Despite what you might have been told, commas are still necessary

I frequently rail about comma usage, and this post will be a continuation of that particular obsession of mine. But, don't stop reading! I have a great example.

I am currently reading a law journal article about legal education before 1860, and I came across this sentence:

"By the time of the Revolution English law had come to be generally well regarded and each colony had a bar of trained, able, and respected professionals..." 


That is punctuated exactly as I found it. But one of the most important goals in writing, is to make sure that whatever you put down on paper does not cause the reader to stumble. You always want to avoid having the reader go through your sentence and say, "huh?" But that's exactly what I did when I read "Revolution English law." What on earth is that, I wondered. Then I realized that the writer and copy editor neglected to place an important comma. 


By now, I'm sure you know where I'm going with this. The opening part of the sentence should have been:


"By the time of the Revolution, English law had come..." 


This is why I'm always harping to students to put a comma after an introductory clause or phrase. That's where--if you were speaking--you would have taken a pause. So, because we read pretty much the way we're used to hearing our language spoken, we need that comma. Otherwise, we wind up with a sentence that sounds as if it's talking about "Revolution English law." 

Essay Exam Advice #2: Get to the point and stay there!

One of the greatest frustrations of grading essay exams is the student whose essay displays lots of knowledge but not on the topic of the question. So, here's

Tip #2: Write only about those things that pertain directly to the question.
You may be tempted to display just how broad your erudition has become since you started taking Professor Brilliant's class, but don't give in. Neither Professor Brilliant nor I will be impressed unless you stick directly to the question at hand.

And, if you follow tip #1 from my earlier post, the dreaded result in tip #2 should not happen!
If you separate your time into thinking/outlining time and writing time, and then follow the jottings of your thinking time, you will not be tempted to stray into extraneous areas.

So, please remember: extraneous detail wastes your time, wastes the professor's time, and doesn't get you any more points. In fact, it may get you fewer points (notice that I did not use the word less which would be incorrect here) because it will take away time that you could more beneficially spend elsewhere on your exam.

As always, my best wishes on all your exams!

Essay Exam Advice

We are rapidly approaching final exam time, so I'm going to lay off the grammar goodies for a while and focus instead on writing better in-class and take-home exams. So, here's tip #1. You've heard it a thousand times before, and this number 1001, but it's so important that I don't feel bad about haranguing with it one more time.

1. OUTLINE before you write. 

I can hear y'all groaning from here as you read this. But don't stop here. Read on, please! 

I think the best advice I can ever give on writing a good essay exam question answer is to
separate your time into thinking time and writing time. 

DO NOT start to write immediately upon reading the question. If you do that, your thoughts will be scattered, you won't think of other possibilities that should be included, and your answer will be disorganized. And believe me, as one who's graded lots of essay exams, you don't want your grader to have to sift through disorganization. Some of us are reading dozens or tens of dozens of exams, so you want to make your essay answer as clear and as well organized as possible. How to do that? Separate your time.

1.a. Thinking time
Most professors will ask a question that requires thinking rather than the regurgitation of what was on a Powerpoint slide. We don't want that. We know you can memorize. When we give an essay question, we want to know whether you can think about what you've learned and pull it together. If you take the time to think about the question and try to pull in as many ideas that relate to that question as possible, you'll have a much fuller and more comprehensive answer.

That word comprehensive is key! An adequate answer will not do if you want an A. You need a comprehensive answer: one that shows that you've thought about, analyzed, and compiled a complete list of reasons, causes--whatever the question is asking you for. As you think about the question and what might apply, jot it down. Then decide whether all the jottings actually do apply, cross out those that don't (they won't get you any points anyway) and then you can start your writing.

1. b. Writing time 
Here your goal is to take your list of jottings and put them into a coherent form. That means organizing. Now's the time you decide whether you're going to write from:
Most important to least important
Least important to the big bang--most important
Chronologically first proceeding to most recent
Or some other form that you think might work (although I strongly recommend one of these three).

So, there you have it. If you follow this suggestion, your essays will be better, your grades will probably be higher, and you will have a much easier time taking the exam.

Try this strategy--it takes some practice like any other skill--and then let me know what you think.

Good luck on all your exams!

Grammar Goody--the second person

I'm sure you've heard this one before, but it seems we all need reminding. This is one of those cases that contradicts my assertion that we should write the way we talk. Actually, we should write the way we talk when we think we're being recorded for posterity--in other words, on our best behavior!

