ATTN: Copyeditors and Grammar Fiends

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (5075 of them)

Things I really ought to know by now, No.1 in a probably long series:

enquiry vs inquiry...

Background Zombie (CharlieNo4), Thursday, 16 September 2010 15:20 (fifteen years ago)

eh

in british i think there's a subtle difference, where enquiry is a query, and an inquiry is like a formal inquest.

don't know about US- favours just use of 'inquiry' i think?

k¸ (darraghmac), Thursday, 16 September 2010 15:22 (fifteen years ago)

yeah we don't fuck with "enquiry" much here

k3vin k., Thursday, 16 September 2010 17:42 (fifteen years ago)

LinkedIn profiles have a bit at the bottom where you can say "interested in"... and they have 'job inquiries' as an option. Drives me insane.

From Wiktionary: According to Fowler's Modern English Usage (1926), inquiry should be used in relation to a formal inquest, and enquiry to the act of questioning. Many (though not all) British writers maintain this distinction; the Oxford English Dictionary, on the other hand, lists inquiry and enquiry as equal alternatives, in that order. Some British dictionaries, such as Chambers 21st Century Dictionary [1], present the two spellings as interchangeable variants in the general sense, but prefer inquiry for the "formal inquest" sense. In Australian English, inquiry represents a formal inquest (such as a government investigation) while enquiry is used in the act of questioning; (eg: the customer enquired about the status of his loan application); both spellings are current in Canadian English, where enquiry is often associated with scholarly or intellectual research. (See Pam Peters, The Cambridge Guide to English Usage, p. 282.)

American English usually uses inquiry.

Not the real Village People, Thursday, 16 September 2010 23:31 (fifteen years ago)

The following documents are to be submitted as soon as possible, if not done so already

illiterate mods are killing ilx (darraghmac), Monday, 20 September 2010 15:27 (fifteen years ago)

i mean usually i could do this, but for ref i just searched for 'grammer fiends' so obv not operating at 100% right now.

illiterate mods are killing ilx (darraghmac), Monday, 20 September 2010 15:28 (fifteen years ago)

if they have not been already?

ledge, Monday, 20 September 2010 15:42 (fifteen years ago)

oh i dunno if that's any better?

illiterate mods are killing ilx (darraghmac), Monday, 20 September 2010 15:44 (fifteen years ago)

"Please submit the following documents as soon as possible, if you have not done so already." Switching from passive to active usually solves that stuff for me.

Shock and Awe High School (Phil D.), Monday, 20 September 2010 15:45 (fifteen years ago)

yes, i like that.

back to you ledge, can you beat that?

illiterate mods are killing ilx (darraghmac), Monday, 20 September 2010 15:46 (fifteen years ago)

CAN YOU HUH?

illiterate mods are killing ilx (darraghmac), Monday, 20 September 2010 15:46 (fifteen years ago)

^ switch from passive to aggressive

illiterate mods are killing ilx (darraghmac), Monday, 20 September 2010 15:46 (fifteen years ago)

fuck you all

ledge, Monday, 20 September 2010 15:46 (fifteen years ago)

yeah i've zung better

ledge, Monday, 20 September 2010 15:49 (fifteen years ago)

oooh while we're on the right thread can i get a second opinion on 'zung'

illiterate mods are killing ilx (darraghmac), Monday, 20 September 2010 15:49 (fifteen years ago)

stung sung zung

ledge, Monday, 20 September 2010 15:51 (fifteen years ago)

^ zinged beast

illiterate mods are killing ilx (darraghmac), Monday, 20 September 2010 15:55 (fifteen years ago)

Is this grammatically correct?

"He posted a new question to ILX, typing as fast as he could."

Do you always have to have a "while" in there? Would a long dash work instead, or is this construction simply grammatically incorrect?

wk, Monday, 20 September 2010 20:24 (fifteen years ago)

You don't need a 'while' in there, I think, the end of your sentence is an adverbial describing the way in which he posted rather than a separate activity.

Running the Gantelope (Nasty, Brutish & Short), Monday, 20 September 2010 21:09 (fifteen years ago)

Ah, an adverbial. Thanks! Are adverbial phrases considered a fiction writing faux pas on the level of adverbs?

wk, Monday, 20 September 2010 21:29 (fifteen years ago)

depending on which linguist you ask almost all clauses can be described as having adverbial components

dayo, Tuesday, 21 September 2010 00:01 (fifteen years ago)

This is causing huge arguments in work:

1. "It was a pleasure to walk past the building"

OR

2. "It was a pleasure to walk passed the building"

I say 1. Everybody else says 2. Which is correct, and why?

nate woolls, Friday, 24 September 2010 14:50 (fifteen years ago)

are you serious?

progressive cuts (Tracer Hand), Friday, 24 September 2010 14:52 (fifteen years ago)

I sense a trap.

Hmmm.

It's like that time in primary school I had to draw the water in a bottle turned on its side and go it wrong. I know it is.

Wait.

Is 'It was a pleasure to walk' the name of someone where you work, nate?

the too encumbered madman (GamalielRatsey), Friday, 24 September 2010 14:52 (fifteen years ago)

go it wrong got it wrong

the too encumbered madman (GamalielRatsey), Friday, 24 September 2010 14:53 (fifteen years ago)

I am serious. I thought it was obviously PAST, I can't see any way on earth it could be PASSED, but a bunch of people have got me doubting myself. People who I previously thought were reasonably intelligent.

nate woolls, Friday, 24 September 2010 14:54 (fifteen years ago)

#1. Anything else is total lunacy.

