English Grammar (Professional Writers) Rant!

Surely, professional writers should know basic rules of grammar? For example: 'should of' should be 'should have' of course, most people are aware of this but I've found the wrong use in a few novels. If it's spoken by a character, then it's a character trait and acceptable. Otherwise, no.

There are many gripes but today's annoyance is the unnecessary use of 'up' at the end of sentences. Here are some examples: 

• Pick the rubbish up should be Pick up the rubbish;
• Pick my parents up probably doesn't mean Pick up my parents but Collect my parents;

The same rule can apply with 'drop...off'. So, instead of drop the package off, try drop off the package or even 'deliver the package' which eliminates the need to think about the sentence structure. To me, 'Drop the package off' is an invitation to complete the sentence in the absence of the writer doing so, e.g. Drop the package off the top of a tall building.

Sometimes, the 'up' isn't required at all, such as: 

• Clean this mess up should be Clean up this mess or just Clean this mess;
  
• Please fill the box up is the same as Please fill the box;
• Hurry up is the same as Hurry!
  

I'm sure that you can think of many, many more.

Add these to my other grammar gripes,of which there are quite a few! For example, take a look at the following examples of incorrect grammar from those who should know better:

From the FT, 26 Jan 2024: "In Poland last year, almost half of men aged 18-21 backed the hard-right Confederation party, compared to just a sixth of young women of the same age."
This, of course, should be compared with.

From Mrs Downie A Level Media blog: "The news agenda of this paper [The Daily Mail] is different to The Guardian."
Tsk! Mrs Downie, it should be different from.

Most likely, this post isn't going to make a huge (or even small) difference to journalism grammar standards, nor will it improve teaching in schools, as A-levels are presumably gained at current standards. However, optimism is one of my characteristics :) 

***

By the way, I'm not ranting at everyone because they may not have had the best English tutors or English grammar may not be their thing (doesn't matter how many times people have tried to teach me certain other things, like electronics or history dates, sometimes your brain just can't take it in).

 

Gender, Labels & Grammar

It seems that the very people who dislike being labelled are labelling themselves. If he/she prefers to be genderless then, unless it's relevant (e.g. medical issues), I totally agree. However, the common practice of using 'they' instead of the singular, genderless 'it' (or maybe create a new word) makes 'them' seem scizophrenic. 

For example, an extract from Wikipedia "They co-created, co-wrote and starred in..." refers only to Mae Martin and does not include any other person(s) who co-created/co-wrote or starred. It's confusing. Also, I can't bring myself to say 'they is brilliant'.

It's a grammar thing which I know that I need to accept, similar to the common mis-use of  'different to' (cringe) or 'compared to' and 'people that...' (see notes) but, well, it's difficult. Don't get me started on 'could of' or 'your' when it should be 'you're'... Language changes between generations and my generation was traditionally taught. All I can do is quietly accept declining standards of grammar and not deliver a rant to the perpertators (unless, of course, they ask me to).

On the topic of labelling, I've never felt the need to belong to a group, whether non-binary, feminist, political or anything else. People are people and it's nobody else's business if there are differences - it's what makes humans interesting. Imagine how boring life would be if we were all the same; might as well be robots.

Similarly, religion. Be atheist, hindu, christian, or whatever you believe. Explain your choice if asked but do not, ever, bully the rest of the world to join you. Religion is your belief, just as Santa Claus is a 3-year old child's belief. In fact, on the face of it, there is more evidence of Santa's magic than any god's miracles, in recent times. Take comfort in your belief but please don't force it upon others. 

~ ~ ~ 

Notes 

The Grammar Thing:
- different from (always, unless using the American 'different than');
- compared with (when comparing like with like; 'compared to' should only be used when the comparison is not comparable, e.g. a person and a summer’s day;
- people who, not people that, please. Simple guidelines:
    -- Who is always used to refer to people (the person who...);
    -- That is used for mostly everything else, e.g. objects, animals, groups
        (the cat that... that team that...).
- could've, would've and should've are shortened from could have, would have and should have. Not 'of'.

Non-gender-specific: There is a place for 'they'. For example, when writing a business plan, it can be introduced as a term which can refer to he, she or more than one person, thereby avoiding multiple future edits.