Anyway, here's something that's perfectly acceptable in informal spoken English but should be avoided at all cost in written English--the use of the second person. The first person is "I" and "me," the second person is "you" (or for my Southern friends, "y'all," and the third person is "they" and "them."

So, here's what I'm arguing against:

When you remember that Reagan was an actor, you understand why he was such a good communicator.

That's grammatically correct but frowned upon as a use of the no-no second person. So, how can you write this instead? How about:

When we remember that Reagan was an actor, we can see why he was such a good communicator. 

Or, even better:

Reagan's training as an actor explains why he was such a good communicator. 


It's always a good idea to write in the third person only, unless you are specifically instructed that first person is also acceptable. But never use the second person. YOU got it?

the Pentagon Papers Redux: The New York Times is Publishing More Secret Documents

In 1972, The New York Times won a significant victory for freedom of the press when it fought a federal government injunction against publication of the stolen Pentagon Papers (an internal Pentagon history of US involvement in the Vietnam War). That court victory opened the doors for what The Times has announced today it will be doing over the next several weeks: publishing secret documents related to US diplomacy.


Here's the story and The Times's rationale for its publication of these documents.

(Please note: the editing software of this blog does not allow me to format the headline. That means that "The New York Times" above cannot be italicized, but, according to the Chicago Manual of Style, which is what historians use, it should be. Please remember to always italicize titles in your writing. See my blog post from )

Grammar Goody # whatever (I can't keep track anymore): Ordinals in dates

I am really perplexed by the sudden appearance of this typical mistake: the use of ordinals in dates. This is what I mean:

The tragedy occurred on September 11th, 2001.


That, I'm afraid, is incorrect. Sure, it's correct in spoken English, but not in written English. (The ordinal, by the way, is that "th" after the number--or it could be "rd" with the number 3 or "st" with the number 1.

The only correct way to write out a date is like this:

The tragedy occurred on September 11, 2001.

So, please drop the ordinals! They're just plain wrong.

Free Speech for Middle Schoolers or Lewd Speech?

Here's an interesting controversy brewing over the use of those popular wristbands that say "I (heart) boobies." Do schools have the right to ban these wristbands as lewd speech (which the Supreme Court has allowed schools to do) or is this a violation of students' rights to free expression?

Here's the article.

What do you think? I know some breast cancer survivors who see this entire campaign as frivolous and demeaning. They say it is bringing sex into a campaign meant to deal with a disease (see how I avoided the dreadful word sexualizing?) Yet, it's also brought increasing attention, which is, after all, its point.Or is this the wrong kind of attention?

Grammar Goody #10--Capitalization, part 2

Job titles: this is a tricky one, but it has an easily remembered rule.

Capitalize job titles only if they precede the name of the person who holds that job. If not, don't capitalize.

Here are two examples of the correct form.

Andrew Cuomo will be the new governor of New York State.

Governor David Paterson will be leaving office in January.

So, if you're writing about someone who is the dog catcher in your town, you would say that he is the town's dog catcher. But his official name would be Dog Catcher Francis Fido.

Many, many people get this one wrong and believe that job titles are always capitalized. Sorry, but that is not the case. Even the word president when des

Grammar Goody #9 Capitalization

Capitalization rule #1

Always capitalize proper nouns. What's a proper noun, you ask?

It, quite simply, is a recognized formal name of something. The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People is an actual name; hence, it must be capitalized. But the civil rights movement (of which the NAACP was a part) is not an actual name--it's just what we've come to call a whole bunch of different organizations and people--so it is not capitalized.

So, the correct way to write this would be:

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People was a major contributing factor in the success of the civil rights movement.

Another example, consider the words south and South. Why is one capitalized and the other is not?

When you use the word south, you are describing the direction: He headed south toward I-90.

But when you use the word South, you are referring to the geographic entity otherwise known, in this country at least, as Dixie. The South is a recognized geographic name, so it is capitalized. The same goes for the North, the West, the Midwest, and the Northeast. [did you notice that last comma before the word and? I have another grammar goody on that one below.]

So, our always-correct student would write:

He packed up and headed south to get to his home in the South (and do, please, note that the word the is not capitalized before most proper nouns).

More on capitalization tomorrow.

