神火的方式治疗作家的块
我们全部体验了它。 坐在书桌或计算机制表，当一张空白的纸和黑屏凝视我们并且敢我们写任何东西时，甚而句子某事。
这是crippling疾病以[标记]作家的块[/tag著名]。
什么？
由grammarblogger张贴
0评论档案2007年3月
0评论他们的Cheatin’心脏
在我的一所大学中在教育[/tag]把另一夜分类，我通过一些学生介绍坐了在[标记]学术不诚实。 一个小组在[标记]等级通货膨胀[/tag]做了一个很好被研究的工作，详述它的起因和潜力治疗。 另一个小组提出了什么在表面看来是底漆关于怎样欺诈，并且为什么如此做在学校是根本的，在任何水平。
Ouch!
由grammarblogger张贴
在使用打翻谁，并且谁
我相信我在文字以前提及了那，在至少和经常讲话，使用 谁 完全和忘记 谁 存在将工作正义罚款。
然而，我最近听一个无线电广告关于妇女赞颂她新的男朋友质量“的一项网上约会的服务谁我在网上遇见了”，或词到那个作用。
这在我的耳朵磨碎了。 为什么？
由grammarblogger张贴
技巧为做质量网上研究
如果您对[标记]找到好信息是严肃的网上[/tag] -，并且不仅什么某人想要强迫在您下喉头你将需要一些战略为成功。
我应付这些战略？ ？在我新的英国资源特点叫 质量网上研究.?? 检查它。
由grammarblogger张贴
包括的v。 包括
我总跑了入坚持那的那些吹牛大王[标记]编辑、copyeditors和校对员[/tag] 包括 用于活跃感觉，意味“包括”。
Hence, one could write, "The program comprises dieting, exercise, and yoga." One could not write this in the passive voice, "The program is comprised of dieting, exercise, and yoga," which is the way I always used the verb.
Now,"blow-hard central" had a point in the sense that I never recognized comprise as a transitive verb that took objects, but I’m not sure they were right about not using "is comprised of."
Now to the rescue comes Common Errors in English, which has a solution–use "is composed of" instead, but that doesn’t quite, to me at least, convey the same meaning as "is comprised of."
Whatever, the blow-hards are always right. Blow-hards rule just about everywhere, don’t they? But they’re not always right!
Posted by grammarblogger
My Compliments on Your Complementary Work
My title is an example of two words that are often confused.?? Actually, what’s confused in many writers’ minds is how to use and spell complementary.??I’ve even seen professional Web sites where companies are trying to sell their “complementary services” and they use complimentary completely incorrectly.?? Sure, I’ll take their free services anytime.
Here’s an explanation of the difference.
Posted by grammarblogger
Grammar Horror Stories (Teaching-Wise)
I have my NotWords and MorphedWords categories, and now I’m toying with a Grammar Horror Stories category.
I bring this up because I can’t remember how many college students I’ve taught over the years who live in mortal fear of K-12 English admonitions from well-meaning (I hope) but un-grammar-educated (for sure) teachers.
Examples?
Posted by grammarblogger
I’m Through With the NotWord Thru
Like Milton in Office Space, who proclaimed “the last straw” when they turned the lights off on him, I am now beyond the last straw with the newer generations’ misuse of the NotWord thru, which is a misspelling of the real word through.
Thru belongs in only one usage, and that’s for fast food joints such as [tag]Drive-Thrus[/tag].
The final straw was reached when a student of mine, who has Mensa-caliber brain functions, turned in a paper with [tag]thru[/tag] used throughout it.
Enough. Let’s banish this NotWord forever. I’m through with thru.
Posted by grammarblogger
Use of Subjunctive Mood in Verbs
Now here’s a misusage that almost no ear, nor eye, will ever catch.
What’s wrong with this lyric:
“If I was a rich man…”?
If this clause reads and sounds okay to you, then you’re definitely among the majority of English users who don’t know, don’t understand or otherwise just ignore the subjunctive mood.
Briefly, the to be verb takes the subjective form were when used in if constructions expressing a wish or condition. For instance:
“If I were in New York today, I could visit my friend Daniel.”
You’re not in New York, so the if expresses a wish or condition and thus requires the subjunctive mood in the verb, which is plural rather than singular.
If I was just learning English, I’d be confused, but if I were born here, I might still be confused. (Find the error–or irony–in there yet?)
Posted by grammarblogger
Word Confusion: Gleam and Glean
I was dashing off an e-mail just now, and I used the word gleam in the sense of examining some documents and deriving meaning.
Something struck me as odd about the word. It turns out that I really meant glean. It’s a good thing I turned instantly to my cyber-buddy Dictionary.com to verify my spelling and usage, and sure enough: Gleam: a flash or beam of light. Glean: to gather slowly and laboriously, bit by bit. Of course, these are only the first definitions for each, but as you can see, I had chosen the wrong word entirely.
Lesson here, even for an old writer hack like me: When in doubt, look it up.
Posted by grammarblogger
