A Word, Please: When it comes to grammar, being self-taught helps

A reader named Al was taught that the word “towards” is for physical direction while “toward” is for more abstract uses.

My friend Tracy was taught that the word “percent” must always follow a number, while “percentage” is for all other uses.

A user on a grammar message board wrote: “I was taught in 1974 that ‘ly’ never belonged on the words ‘good’ or ‘bad.’”

MORE: Read more of June’s columns >>

A poster at a writing tips website noted, “I was taught that ‘none’ is singular,” meaning it would be grammatically incorrect to say, “None of my friends are sports fans.”

A writer for the Guardian was taught that “‘between’ applies only to two things, and ‘among’ should be used for more than two.”

I once met a woman who was taught that you should never begin a sentence with the word “it.”

In the 14 years I’ve been writing about grammar, sometimes I think I’ve heard ‘em all. But then I think about some of the things I haven’t heard, and an interesting picture emerges.

I’ve never heard someone say he was taught that Aaron Burr killed Alexander Hamilton in a thumb-wrestling match. I’ve never met anyone who was taught that water molecules resemble Donald Duck. No one, as far as I can tell, was taught that two plus two is five. And, perhaps most important, I’ve never heard anyone say: “I was taught how to research English usage so that I can find out for myself what’s proper and correct.”

Grammar seems to be the only subject in which we’re supposed to put blind faith in hearsay. Most of us aren’t given the tools to learn things for ourselves. We’re simply told that X, Y and Z usages are wrong, and it’s left implied that we should not question the source or try to find answers on our own.

It’s as though, locked away in some secret hall of knowledge, there exists a rare tome called “The Grammar Penal Code” that we’re never allowed to see or touch or even ask about.

It’s weird.

The truth about the language rules we’re taught isn’t confined to an obscure book or the brain of some long-lost teacher. The facts are right in the dictionary. Actually, they’re even more clearly spelled out in dictionary-like reference books called usage guides, with “Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of English Usage” considered to be among the best.

But you don’t need a specialty reference. A dictionary will do just fine, provided you’re willing to read the whole entry for the word you’re researching. Usually, the definitions, filtered through a bit of critical thinking, set clear parameters for how a word may or may not be used.

For example, the definitions of both “percent” and “percentage” include “part of a whole,” which means that my friend Tracy was taught wrong. “Towards” and “toward” aren’t delineated the way Al was taught, and “between” and “among” aren’t mutually exclusive, either.

In many cases, the dictionary makers have already anticipated your question and answered it with a “usage note” analyzing the conventional wisdom on the subject.

For example, here’s a gem you’ll find at the end of Webster’s New World College Dictionary’s entry for “none”: “It is widely asserted that ‘none’ is equivalent to ‘no one’ and hence requires a singular verb and singular pronoun.”

Webster’s notes, adding that it’s true that ‘none’ is derived from an Old English word meaning “one,” “but the word has been used as both a singular and a plural since the ninth century.” The King James Bible, Shakespeare and many other important sources have used the plural “none,” the dictionary notes, concluding: “Choosing between singular or plural is thus more of a stylistic matter than a grammatical one.”

So while it’s probably OK to trust what you were taught about history, science, math and most other academic subjects, when it comes to English usage, it’s never too late to become self-taught.

--

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