences can be used to convey great excitement, anxiety or a general stream of consciousness feel. It’s a fantastic rhetorical device in the right hands; however, in the wrong hands it looks like you should have paid a copy editor their well-deserved fee.
Always remember, the purpose of grammar is to produce writing that is easy for the reader to understand, not to make writers sweat. Feel free to bend or break any of the rules if it makes your writing more appealing, or for stylistic effect.
But remember, a little bit of grammar rebellion can go a long way.
About Tracy
I consider myself to be something of a grammar Nazi however I do agree with all the suggestions that you listed above. I don’t think that it’s breaking grammar rules per se, if you’re doing it consciously. I’m more irked by people who would look at the above list and not even realise that a rule is being ‘broken’ and will do much, much worse than anything listed.
For a “grammar Nazi” there’s a lot of poor writing in your post, including incorrect punctuation, a passive sentence, and wordiness. You’ve “done much, much worse than anything listed.”
I love you, BB.
HAHAHAHAH
She said “somewhat.” And in the spirit of her post, I hope you are being cute.
Maybe I’m a bit too old but I just can’t buy #8. When I was in school, using they and their for a singular subject was unacceptable. To this day it’s probably my biggest pet peeve.
Hi Giselle! I agree, it’s important for everyone, not just professional writers to have a firm understanding of grammar.
Ouch, I fear I fall into the group that Giselle mentions. I like to write in a way that’s close to the way I speak so it feels like I’m starting a conversation.
And I do like to start sentences with conjunctions.
Thanks for this Tracy. I feel like I can turn my inadequacies to my advantage. :)
As our friend Tim Brownson would say just reframe “complete ignorance of the rules of the mother tongue” to “writes with a unique, personal flair that pushes boundaries and breaks barriers”.
Babies break grammar rules all the time. It’s cute. But the first time they break a rule on purpose, we realize they’re brilliant. Clever writers who tweak the rules get the most from their words. It makes grammar a game, and I love to play!
Exactly! I love it when people approach writing and language with a playful heart.
i am not saying i don’t agree with these, but for the first one being that it is dialogue so it really wouldn’t matter anyway.
i am not nit picking just stating a fact.
while commenting on a grammer article my grammer sentence above sounds really dumb. My bad
Not to mention you’ve commented on a grammar article twice and spelled “grammar” wrong every time. You’ve also started your sentences with a lower case letter. I think it’s this kind of ‘breaking the rule accidentally’ we’re talking about!
each time (if it is twice)
NOW I’m getting in to it!!! :)
I think it is important for writers to begin by following the rules. When you know the rules you can then decide to break them on a case by case basis consciously and specifically for effect. Also, remember the purpose and audience when you write. Some target readers will be more academic than others and demand a greater steadfast adherence to grammatical standards.
I think keeping your audience in mind hits the nail on the head.
I believe Hyacinth’s last name is spelled, “B-U-C-K-E-T”.
You are completely right, I’m correcting that now. Thanks!
Regarding number 8, I typically substitute “they” or “one” with my own gender (that is, with “he”), and I don’t mind if someone else does the same. If someone writes, “a driver should always check her rear view mirror,” it’s fine with me, and the opposite should be fine with someone else.
I think in many situations it’s fine to use just the feminine or masculine pronoun, but there are also situations where it wouldn’t go over so well. I’ve also seen writers alternate pronouns throughout the piece.
I think as long as you’re consistent then it doesn’t matter whether you use ‘his’ or ‘her’. As a man, I must confess the first time I saw an article that referred to ‘her’ all the way through I thought it was a bit strange, but that’s only because I was so used to seeing ‘his’ or ‘him’. Anything is better than ‘their’ for first person singular! Facebook drives me mad when it reports “XXXX commented on their picture!”
Where practical, I tend to use “s/he”.
Best of all is to try to rewrite the sentence so you eliminate the singluar/plural problem. In this case, saying “Drivers should check their rearview mirrors” not only sounds good, it’s actually better–it makes the point that the writer means all drivers and not just a particluar one.
I absolutely agree with all of these, with the strong exception of number 8. Rewrite the sentence. Or use “he.” If you believe “he” is entirely too sexist, then help yourself: use “she.” But for the love of God, please don’t use their when referring to a driver. It’s awful, as anyone who uses facebook knows. E.g.: “Franklin Jones has changed their profile.”
