Woe Is I: The Grammarphobe's Guide to Better English in Plain English(Third Edition) - Softcover

Über die Autorin bzw. den Autor

Patricia T. O'Conner, a former editor at the New York Times Book Review, has written for many magazines and newspapers. She is the author of two other books on language and writing, Words Fail Me: What Everyone Who Writes Should Know About Writing and You Send Me: Getting It Right When You Write Online.

Auszug. © Genehmigter Nachdruck. Alle Rechte vorbehalten.

Chapter 1

ij

Woe Is I

Therapy for Pronoun Anxiety

When a tiny word gives you a big headache, it's probably a pronoun.

Pronouns are usually small (I, me, he, she, it), but they're among the biggest troublemakers in the language. If you've ever been picked on by the pronoun police, don't despair. You're in good company. Hundreds of years after the first Ophelia cried "Woe is me," only a pedant would argue that Shakespeare should have written "Woe is I" or "Woe is unto me." (Never mind that the rules of English grammar weren't even formalized in Shakespeare's day.) The point is that no one is exempt from having their pronouns second-guessed.

Put simply, a pronoun is an understudy for a noun (a word for a person, place, or thing). He may stand in for "Ralph," she for "Alice," they for "the Kramdens," and it for "the stuffed piranha." Why do we need them? Take the following sentence: Ralph smuggled his stuffed piranha into the Kramdens' apartment, sneaked it out of his jacket, and was slipping it into his wife's curio cabinet, when suddenly Alice walked into their living room, clutched her heart, and screamed, "You get that out of my house!"

If no one had invented pronouns, here's how that sentence would look: Ralph smuggled Ralph's stuffed piranha into the Kramdens' apartment, sneaked the stuffed piranha out of Ralph's jacket, and was slipping the stuffed piranha into Ralph's wife's curio cabinet, when suddenly Alice walked into the Kramdens' living room, clutched Alice's heart, and screamed, "Ralph, get the stuffed piranha out of Alice's house!"

See how much time pronouns save?

Simple substitutions (like his for Ralph's) are easy enough. Things get complicated when a pronoun, like any good understudy, takes on different guises, depending on the roles it plays in the sentence. Some pronouns are so well disguised that you may not be able to tell one from another. Enter that and which; it's and its; who's and whose; you're and your; who and whom; everybody and nobody; and their, they're, and theirs.

Now let's round up the usual suspects, as well as a few other shady characters.

The Which Trials: Which or That?

Bite on one of these: Buster's bulldog, [which or that] had one white ear, won best in show.

Pretty easy, right? The pause in the middle, set apart by commas, probably told you to choose which.

Now for a harder choice: The dog [which or that] won best in show was Buster's bulldog.

If you're confused, you've been spooked by whiches. In that sentence, according to modern grammarians, you can use either that or which. (Americans are more likely to use that than the British, but both are correct.)

The old that-versus-which problem haunts everybody sooner or later. Here are two hints to help you figure out whether a clause (a group of words with its own subject and verb) should start with that or which.

¥             If the clause is not essential (your sentence is okay without it), use which and commas.

¥             If the clause is essential (your sentence is pointless without it), use either that or which and no commas.

Why does it matter whether the information in the clause is essential or not? Because we naturally pause to introduce stuff that's merely an interruption and not necessary to the meaning of a sentence. We separate it from the rest with commas and a which. But we don't pause for essential information-it runs right into the sentence with no interrupting commas, and it can start with either which or that (the choice is yours).

Let's take another look at the correct versions of those sentences: Buster's bulldog, which had one white ear, won best in show. The dog which [or that] won best in show was Buster's bulldog.

The point of each sentence is that Buster's dog won. What happens when we remove the which or that clause?

In the first sentence, the clause (which had one white ear) is disposable-without it, we still have the gist of the sentence: Buster's bulldog won best in show.

But in the second sentence, the clause (which [or that] won best in show) is essential. Without it, the sentence is pointless: The dog was Buster's bulldog. The point you were trying to make-Buster's dog won!-is missing.

Now let's take sentences that look more alike. All the versions are correct, though their meanings aren't the same.

The dogs, which had baths, smell better now. (This means that all the dogs smell better because all of them had baths.)

The dogs which [or that] had baths smell better now. (This means that only the bathed dogs smell better.)

These next sentences also look alike, but the information-essential or not-comes at the end. Again, all the versions are correct, though their meanings aren't the same.

We threw out the bath towels, which were ruined. (We dumped all the towels-they were all ruined.)

We threw out the bath towels which [or that] were ruined. (We dumped only the ruined towels.)

When information is essential and not set apart by commas, many people prefer that to which. They may think that is less of an interruption, or they may think which is incorrect (it's not). If you normally use that in these cases, by all means keep using it. Just don't sneer at those who use which.

Which Craft

Sometimes we start a statement with which to make a comment on the previous sentence. Which is perfectly all right, if the ideas are connected.

Orson saw himself as larger than life. Which was true, after he gained all that weight.

But which is often used in casual conversation to introduce an afterthought that comes out of nowhere.

He was a great Othello. Which reminds me, where's that twenty dollars you borrowed?

Conversation is one thing and written English is another. When you write a sentence starting with which, make sure there's a connection. Which is a rule that bears repeating!

An Itsy-Bitsy Problem: It's or Its?

The smaller the word, the handier it is. And it is about as useful as they come. It can stand in for anything-a stuffed piranha, existentialism, the Monroe Doctrine, or buttered toast. It's a very versatile pronoun! But did you notice what just happened? We added an s and got it's-or should that be its? Hmmm. When do you use it's, and when do you use its?

This is a teeny-weeny problem that trips up even the smartest people. They go wrong when they assume that a word with an apostrophe must be a possessive, like Bertie's aunt. But an apostrophe can also stand for something that's been omitted (as in contractions, which are run-together words like can't and shouldn't). In this case, it's is short for it is. Plain its is the possessive form. So here's the one and only rule you need:

¥             If you can substitute it is, use it's.

NOTE: It's can also be short for it has. There's more on its versus it's in the chapter on possessives, pages 41-42.

Who's (or Whose) on First?

This problem is a first cousin of the one above (which you should look at, if you haven't already). As with it's and its, remember that who's is shorthand for who is, and unadorned whose is the possessive form.

¥             If you can substitute who is, use who's.

NOTE: Who's can also be short for who has. There's more on whose versus who's in the chapter on possessives, pages 42-43.

You're on Your Own

"Your our kind of people," reads the hotel marquee. Eek! Let's hope impressionable children aren't looking. The sign should read:...