神火的方式治療作家的塊
我們全部體驗了它。 坐在書桌或計算機製表，當一張空白的紙和黑屏凝視我們并且敢我們寫任何東西時，甚而句子某事。
這是crippling疾病以[標記]作家的塊[/tag著名]。
什麼？
由grammarblogger張貼
0評論 檔案2007年3月
0評論 他們的Cheatin』心臟
在我的一所大學中在教育[/tag]把另一夜分類，我通過一些學生介紹坐了在[標記]學術不誠實。 一個小組在[標記]等級通貨膨脹[/tag]做了一個很好被研究的工作，詳述它的起因和潛力治療。 另一個小組提出了什麼在表面看來是底漆關於怎樣欺詐，并且為什麼如此做在學校是根本的，在任何水平。
Ouch!
由grammarblogger張貼
在使用打翻誰，并且誰
我相信我在文字以前提及了那，在至少和經常講話，使用 誰 完全和忘記 誰 存在將工作正義罰款。
然而，我最近聽一個無線電廣告關於婦女讚頌她新的男朋友質量「的一項網上約會的服務誰我在網上遇見了」，或詞到那個作用。
這在我的耳朵磨碎了。 為什麼？
由grammarblogger張貼
技巧為做質量網上研究
如果您對[標記]找到好信息是嚴肅的網上[/tag] -，并且不僅什麼某人想要強迫在您下喉頭你將需要一些戰略為成功。
我應付這些戰略？ ？在叫的我新的英國資源特點 質量網上研究.?? 檢查它。
由grammarblogger張貼
包括的v。 包括
我總跑了入堅持那的那些吹牛大王[標記]編輯、copyeditors和校對員[/tag] 包括 用於活躍感覺，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