The entire issue arose when after millennia a few folks decided the use of masculine pronouns to denote the whole of mankind was part of a larger political apparatus that was oppressing women. Others, like P.J. O’Rourke, believe the change resulted in little other than the mindless destruction of “an elegant system of personal pronouns.”
And it was poetic, too. Recall that planets and ships and other vessels of life were always feminine.
I think that language and the way we use it evolves with our society and that’s generally a good thing. There are ways to work around using plural pronouns with singular nouns, but for most casual writing, it seems a bit fussy to me.
The other option is to pluralize the subject: “Drivers should always check their rear view mirror.” Or would that be “mirrors” instead?
Yes, it would be “mirrors.” Unless all the drivers share one mirror.
No, Pat had it right. It should be, “Drivers should always check their rear view mirror.” To use mirrors indicates each driver has multiple rear view mirrors.
Let me make my point again. Take two seconds to re-write the sentence. The easiest way is to simply say, “Drivers should always check the rear view mirror.”
No, sorry, YOU have it wrong. It is either:
“Drivers should always check their rear view mirrors.”
More than one driver – so “drivers” is plural – “their” is plural – “mirrors” is plural, too. These drivers are not all sharing a single mirror. Picture three cars lined up–three drivers–three mirrors. All nouns must agree.
OR
“Each driver should check his mirror.”
One driver – singular – “his” is singular – “mirror” is singular. Each driver should check his own mirror. Driver:mirror=1:1.
“The driver should always check the rear-view mirror” is a nice compromise if you’re looking to avoid gender.
If you look again you’ll see there is a material difference between all of the other rules you say can be broken and number 8. The rest are matters of style, and style is appropriately a reflection of the writer.
Number 8 concerns math. While I’ve heard about schools that give good grades for a good faith effort at solving a mathematical problem, I believe there is still something to be said for getting the exact answer. Among other benefits, it keeps bridges suspended and airplanes in the air.
Thanks for sharing these great tips.
I’m so glad that the itennret allows free info like this!
Thank you for granting permission to use living, breathing language!
(Or, should I say, language used by living, breathing people?)
I try very hard to give a cursory nod to what education I haven’t already forgotten, but there are times when ya just gotta say something the way it’s gotta be said–for instance, I have been taught to eschew the use of contractions.
Whatever. I can’t chew like an S. Can you?
Great article!
I have always learned that to break a writing rule one must first master it.
Excellent point, and I agree COMPLETELY!
I agree with most of your points, but would take issue on “4. Never split infinitives.”.
“To boldly go where no man has gone before.” does not sound better; it just sounds pompous, rather like the way in which some people incorrectly use reflective pronouns in an attempt to add weight to their sentences.
Not a Star Trek fan, then. As for pompous, the line was delivered by a French character using a soft British accent. Both techniques gave the opening of each episode more “weight,” as you say, with its American television audience.
Funny. Totally. Figured out what a #hash tag is, but I have no idea what it does. Like, I see OMG and LOL an FOFL in some eimals, but have seen no others. Literally, abbreviations & acronyms make me sick. Will they trend? (Never knew trend was a verb.) BTW I am 90 yrs. old. MH[Riposte to Ann O: If something is grammatical it is correct. Try "error in grammar."]
5c8WbS iyzrunikolyk
Winston Churchill was once criticized by a young newspaper reporter for ending a sentence with a preposition. The young man pointed out that one should never end a sentence wit a preposition. To which Churchill replied, “That, young man, is arrant nonsense, up with which I will not put!”
I’m surprised it took this long for someone to quote this famous, um, quotation. :) I’ve always loved that one; it’s a perfect example of both how we misuse the language and how silly we’d sound if we [sometimes] didn’t.
Yoda you should tell that to….dare, do you? :)
All of these seem fine to me, safe for the plural referring to a singular. That just sounds awkward and confusing to me. But that’s personal preference I suppose. I’d say it’s more important for a writer to develop a distinctive style and voice and not be all over the place.
What kind of advice is “Never use the passive voice” anyway? Why would you deprive yourself of an entire mode of expression. Just using active expressions sounds severly limited.
How about “Boldly to go where none have gone before”? It’s in iambic pentameter, does not split the infinitive and is not sexist.
Just a thought.
Richard
And another thing: How about “Drivers should always check their rear view mirrors”?
Great post, but I would have loved it even more if you had included more examples. I need to get this stuff down so my producer will stop making so much fun of me when she corrects all my mistakes.
