Content deleted Content added
m →Semantics: MOS:LQ + MOS:QWQ |
m →Notes: MOS:LQ + MOS:QWQ + MOS:CONFORM, MOS:QUOTEPUNCT |
||
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 11:
==Grammar==
* '''Misconception:''' ''"A sentence must not end in a [[preposition]]."''<ref name="Cutts 2009. p. 109">[[#Cut09|Cutts 2009]]. p. 109.</ref><ref name="ReferenceA">[[#CK09|O'Conner and Kellerman 2009]]. p. 21.</ref><ref name="ReferenceB">[[#Fog10|Fogarty 2010]]. "Top Ten Grammar Myths
[[Mignon Fogarty]] writes that "nearly all grammarians agree that it's fine to end sentences with prepositions, at least in some cases
* '''Misconception:''' ''"[[Infinitives]] must not be [[Split infinitive|split]]."''
"There is no such rule" against splitting an infinitive, according to ''The Oxford Guide to Plain English'',<ref name="Cutts 2009. p. 111">[[#Cut09|Cutts 2009]]. p. 111.</ref> and it has "never been wrong to 'split' an infinitive".<ref>[[#CK09|O'Conner and Kellerman 2009]]. p. 17.</ref> In some cases it may be preferable to split an infinitive.<ref name="Cutts 2009. p. 111" /><ref>[[#CK09|O'Conner and Kellerman 2009]]. pp. 18–20.</ref> In his grammar book ''A Plea for the Queen's English'' (1864), [[Henry Alford (theologian)|Henry Alford]] claimed that because "to" was part of the infinitive, the parts were inseparable.<ref>[[#CK09|O'Conner and Kellerman 2009]]. p. 19.</ref> This was in line with a 19th-century movement among grammarians to transfer Latin rules to the English language. In Latin, infinitives are single words (e.g.,
* '''Misconception:''' ''"[[Conjunction (grammar)|Conjunctions]] such as
Those who impose this rule on themselves or their students are following a modern English "rule" that was neither used historically nor universally followed in professional writing. [[Jeremy Butterfield]] described this perceived prohibition as one of "the folk commandments of English usage".<ref>[[#But08|Butterfield 2008]]. p. 136.</ref> The ''Chicago Manual of Style'' says:
<blockquote> There is a widespread belief—one with no historical or grammatical foundation—that it is an error to begin a sentence with a conjunction such as "and", "but", or "so". In fact, a substantial percentage (often as many as 10 percent) of the sentences in first-rate writing begin with conjunctions. It has been so for centuries, and even the most conservative grammarians have followed this practice.<ref>[[#Uni10|University of Chicago Press 2010]]. p. 257.</ref>{{Ref label|C|c|none}} </blockquote> Regarding the word "and", ''[[Fowler's Modern English Usage]]'' states
* '''Misconception:''' ''"The [[English passive voice|passive voice]] is incorrect."''
It is a misconception that the passive voice is always incorrect in English.<ref>[[#Wal04|Walsh 2004]]. pp. 61, 68–69.</ref> Some "writing tutors" believe that the passive voice is to be avoided in all cases,<ref>[[#Pul09|Pullum 2009]].</ref> but "there are legitimate uses for the passive voice", says Paul Brians.<ref name="Brians 2009. p. 169">[[#Bri09|Brians 2009]]. p. 169.</ref> [[Mignon Fogarty]] also points out that "passive sentences aren't incorrect"<ref>[[#Fog10a|Fogarty 2010]]. "Active Voice Versus Passive Voice
Some proscriptions of passive voice stem from its use to avoid accountability or as [[weasel words]], rather than from its supposed ungrammaticality.
* '''Misconception:''' ''"[[Litotes]]
Some style guides use the term [[double negative]] to refer exclusively to the [[nonstandard dialect|nonstandard]] use of reinforcing negations ([[negative concord]], which is considered standard in some other languages), e.g., using "I don't know nothing" to mean "I know nothing". But the term "double negative" can sometimes refer to the standard English constructions called [[litotes]] or nested negatives, e.g., using "He is not unhealthy" to mean "He is healthy". In some cases, nested negation is used to convey nuance, uncertainty, or the possibility of [[Three-valued logic|a third option]] other than a statement or its negation. For example, an author may write "I'm not unconvinced by his argument" to imply they find an argument persuasive, but not definitive.<ref>{{cite web|url = http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/double-negative|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20130627233213/http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/double-negative|url-status = dead|archive-date = June 27, 2013|website = Lexico|publisher = Oxford|title = double negative}}</ref>
Some writers suggest avoiding nested negatives as a [[rule of thumb]] for clear and concise writing.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2011-02-16 |title=Politics and the English Language
==Usage==
Line 70 ⟶ 73:
:'''a.'''{{Note label|A|a|none}}For example, among the top ten usage "errors" submitted to the BBC was the supposed prohibition against using double negatives.
:'''b.'''{{Note label|B|b|none}}[[The Churchill Centre]] describes a similar version as "An invented phrase put in Churchill's mouth".<ref>[[#Chu11|The Churchill Centre and Museum at the Churchill War Rooms, London 2011]]. (The original text is italicized.)</ref>
:'''c.'''{{Note label|C|c|none}}''Chicago'' elaborates by noting Charles Allen Lloyd's observations on this phenomenon: "Next to the groundless notion that it is incorrect to end an English sentence with a preposition, perhaps the most wide-spread of the many false beliefs about the use of our language is the equally groundless notion that it is incorrect to begin one with
:'''d.'''{{Note label|D|d|none}}These authors are quick to point out, however, that the passive voice is not necessarily ''better''—it's simply a myth that the passive voice is ''wrong''. For example, Brians states that
{{refend}}
|