1. “The corporation runs hydropower plants from Maine to Montana.”

2. “Because Martinez was so young, it was natural to compare his potential with Hall of Fame pitcher Sandy Koufax.”

3. “If she could, she would travel to Saturn to see the rings as well as other galaxies to see if there is life elsewhere.”

4. “Remember the sixties dream of an entire meal served in a pill, like the Jetsons?”

5. “The practice field utilizes the same dirt on the warning track as the team’s home stadium.”

Answers and Explanations

1. The impression is that the plants are somehow interconnected in a continuous string from one state to the next, rather than that the plants can be found in various states in and between the two states mentioned. Complete the thought with the addition of a phrase that clarifies that the plants are located intermittently and eliminates the possible misapprehension: “The corporation runs hydropower plants in many parts of the country, from Maine to Montana.”

2. The comparison should not be described as the one between Martinez’s potential and Sandy Koufax; it should be between the respective potentials of the two men. That distinction is clarified by the addition of two words that indicate the true parallel relationship: “Because Martinez was so young, it was natural to compare his potential with that of Hall of Fame pitcher Sandy Koufax.”

3. As written, the sentence suggests that the subject desires to travel to Saturn to see two features — the planets rings and other galaxies – both for the purposes of determining whether life exists elsewhere besides Earth. But the two things she wishes to experience are Saturn’s rings and other galaxies — and only in the latter case because she’s curious about the possible existence of extraterrestrial life. This significant misunderstanding is due to one small but important omission: The sentence is missing a preposition before the reference to other galaxies that parallels the one before “Saturn to see the rings”: “If she could, she would travel to Saturn to see the rings, as well as to other galaxies to see if there is life elsewhere.”

4. This sentence implies that the Jetsons constituted an entire meal served in a pill. However, the writer is referring to a futuristic idea reminiscent of something that might have appeared, or perhaps did appear, in the 1960s animated television series The Jetsons — referring to the program, not the family featured in it — and that’s what the sentence should indicate: “Remember the sixties dream of an entire meal served in a pill, as in The Jetsons?”

5. The suggestion here is that the dirt on the warning track at the practice field is dug up and deposited in the home stadium — and that it is shuttled back and forth repeatedly. What the writer means is that the dirt on the practice field’s warning track and the dirt on the home stadium’s warning track are from the same source. This fact must be explicated in such detail, including specifying that the dirt in question at the home stadium is to be found not just generally within the structure, but, more precisely, on its warning track: “The practice field utilizes the same type of dirt on the warning track as that found on the perimeter of the team’s home stadium.”

1. “Joseph Priestley began to suspect that air was not a simple substance while he was at Leeds.”

2. “It was under these conditions that Protestantism was introduced to Europe, a branch of Christianity that declared public festivities sinful and vulgar and convinced large numbers of people that their lives should be spent on disciplined labor and worship.”

3. “He had accumulated millions of dollars there that couldn’t be taken out of the country according to rules established after the war ended.”

4. “I already had a number of books and comics under my belt I had drawn with my brother.”

5. “A list of states with the highest past-year rates of driving while under the influence of alcohol among adults ages 18 or older follow.”

Answers and Explanations

1. As organized, this sentence implies that the scientist limited his doubts about air’s composition to the time he spent in Leeds, rather than stating that his suspicion began during his time there. To clarify the sentence, move the modifying phrase to the head of the sentence, and, for good measure, change the tense of the second verb, because air’s substantive nature has not changed since Priestley’s lifetime: “While he was at Leeds, Joseph Priestley began to suspect that air is not a simple substance.”

2. Because Europe is the noun immediately preceding the gloss, a reader might assume that the gloss defines Europe, rather than Protestantism, the correct subject of the definition. To eliminate that ambiguity, move the reference to the continent to the end of the sentence so that the definition is a mid-sentence parenthetical: “It was under these conditions that Protestantism, a branch of Christianity that declared public festivities sinful and vulgar and convinced large numbers of people that their lives should be spent on disciplined labor and worship, was introduced to Europe.”

3. This sentence is not egregiously incorrect, but the phrase beginning with according seems to modify country. It would be easier to read — and the most essential information would effectively be reserved for the end of the sentence — with the phrase inserted as a parenthetical: “He had accumulated millions of dollars there that, according to rules established after the war ended, couldn’t be taken out of the country.”

4. As constructed, this sentence implies that the writer and his brother had collaborated on drawing a belt, under which a number of books and comics were kept. The phrase “under my belt” should be shifted closer to the head of the sentence: “I already had under my belt a number of books and comics I had drawn with my brother.”

5. This painfully contracted sentence needs to be relaxed. The impetus to avoid a weak “to be” form of a verb is admirable, but it is awkward for that verb to be located at the very end, after a confusingly extensive subject. It would be better to immediately state the location of the list, then uncoil the tightly wound phrase identifying the subject of the list: “The following is a list of states with the highest rates of adults ages 18 or older who drove within the last year while under the influence of alcohol.” This is a rare instance in which the modifying phrase (in this case, the subject of the list) is more effectively placed at the end of the sentence, rather than inserted somewhere in its midst.