-Joseph-
Good list, but…
1.) Your examples are questions, not statements, which is a different topic. The original rule came from applying the Latin rules of grammar to a Germanic language, which often does not make sense. It’s my belief that true prepositions should not end a statement, but that phrase verbs can certainly sit at the tail.
4.) The first phrase seems to contain an extra word: “You can go always split infinitives….”
8.) I prefer the universal he in formal writing. “They/their/them” were originally singular or plural. “He” and “she” are later additions to the language. But, as English is a living language, rules change.
Anyway, just my thoughts, thanks again for posting these.
Yep, you’ve got them. Another one I’d add is that it’s okay to use ‘isn’t’ instead of ‘is not’ etc. I recently read a book that never used the shortened form and it sounded just plain wrong in a contemporary novel.
I just did a couple of posts on the topic of writing rules.
This is a wonderful article. I only wish I had known these tips when I started to blog. Now, I feel as if you put all the lessons I learned the hard way into the one article every blogger should read prior to taking on the task of writing an article. Thanks so much.
Tracy, Please don’t encourage the “Wild Ones” who think they can write, but accidentally murder our language. Poor Joe’s “grammer” is pitiful. It’s all right (–and,yes, I know “alright” is not a word in the English language!) if some of us didn’t have advantages and/or never learned proper grammar, but it’s just ridiculous when they try to tell us what is acceptable. Mercy!
One sentence paragraphs are okay? You’ve got to be kidding! Those who use them would be better served to re-read what they’ve written and then re-write it properly. Nothing is more tedious than reading poorly written material.
I will only be okay with a person using “they” as a singular pronoun if “they uses” the singular verb form. Do you SERIOUSLY think sentence constructions such as “they walks…,” “they sees…,” or “they uses…,” are acceptable? You haven’t thought this through.
LOVE this! Will definitely be doing a repost.
AP style still frowns on the use of “their” as a collective singular pronoun. I agree w/ this article but the truth is, English doesn’t have a gender neutral personal pronoun. We’ve got “it” but that shouldn’t be used to refer to people. Anyway, I encourage everyone to use “their” as a gender neutral collective singular personal pronoun. Once enough people use it in this way it’ll be “okay” to use it this way.
And the English language, which is mankind’s greatest artistic achievement, will be forever diminished.
How so? I agree that in situations such as on Facebook, where the sex of the person referred to is known, it’s unacceptable to use their, since he or she can be used appropriately; however, in situations where sex is unknown, do you truly feel that it’s better to proceed in ignorance, making a blind choice of he or she when truly neither fit the bill?
There are many times in the English language when discerning meaning is left to the reader, I feel that it’s perfectly reasonable, and beyond that, easy, to discern whether “they” is singular or plural, in context, that is.
I’m like-minded in that English is among the greatest, if not the greatest, artistic achievement of humanity, yet my feelings on the subject are the polar opposite of yours. I feel that accepting use of “their” would only make the language more unique, more beautiful, differentiating it from Romance languages, such as French, where all nouns have a sex, sometimes determined according to a rule, though more often than not left to the listener’s ear to determine. It’s a clumsy system, and one I’d be glad to see the English language distanced from.
It might seem sexist, but using “he/she/her/his” instead of “they/their”, when using said pronoun to refer to a singular antecedent, is at least grammatically sound: one person cannot logically be a “they”, because “they” is defined as more than one person (IE, multiple people).
So given the options we have for referring to singular antecedents (EG one, person, everybody, nobody, somebody, everyone — all singular), I’d rather be grammatically correct and choose the singular pronoun or possessive pronoun and risk the “sexist!” complaints than to use the plural and be gender-neutral but grammatically wrong.
So let’s create gender-neutral pronouns, for use when we don’t know the gender of the singular antecedent:
Heir — he/she/him/her
Heirs — her/his
Webster’s is as much a mirror as it is a guide: if we use heir/heirs to an adequate degree (…a lot, and for decades…), these might earn their way into our lexicon and solve the conundrum of #8.
My objection to the use of he/she isn’t on the basis of a perceived sexism, but rather the inaccuracy of using a gendered pronoun when the gender of the person described is unknown. I understand your point about the issues of plurality, I just don’t see why it’s more reasonable to introduce new words into the lexicon – such as heir and heirs, for instance – when a word exists already which feels natural in that usage, adapts perfectly to the situation and, honestly, is already far along in the process of taking on that new meaning, if we can add words, why can’t we change them as well?