Each and every time....

This may not rank as one of the most important grammar tips you'll ever receive, but if just a few of us start to realize the idiocy of the phrase "each and every," I will feel better.

Think about it: why would anyone say (or write) "each and every" anything? Isn't that one of the world's great redundancies?

Janet Napolitano, head of Homeland Security, was quoted in today's USA Today as saying, "Each and every one of the security measures we implement serves an important goal." Now, that's all very absolute sounding, but wouldn't it have been just as correct (and a whole lot less wordy) if she'd said:
"Each one of the security measure..."
OR
"Every one of the security measures."?

Really, it's the same thing! So why do we Americans persist in saying "each and every"? I leave that question to you...

Privacy or Security: Are the two necessarily incompatible?

A new opinion piece in the New York Times argues that the old either-privacy-or-security paradigm is dead. With so much information changing hands regularly--credit card transactions, medical data, emails, social networking--this author argues that whether we can have privacy has become a moot point. So, what we need to think is not whether we can have privacy OR security (because that question is now outdated), how can privacy and security be balanced. He argues that we need, as a society, to discuss not how much information can be gathered about us, but how that information will be used. Very interesting reading:

Click here to read the piece.

Grammar Rant--rampant redundancy!

Actually, this is not another grammar rant, but is more correctly a redundancy alert. I don't know why it has become so popular these days, but people keep referring to time periods.

Does  that not strike you as redundant? What else could a period be (used in this fashion) but a period of time?

So, don't use the awful phrase, time period. Use one or the other, either:

She knew the French Revolution occurred during this time

OR

She knew the French Revolution occurred during this period.

But, please, don't use both. And those of you who are intending to become teachers (I applaud you all), please don't let your high school or middle school students write about time periods.

Grammar Rant

Occasionally, along with the Grammar Goodies,  I will feel compelled to throw in a Grammar Rant. These will appear randomly, usually when something outrageously wrong crops up in my inbox. Today's Grammar Rant stems from a mass of student emails requesting permission numbers. Now, I am perfectly happy to hand out permission numbers whenever I can, and I have no problem with students sending me permission number requests. And I am THRILLED when students write back after hearing from me (most do not).

Anyway, here's what's getting my back up today.

There is no such word as ALRIGHT.

I can't tell you how many times polite students will respond to my response with the following:

"Alright, I understand. Thanks anyway."

The correct form is ALL RIGHT.

Really, trust me--there is no such word as ALRIGHT.

There, now I feel better...

Grammar Goody #8--Comma Rules, part II

Yippee! Another comma rule.


Put a comma after an introductory phrase or clause. To wit:

Although she never put on her shoes before taking out the garbage, her toes managed to survive nicely without breaks or sprains. 

Without that comma after garbage and before her toes, you'd have a really weird couple of words there:

...garbage her toes...

That clearly would not be good or clear.

This rule used to be hard and fast. Now it's softening somewhat so you will see this type of comma not used sometimes when the introductory clause or phrase is short. But I advise you to ALWAYS put it in. It's never going to be wrong if you do.

So, I would write a sentence like this next one WITH the comma (even though it's not considered wrong to do so without it in some circles):


Although short, the clause was effectively placed and had maximum impact.

The bottom line on introductory clauses or phrases, always set them off from the rest of the sentence with a comma.

Grammar Goody #7-- When to use commas, part 1

You're stumped on how and when to use commas, right? That's because if you were taught it at all, no one  held your feet to the fire and actually made you do it. So, gradually you forgot.

Fortunately for you, commas are among the easiest of punctuation marks to learn the proper placement of.

This last sentence reminds me of an old story about Winston Churchill, the great British prime minister during World War II. He was once scolded for ending a sentence with a preposition (as I just did above when I wrote the "proper placement of"). Churchill had enough of such pedantry, and he replied saying something like "that is a criticism up with which I will not put....)

But I digress. Back to commas. We'll start with rule #1 today and continue with others in succeeding days (I know, I know, but you'll just have to wait for the others...)

1. Put a comma before and if the and is connecting two independent clauses, as in this:


She decided to go to the wedding, and she knew exactly what she would wear. 


So, what's an independent clause? It is a part of a sentence that can stand on its own as an independent sentence. In our example above, we have two independent clauses.

