A Word, Please: Which is right? Sometimes, both

A lot of the questions I get are of the “Which is right?” variety.

A co-worker will come to my desk and ask, “Which is right: ‘the man that helped me’ or ‘the man who helped me’?” A reader will email asking me to settle a bet: “My wife says adviser is spelled with an E, but I say it takes an O.” A friend will stop talking midsentence and ask, “Was ‘He dived’ right? Or should I have said, ‘He dove’?”

In language, there are lots of ways to be wrong. But most of the time, when a native speaker can’t decide between two things that “look right,” it’s because both are acceptable.

Copy editors like me can’t leave it at that. We have to go with the form that’s preferred by our style guides or designated dictionaries.

That’s the only way we can be sure a publication doesn’t have “adviser” on one page and “advisor” on the next. But for everyone else, the English language offers a lot of choice. Here are eight “both are right” scenarios you’ll be glad to know about.

Our first example, “the man that helped me” vs. “the man who helped me,” is controversial. In editing and other proper-English circles, “who” is considered superior because it’s specific to people. “That” could refer to a pencil or an idea. But “who” cannot.

Editing ideals say that specific words are better than vague words. So we like “who.” But if you look up “that” in the dictionary, you’ll see that it can be a synonym for “who.”

If you’re reading an article in the New York Times, you might notice the word “adviser.” But in the Los Angeles Times you’d see “advisor.” Both are correct.

As for “Yesterday, I dived into the pool” vs. “Yesterday, I dove into the pool”: The dictionary allows both. But if you know how to read between the lines — that is, if you know that dictionaries usually list the preferred form first, you know that “dived” is better.

Note that your freedom of choice ends with the simple past tense. For the past participle, only “dived” is correct: “In the past, I have dived into the pool.”

A question I get quite a bit is whether titles of books, movies and plays should be in italics or quotation marks. We’re accustomed to seeing both. News publications often follow a style that was established before printing presses could handle italics. Book publishers prefer italics for many titles, though they make exceptions for some shorter works such as songs, blog posts and the titles of individual articles.

You may have noticed that, above, I used just one comma in “books, movies and plays.” It would also be correct to insert a second comma, called the Oxford or serial comma: “books, movies, and plays.”

Here’s one that confounds a lot of people: “Carlos’ hat” vs. “Carlos’s hat.” Possessives are extremely confusing. But in this case, at least, you can’t go wrong: When you have a singular noun that ends with S, newspaper style says to not add an extra S to form the possessive: Carlos’. Book and academic writing advocate: Carlos’s.

If you’ve ever wondered whether “politics” takes a singular or plural verb, these two examples should clear things up: “Politics is a tough profession.” “Her politics are very extreme.” As you can see, “politics” goes both ways.

“Coworker” is as valid as “co-worker.” I prefer the hyphenated form because the alternative makes me think of a person who irks cows. But the rules for hyphenating prefixes vary from publisher to publisher.

Some say that “co-” can be attached to a word with no hyphen. Others say that “co-” takes a hyphen in certain circumstances. Of course, I don’t call the shots at the newspaper you’re reading right now. So if my opening paragraph included “coworker,” my apologies to Elsie.

--

JUNE CASAGRANDE is the author of “The Best Punctuation Book, Period.” She can be reached at JuneTCN@aol.com.