Speaking of Webster’s though, if Wikipedia – quoting a New York Times article – can be believed then “Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary (11th ed.) already finds the singular they acceptable ‘even in literary and formal contexts,’”
It seems to me as if the majority of the objections to use of they as a singular pronoun aren’t based on any concrete issues with its use, because really, having to say “they are going” instead of “he is going” isn’t such a concession; we already say “you are going” don’t we?
Michael,
In parts of the US, the plural/singular second-person ambiguous case has been resolved:
Singular: You
Plural: Y’all (you all)
hehe
Interesting article, some highly amusing comments.*
Curious that we can be almost religious in our vehement persecution of others’ interpretation of rules.*
It might be interesting to know if a continuing demographic study would show how much rules vary between each Country/Region, and whether trends would show whether one Country/Region acted as “root”, or if there is simply inexorable “cross-pollination”.
Actually, considering that children largely define languages’ future, as well the fact that we Elders collectively shudder that “txtspk rools”, I’d be inclined to plump for the latter.
Change sure can be a female canine.
* Just demonstrating to William Wilgus that single-sentence paragraphs work just fine.
LOL “kick you in places you’d rather be licked” Epic! :)
Err.. I rather enjoyed that phrase. I found it quite clever and humorous.
It’s prescriptive grammar vs. descriptive grammar. Prescriptive is “English teacher” grammar, while descriptive grammar is that studied and most widely accepted by linguists. As a Linguistics major and a huge proponent of descriptive grammar usage, I believe that it is terrible how teachers fully expect students to monitor their writing insofar as to change their tone/character only to adhere to outdated and archaic rules.
Kristy, which (or what, if I forget to list one…) is the proper/best way to pronounce “o”?
Is it:
- The dipthong “Ohhhh”, like in the northern Midwest or Canada (eh!)?
- The short, sharp “Oh” of the Latin languages?
- The rounded “eh’oo” of, like, California (think: valley girl, totally) or Britain?
As a native Wisconsinite and semi-speaker of Spanish, I favor the first two… and whenever I hear something like “hope” pronounced “heh-oop”, I nearly vomit.
What say you? (and disregard my bias; let me know whatchoo theenk. hehe)
the difference between the wisconsin “o” and the california/uk “o” is whether or not is is aspirated out through the nose. one telltale sign of a midwestern accent is whether your voice changes considerably if you speak while holding your nose. (i’m from michigan originally but have learned to speak “clear” english like the east and west coast by learning how to pronounce vowels without using my nose.)
it’s not a properness thing, by the way; they’re merely accents. it’s like asking if the French throaty pronunciation of “R”, the German glottal pronunciation of “R”, or the rolled Spanish “R” is more correct.
The person that invented ‘I’ before ‘E’ except after ‘C’ obviously never spelled the word “Cookies.”
While good grammar is important when you are writing formally, I am not so much of a grammar nazi that I pick apart people’s facebook statuses and comments on blogs. Given the fast paced society of today, it seems to me that people broadcast their thoughts the way that they speak. I will be the first to tell you that the only way we can improve grammar in our lives is to conscientiously try to improve the way we speak. Good grammar will be commonplace.
Good advice. Good grammar is bueno.
http://www.blairlockout.com
A good list of rules that can be broken. Like so many here, I do have a major problem with the “they” rule. If you are writing dialog, I think that’s OK, since people tend to talk like that. But if you are writing exposition, I agree with everyone above who said pick a gender. Pick a gender and be consistent, and for most people picking their own gender is the most natural, so go with it. I too dislike the sound of “his or her.”
A driver should always check his rear view mirror.
A driver should always check her rear view mirror.
John said to his daughter, “A driver should always check their rear view mirror.”
Of course, if you are writing historical fiction set in a period when “he” was the accepted gender neutral pronoun, John would say to his daughter, “A driver…his…”. Anything else would be breaking with the period.
There are some bad things happening in the English language these days, but for me the plural pronoun substitute for a singular is the most egregious. The other rules on this list can be used creatively. Using “they” when you mean “he,” “she,” or “it” is just plain wrong.
“Proper” grammar as taught in school is almost arcane nowadays, and rarely used as taught except in the cases of school papers, thesis and dissertation projects, and perhaps in more formal learning environments such as private schools.
People, especially when reading fiction, prefer conversational tones, and this article does great job of setting the foundation for that type of writing.
