Sanskrit, Latin, Hebrew, now French

A month or so ago I referenced Sanskrit, Latin, and alluded to Hebrew culture. Here’s some French.

The term Frazz and that first grader are talking about is “esprit de l’escalier” pronounced es pree dee les kal yay. It refers to that witty reply you didn’t think of until too late. Literally “wit on the staircase”; that is, after you had left and gone upstairs. Ah, those French.

Awhile and a While

I haven’t run into this solecism lately, but I ran into the lesson on Facebook. Here it is:

The noun phrase “a while” can and often does follow a preposition, such as “for” or “in.” The adverb “awhile” cannot follow a preposition.

If you can replace “a while” with another article and noun such as “a year,” you know you want the two-word version. If you can replace “awhile” with another adverb such as “briefly,” you know you want the one-word version.

I think you can find the site here. This post from them is from June 18.

A Solution to the Gender-neutral Possessive Pronoun

As I presume you know by now, English doesn’t have a gender-neutral possessive pronoun. The default has long been to use the masculine or the technically incorrect plural. Here’s an example of using the masculine. The sentence is in a presentation on computer security, slide 21:

Tiny issues / differences in initial state (single bitflips) can make a machine spin out of control, and the attacker can carefully control the escalating error to his advantage.

Perhaps the presenter was drawn to the idea that most attackers are men, or just preferred not to use the singular “their.”

Here’s another solution: Change the subject to plural!

Tiny issues / differences in initial state (single bitflips) can make a machine spin out of control, and the attackers can carefully control the escalating error to their advantage.

The plural isn’t always an option, but when I can use the plural, it’s the option that I prefer.

Another Correct “Whom”!

I don’t run into correct whoms often, so I like to post them when I see one as good examples, The Lockhorns in this case.

The subject and verb are “you think,” which makes “whom” the direct object. Myself, I’d be a little more cheerful about that perfume ad…

Grammar Police Comic

It’s dumb, not even funny. But it’s about me, so I guess I should post it, right?

He should have quotes around “Ten hyphen four.” Harrumpf.

A Tricky Compound

Occasionally I warn about using the wrong case for compound objects of prepositions (between him and I is wrong, him and me is correct). So Ordinary Bill has a little test for you. Warning: it’s tricky. Look at the last panel:

Was she correct to say “my boyfriend and I”? Should she have said “my boyfriend and me”? Why or why not?

Well, she’s correct! We don’t have a preposition here, so it’s not a compound object. We don’t exactly have a verb, either. We do have an implied verb, taken from what the garbage man says. Her implied verb is “is.” Ah, so compound direct object, right? Nope! Linking verbs (any form of “to be” in this case) take predicate nominatives. The linking verb is equivalent to an equals sign, so both ends of the sentence are equal, hence both are nominative. Her full statement is something like, “Nope, it is  just my boyfriend and I.” Maybe she’s saying “Just my boyfriend and I create this mess.” (That would make it a compound subject, which is a little easier to deal with.)

(Yes, saying “the English teacher is I” is correct, even though it sounds bad. Instead, say, “I am the English teacher.”

 

Rules and Exceptions

Occasionally you might hear the expression about the exception proving the rule. Almost always it’s used incorrectly. People say “the exception proves the rule” meaning something like “the exception shows Proves) that the rule exists.” This is nonsense. This comic, last panel, is typical:

The word “proves” in this expression means “tests.” (It’s an old usage. You’ll find it in the KJV.) The real point of the expression is to assert that if you can break (test/prove) a rule and get away with it, it’s not a rule. If breaking the rule causes a violation, the rule is real.

Small Mistake, Big Mistake

The guilty panel is panel three in this Curtis.

Small mistake: using “may” when you mean “might.” “May” implies permission, though it’s become a mild version of “might.” Still, you’re wise to say “might” when that’s what you mean, especially when you’re explaining something.

The big mistake is common among folks who paid some attention in English class. They typical scenario is when some kid says, “Me and Tom want to go fishing.” and the teacher says, “It’s ‘Tom and I want to go fishing’.” The kid gets into the habit of using “I” all the time in compounds even when the compound is the object of a preposition, which we have here. Dad should have said, “…for your mother and me to give…”

So I guess Dad’s report card was about the same as Curtis’.

Irony

I hardly need to say anything here. The cop has it right. The fourth panel his irony is sarcasm, too, by the way. Anyway, here’s the Beardo:

Why did the guy with the beard say it was ironic when it was just bad luck? Because it was the opposite of what he expected to happen.

By the way, it should be “well-read cop,” with the hyphen. Compound adjective.