(1) She decided to go to the wedding (could stand as a complete sentence on its own)
AND
(2) she knew exactly what she would wear (also could stand as a complete sentence on its own).


Now, that comma may seem unnecessary, but it it's not. It's required in good writing. 


This rule is also cool with or, but, or nor--not just and. 


Going back to my lame example sentence above, the comma placement would be the same if we substituted but for the and. 


She decided to go to the wedding, but she had no idea what to wear. 

Grammar Goody #5-- How to use semicolons (or, when in doubt, don't)

Sometimes students throw semicolons around, hoping it will make their writing look more erudite. My daughter used to love to throw in a semicolon whenever she thought it might look good. But, appearances aside, that's not a good reason to use this most misunderstood of punctuation marks.

So, here's my advice--only use semicolons in two instances.

1. To join two independent clauses that do not have but, or, nor or and.
So, it would be like this
Jim wanted to go; Jan said she didn't.

Now, you could always break that up into two sentences:
Jim wanted to go. Jan said she didn't.

And that would be fine, but it's also good to leave it as one sentence since the clauses are so short and so closely related.

And now the second time to use a semicolon?

2. To set of items in a series that have internal commas. 

He ordered the steak; the potatoes, the kind with the garlic mashed in; and the vegetable of the day.

See why the semicolon is necessary here? It's because "potatoes, the kind with the garlic mashed in" has an internal comma and yet it functions as one of the things in the list, not two. So, if the sentence was punctuated like this:
He ordered the steak, the potatoes, the kind with the garlic mashed in, and the vegetable of the day

then "the kind with the garlic mashed in" would be one of his menu selections, and that's not what you mean.

So, be precise in your punctuation, lest you get  garlic mashed in somewhere you don't want it.

Last remaining Kennedy insider is gone

Today's New York Times contains an obituary for Ted Sorensen, JFK's principal speechwriter--and the speechwriter responsible for some of Kennedy's most famous lines, such as "ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country." He was more than just a speechwriter, though. He was also a confidant and adviser.

There's a marvelous 22-minute video interview included on the obituary page. I recommend it highly. We Americans tend to focus on our presidents, ignoring key Congressional representatives and presidential staff members who are immensely influential. Sorensen is such a person.\

Ted Sorensen obituary, 1 November 2010


And there's another article that we should all read: it shows that Kennedy was not the knee-jerk cold warrior he is often made out to be. With Sorensen's influence, Kennedy delivered a speech in 1963 that sounds nothing like cold war saber rattling --rather, it calls for toning down the rhetoric and international acceptance of diversity. Here's the link to the article in the Boston Globe about that speech.

Grammar Goody #6-- Number and Amount are Not Synonymous

Many people use amount these days for everything dealing with quantity, but that's not always correct. There is a hard-and-fast rule about this (not the hyphens between the compound adjective words?)

1. Use amount only for things that can't be counted:
The amount of love in the world today...

The amount of fear...

2. Use number for things that can be counted:
The number of soldiers serving in Afghanistan....

So this sentence below would clearly be wrong (and I heard it on a news broadcast a few days ago)

The amount of voters is much lower this year than two years ago.

Why is that wrong? Because voters can be counted.

BUT, if the sentence were like this:
The amount of voter apathy is much higher this year than two years ago...
That would be correct because voter apathy can't be counted.

Daniel Ellsberg on the newest round of Wikileaks

For my graduate students who are reading extensively into First Amendment issues and my Constitutional History students comes this most timely opinion piece by Daniel Ellsberg about the newest round of Wikileaks about the Iraq War (which he says may be even more significant than the Pentagon Papers were more than 40 years ago.

Ellsberg's article in The Guardian

Grammar Goody #4 --Redundancies = Too Many Words

Redundancies abound these days. They make our discussions lengthy and our writing obtuse.

Here's a list of some of my favorites

1. add in

2. join together

3. time period

4. true facts

5.rise up

6. drop down (a favorite of meteorologists--temperatures don't just drop to -43, they drop down to -43)

7. live studio audience (imagine the possibility of a dead studio audience..might be good for Halloween, I suppose)


And my all time favorite is?

Free gift. (don't you just hate those gifts you have to pay for?)

No, really my all, all-time favorite is:

Each and every. 

Or how about ATM machine. Hey, what does the M stand for?

Something to think about. Any you'd care to add? Leave a written comment below. [get it?]