As for the They vs. one vs. he or she argument, they is a perfectly acceptable, and grammatically correct use when referring to a single person, that was changed fairly recently. When you talk to a friend about another person’s actions, you say “They did…” I will NEVER use he or she in any sentence outside of a formal paper or, in extreme cases, a letter to the Queen of England, who I am highly unlikely to write to, anyway. Or, to be grammatically correct: To whom I am unlikely to write at any time whatsoever. (Awkward!)
Great article!
This is crap.
To begin with: a significant chunk of these aren’t even rules at all, but only guidelines. There is no, and never was any rule about staring sentences with conjunctions, double negatives, or paragraph length.
But moreover, most rules are rules and shouldn’t be ignored. No, you shouldn’t use use vernacular, run-on sentences, or prepositions at the ends of your sentences unless you’re using a character’s specific dialogue, or if you’re establishing a setting.
But for the love of all that is good and green, figure out your pronouns. Pronoun disagreement doesn’t just make you look like a seventh-grader, but it’s just annoying to anyone that knows how to use the English language.
A run-on sentence isn’t just a long sentence. A run-on sentence could be four words long, e.g., “I walked he ran.” It’s a sentence in which two or more independent clauses are joined together without the proper punctuation or conjunction. It has nothing to do with length.
It’s also worth pointing out that splitting infinitives and ending sentences with prepositions were never “grammar rules” in the first place. They’re myths, perpetuated by people who think they know more than they do about grammar. Grammarians many centuries ago came up with those two “rules” because they thought English grammar should conform to Latin grammar — and in Latin, it’s literally impossible to split infinitives or end sentences with prepositions. In truth, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with doing either one in English … and there never has been. English isn’t Latin.
I just want to applaud the fact that there are people willing to thumb their nose at the tyrannical monster of grammar, and the Grammarians. I’ve never in my life found more pompous snotty attitudes and sheer killers of the creative process, than when I am around or am forced to listen to Grammar Nazis stroke their rules.
Editors and Grammarians’ sole purpose on this planet, is not to liberate us from the burden of bad grammar and punctuation. It’s to shackle us to it, and to squelch our freedom of expression on the unwritten and untouched page.
I’ve read stories that would be masterpieces of the English language, were it not for the enforcers that hammered the rules so hard that out of fear, a potentially great work was lost.
I hate grammar, and I hate punctuation. I despise those that cling to it as an ally of justice, and their one great truth in a pathetic darkness of mediocrity. And whenever possible, I take great personal satisfaction when–if even for a brief moment–one of us slaves has flown the cage.
Editors are pointless if we writers refused to write; and most Editors are only good at technical writing. So if we all sat down one day and refused to pen a lick of ink, then I imagine the Grammarians would all fly from their ledges, for there would be nothing left for them to complain against.
Funny and informative.
Those who cannot break a few grammar rules occasionally in their manuscripts are not truly writers.
And I can name a few people I know who think they are but aren’t!
It is strange that I should find this article. I wrote my college entrance paper and turned it in to my Senior English teacher before submitting it to my school of choice. She gave me an F, as she had all year, but the college responded with a writing scholarship within a month. I greatly enjoyed sticking that acceptance letter in my teacher’s face, along with the portfolio of all the papers they said were genius…and every one of them, she’d given an F.
i agree with many of these suggestions, but I still cannot accept “their” in place of “his or her”, even though it seems more natural. It drives me crazy and I don’t know why. :P
Cleverly written. Well stated. Excellent points.
As a writer, one has to be flexible and “go with the flow” in terms of subject matter, context and target audience. Sometimes “breaking grammatical rules”–as you have brilliantly demonstrated here–is just what is needed to get the point across.
Cheers!
Love this post — I personally like to start sentences with “because,” which is technically wrong, but works great in copywriting. Because it just gets to the point.
Thanks for the empowerment –
Take example of child, first learns how to speak, and then comes grammar. For me English is second language and I like to learn English grammar natural way.
I can’t accept #8. The solution you offer isn’t the only solution, and certainly not the best solution. The antecedent can be made plural, or the “offending” pronoun can be remove with a revision of the sentence. A careful writer doesn’t need to use plural pronouns for singular antecedents.
Another thing to consider as a writer is that all grammar rules are off when writing dialogue. That’s your opportunity to really write like people talk. It can also convey a lot of character if done correctly.
The way “people” (i.e. morons who don’t parse their sentences and grammar before opening their pieholeS) actually talk is boring. Captain Picard would not be improved by putting pauses and broken sentences into his dialogue.
Whenever someone writes ‘realistically’ like that it just annoys me. Makes me hate the character for talking like a mumbling retard.