Also recently found in a book at work: "pho-hawk." Apparently the author has a particular attachment to that horror. Should such people be killed and eaten?

I've got ten bucks. SURPRISE ME. (Laurel), Friday, 24 September 2010 14:55 (fifteen years ago)

God, nate, you must have thought you were going mad. Like the end of Invasion of the Body Snatchers.

the too encumbered madman (GamalielRatsey), Friday, 24 September 2010 14:56 (fifteen years ago)

I work with a load of idiots, obviously.

nate woolls, Friday, 24 September 2010 14:59 (fifteen years ago)

you don't understand! my dog, who i have named "it was a pleasure to walk", had just eaten a building!

progressive cuts (Tracer Hand), Friday, 24 September 2010 15:29 (fifteen years ago)

Most amusing.

I don't understand 'pho-hawk' - what is that supposed to be?

Running the Gantelope (Nasty, Brutish & Short), Friday, 24 September 2010 16:16 (fifteen years ago)

faux hawk?

teddy penderecki (c sharp major), Friday, 24 September 2010 16:23 (fifteen years ago)

as in, the dude haircut also known as the hoxton fin

teddy penderecki (c sharp major), Friday, 24 September 2010 16:25 (fifteen years ago)

Faux, yes. I don't even....

I've got ten bucks. SURPRISE ME. (Laurel), Friday, 24 September 2010 17:13 (fifteen years ago)

Grammar folks,

What are your feelings on the tendency to refer to "a politics" or even "a politic"? Is one more correct than another? Or is it just inflated? The phrase in question is "an acerbic sexual politics".

Dan I Wish I Was Your Lover (admrl), Sunday, 26 September 2010 16:59 (fifteen years ago)

It has become accepted useage to say, for example, "I like his sense of humor, but not his politics." Given this useage, the phrase passes muster, but I'd suggest that if it sounds awkward in its context, change the phrase or the context to something you don't find jarring.

Aimless, Sunday, 26 September 2010 18:18 (fifteen years ago)

i don't understand why 'an' would go into the context given, admrl.

i dont love everything, i love football (darraghmac), Sunday, 26 September 2010 18:31 (fifteen years ago)

think such useage occurs frequently as part of cultural studies jargon

dude (del), Sunday, 26 September 2010 18:39 (fifteen years ago)

Thanks guys. I'm correcting someone else's text, which is always a little difficult. I agree about "an", though

Dan I Wish I Was Your Lover (admrl), Sunday, 26 September 2010 18:46 (fifteen years ago)

"Over the past 20 years, ABC Company has helped many businesses in __________ (improve) their brand."

this is for a verb conjugation exercise. obviously that "in" means it will be "improving", but...why? is it just some phrasal convention? without "in" it would be just "improve" which to me seems a bit clearer, and could also be easily understood in grammar terms.

rent, Monday, 27 September 2010 07:11 (fifteen years ago)

wd just go with 'to improve' myself

i dont love everything, i love football (darraghmac), Monday, 27 September 2010 08:03 (fifteen years ago)

Verb forms tend to be verb+ing after a preposition, but as Darragh says, there's no real need to go down that route here.

Running the Gantelope (Nasty, Brutish & Short), Monday, 27 September 2010 10:49 (fifteen years ago)

The rough linguist's answer is that a preposition always takes a noun phrase as argument; "improve their brand" is a (non-finite) verb phrase but "improving their brand" acts more or less like a noun phrase (e.g. "improving their brand is fun"). There some caveats and subtleties to this: nominalisations behave more idiosyncratically than other nouns, you have to accept that "to" in "to improve" is not a preposition...

seandalai, Monday, 27 September 2010 13:43 (fifteen years ago)

you're right, darragh, of course. missed that. prob wouldn't say the "to" in conversation tbh. totally agree it's clumsier than necessary, but that's how it appears in the gap exercise. but great explanation, thanks very much.

rent, Tuesday, 28 September 2010 07:56 (fifteen years ago)

you're right, darragh, of course.

^ most under-used grammatical term on ilx

i dont love everything, i love football (darraghmac), Tuesday, 28 September 2010 09:13 (fifteen years ago)

"Over the past 20 years, ABC Company has helped many businesses in __________ (improve) their brand."

argh, note that this contains my biggest ongoing peeve -- businessES have brandS, plural

oɔsıqɐu (nabisco), Tuesday, 28 September 2010 16:15 (fifteen years ago)

Maybe ABC has helped companies improve ABC's brand.

http://tinyurl.com/vrrr0000m (Pleasant Plains), Tuesday, 28 September 2010 16:34 (fifteen years ago)

by being an awesome client!

progressive cuts (Tracer Hand), Tuesday, 28 September 2010 16:36 (fifteen years ago)

I don't think it's that bad - it's one way to signal that there's a single brand per business. Would you also hate on the following example? "Five of the songs contain a disco breakdown".

seandalai, Tuesday, 28 September 2010 19:03 (fifteen years ago)

"helped many businesses improve their brands" gets my vote.

quincie, Tuesday, 28 September 2010 19:15 (fifteen years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.