Vol. 72, No. 3, March 1999
In Plain English
Pet Peeves
of Improper English Usage
Readers sound off on pet peeves of their
own.
By Mary Barnard Ray
Some time ago, I invited readers to send their pet peeves
of improper English usage for inclusion in a future writing column.
The authors of these "peeves" wish to remain anonymous,
and so they shall. Their voices are their own. My comments, if
any, are clearly identified.
To those who sent in these "peeves," and to everyone
who has contributed to the mailbag, thank you. Please continue
to write. It's gratifying, as an author, to hear from readers.
Reader: Here's my grammatical pet peeve: people
in advertising who don't know the difference between
the plural and the singular. For example: Using "they"
when referring to a business like Phil Tolkan Pontiac.
Frequently the writer will switch back and forth between
the singular and the plural. It is very annoying.
Ms. Ray: Good choice! This indifference to numbers
can be annoying and misleading. Sometimes the problem may stem
from ignorance or indifference, but often it is done as a flawed
attempt to avoid gender-biased language. But it creates ambiguity
and offends the trained English ear; legal writers should not
resort to the habit. There are better ways to avoid gender-biased
language.
Using the plural form throughout a text avoids the need for
"he or she" without violating numerical logic.
"Attorneys choosing to exercise this option should submit
their completed applications by June 6, 1999."
When the plural form cannot be used without sacrificing precision,
then try rephrasing to reduce the number of references to the
person involved.
"Any attorney who uses this form should include a self-addressed,
stamped envelope."
When this is not possible, use "he or she."
"If a stockholder has not received a written notice by
Sept. 1, 1999, then he or she should contact... ."
Even if "he or she" occasionally seems cumbersome
and distracting to you as a writer, it will not be as cumbersome
or distracting to the careful reader as inconsistent numbers
and subject/pronoun disagreement.
Mary Barnard Ray is a legal
writing lecturer and director of the Legal Writing Individualized
Instruction Services at the U.W. Law School. She has taught writing
workshops and offered individual sessions for law students; she
also taught advanced writing and commenting and conferencing
techniques in the training course for the legal writing teaching
assistants. She has taught and spoken nationally at many seminars
and conferences of legal and college writing instructors. Her
publications include two coauthored legal writing books, Getting
It Right and Getting It Written and Beyond the Basics,
published by West Publishing Co.
If you have a writing problem that you can't
resolve, email or send
your question to Ms. Ray, c/o Wisconsin Lawyer, State Bar of
Wisconsin, P.O. Box 7158, Madison, WI 53707-7158. Your question
and Ms. Ray's response will be published in this column.
Readers who object to their names being mentioned should state
so in their letters. |
Reader: I have lots of peeves, but a few of my pet
ones are these:
- Using "impact" as a verb.
- Using "quality" without a qualifier (as in, "It's
a quality product," instead of "It's a high-quality
product").
- Not using a comma before "and" or "or"
in a list. This drives me nuts, because it can change the meaning
of a sentence. In legal drafting, we always use that comma to
avoid any misunderstandings. I think the teachers in elementary
schools now teach students affirmatively not to use that comma,
because the young attorneys we get in the office have to be "deprogrammed."
- One I see all the time in everyday writing and speaking is
the overzealous avoidance of ending a sentence with a preposition.
I don't know how it happened, but suddenly everyone thinks
it is improper to end a sentence with a preposition. (It's
like the incorrect avoidance of using "me" when "me"
is correct, instead of "I.")
People are afraid of looking ignorant, when in fact the usage
is wrong.
|