Another Redundancy

Recently I was observing a NASCAR public service announcement for disaster support. At the end, one driver urged everyone to "unite together." I guess that admonition sounds better than "unite separately."

Grammatical Trans Fat

Now we're "transitioning" from one thing to another. I suppose the idea is to economize from the phrase, "make a transition," to the word, "transition." Well, "transition" should not be used as a verb. What, I'm making life more difficult for you? Not! Indeed, use "transit" instead. "I transited away from using nouns as verbs." Once again I kept it even simpler!

Shorter Cut

Let's get it straight right from the start, I'm not a texter. I have noticed, though, the abbreviation "lol." I keep thinking it means "lots of love." I am repeatedly told that it stands for "laughing out loud." Ok, then I have an abbreviation for the above abbreviation. You see, one shouldn't say "out loud." "Aloud" is preferred. Hence we have "laughing aloud" with an abbreviation of "la." Now isn't that nice?!

Dangerously Bad Grammar

I've touched on some quick tips like these: If you can use "farther," don't use "further"; if you can use "whether," don't use "if"; and if you can use "and," don't use "or." An excellent example of the last of these can be seen on some gas pumps: "Turn off cell phones or other electrical devices to avoid possible explosion." A logical, though not common-sense, response might be, "I think I'll choose to turn off my laptop." Clearly the instruction is to turn off all electrical devices and should read, "Turn off cell phones and other electrical devices."

"'Til there Was You"

Remember this song by such as Anita Bryant and the Beatles? The title seems innocuous enough, but what's the subject of this clause? "You," right? The verb must be plural, ok? Then shouldn't the title be, "'Til there Were You"? I haven't been able to find anyone who disputes such logic, but the new title surely sounds weird. Oh, as an aside, "'til" is an abbreviation for "until." I don't care for the spelling "till," which seems to have little to do with "until."

"I Gotta Be Me"

The famous Sammy Davis, Jr., song title is safe from my wrath by way of poetic license. How, though, did we come to say such in everyday conversation? "I must . . ." became "I have to . . . ," which dissolved into "I've got to . . . ," which fell to "I got to . . . ," that slid into "I gotta . . . ." I'll be honest; I always believed that "I have to . . ." was fine. Literally, though, what does "I have to . . ." mean? Probably nothing really. Now "I've got . . ." to me is a convoluted processing of "I have . . . ," which is a simple, straightforward indication of possession. "I got . . ." means that I received or picked up, not that I currently possess. Ok, so what is the best grammatical version of "I Gotta Be Me"? A college English teacher once quickly responded to my question: say, "I Must Be Myself." Bad song title, excellent grammar!

Pronouns

It should be fairly elementary in most cases to get it right concerning "I," "me," "he," "him," "she," "her," "they," and "them." Weren't we always taught to use the one that would sound right if the partner word were left out? Example: "Heather and I are going to the grocery." "I am going to the grocery." Ok, that was too easy. How about, "Jay is going to the grocery with Heather and me"? The test: "Jay is going to the grocery with me."

Now let's look at some slightly more difficult situations. "I don't know who is going," but, "I don't know whom he is going with" (or "I don't know with whom he is going). Reduce such situations to the clauses that the pronouns are immediately parts of. ". . . Who is going," but, ". . . with whom he is going." If you're not much into "whom," substitute, say, "him" for "whom" and "he" for "who." Thus "I don't know whom she killed" can be analyzed, ". . . she killed him (not he)"; so it's not, "I don't know who she killed." Further, "Whom she killed is lying in the closet." Again "she killed he" is clearly wrong; likewise "who," strictly speaking, is incorrect. Try this one, "Ben is the one who (or whom?) I thought did it." "I thought" is unnecessary or parenthetical; leave it out and test: "Ben is the one who did it." That's right, "I thought he did it," certainly not "I thought him did it."

Most of us know to answer the phone request, "I'd like to speak with Tom," with "This is he." On the other hand, when the police coming looking for Jake, folks usually say, "That's him!" Be consistent. The construction is the same. Say, "That's he!" Oh, yeah, you'll probably shake up the policemen; but, hey, this is a grammar discussion, not a criminology lesson.