1. “The postwar suburban ideal was a Cadillac and a fur coat like a movie star.”

2. “His legacy was also one of social revolutionary, humanitarian, and artist.”

3. “A letter can be mailed via the Pony Express reenactors for the 1860 price of $5.”

4. “That established history is being challenged by a rare book collector and author, John Doe and Jane Smith.”

5. “Although DNA testing is highly effective, those involved in criminal investigations do not always use it because of its high cost.”

Answers

1. The sentence implies that the ideal was ownership of two things: a Cadillac, and a fur coat that resembles a movie star. We know it means possessing a Cadillac and a fur coat, as movie stars were wont to do, but the sentence fails because it doesn’t explicitly state that. This revision does: “The postwar suburban ideal was driving a Cadillac and wearing a fur coat, like a movie star.”

2. The subject’s legacy cannot be that of someone with these identities, but it can be associated with that of such a person: “His legacy was that of a social revolutionary, humanitarian, and artist.”

3. The final phrase of this sentence lacks clarity. The point is that in 1860, sending a letter by Pony Express cost $5, and that today, for the same amount — a more modest total than it was about 150 years ago — one can send a letter on a commemorative ride carried out by reenactors. The sentence should be revised to make this relationship clearer: “A letter can be mailed via the Pony Express reenactors for the same fee it cost in 1860: $5.”

4. As written, this sentence suggests that the challenger is a book collector and author who is rare, and that the person’s name is John Doe and Jane Smith. Hyphenating rare and book to demonstrate that they team up to modify collector, and recasting the sentence to join each single epithet to the respective name, makes all clear: “That established history is being challenged by a rare-book collector, John Doe, and author Jane Smith.”

5. DNA testing is not always used of its high cost? Then why is it always used? Back up a little bit — the sentence means that DNA testing’s high cost restricts the frequency of its use. This important distinction is conveyed with the simple reversal of two phrases and the insertion of a comma between them: “Although DNA testing is highly effective, because of its high cost, those involved in criminal investigations do not always use it.”

1. “Learn to use this art form not only for performance but also to collaborate, exercise, and respect the differences of others.”

2. “Children enrolled in high-quality preschool programs are more likely to graduate from high school, hold down jobs, and less likely to be on welfare or end up in jail.”

3. “She will be returned to the same, or a substantially similar, position to the one held prior to the leave of absence, as required by law.”

4. “They pulled him from his vehicle, beat him, robbed him of his money and equipment.”

5. “Dedication, hard work, flexibility, a sense of humor, and the interest and ability to learn and improve professionally are some of the positive qualities the company seeks in all employees.”

Answers

1. This sentence isn’t strictly incorrect, but it would be clearer if it didn’t lead the reader to infer that the additional benefits of the art form are that participants can collaborate the differences of others, exercise the differences of others, and respect the differences of others. That implication is eliminated if the preposition to is inserted before the second and third items in the list: “Learn to use this art form not only for performance but also to collaborate, to exercise, and to respect the differences of others.”

2. This sentence has contrasting “more likely” and “less likely” phrases, but includes two of one and one of the other, and the second “more likely phrase” is confusingly cordoned off by commas, leaving it bereft of context. To make the sentence correct, the brace of commas must be omitted and a conjunction added: “Children enrolled in high-quality preschool programs are more likely to graduate from high school and hold down jobs and are less likely to end up on welfare or in jail.”

3. This type of error is distressingly frequent, considering that it seems obvious that if the parenthetical phrase is removed, the sentence is awkward, therefore the original sentence is awkward. One of several possible fixes is to get the trailing phrase out of the way immediately by moving it to the head of the sentence, then presenting the fully expressed basic statement followed by the alternative: “As required by law, she will be returned to the same position held prior to the leave of absence, or a substantially similar one.”

4. Here’s another common error — the omission of a conjunction before a concluding compound list item. As written, the sentence implies that there were four stages to the crime: 1) They pulled him from his vehicle, 2) they beat him, 3) they robbed him, and 4) equipment. Huh? That’s wrong. Only three things occurred; items 3) and 4) are one step. Because that one step is the final list item, it should be preceded by a conjunction: “They pulled him from his vehicle, beat him, and robbed him of his money and equipment.”

5. Interest and ability take different prepositions, so they need to be separated into parallel phrases where each word is supported by its own preposition: “Dedication, hard work, flexibility, a sense of humor, and the interest in learning and improving professionally and the ability to do so are some of the positive qualities the company seeks in all employees.”

1. “A Number Of” Followed by a Singular Verb

Occasionally, a superficial understanding of what constitutes proper grammar leads writers to create a disagreeable subject/verb agreement such as “A number of members is supporting reform.” But longstanding idiom trumps strict correctness: “A number of members are supporting reform” is correct, because the focus is on the members, not on the proportion of them supporting reform. The same commonsense rule holds for handful, majority, and similar terms.

2. As in Place of Like

Writers averse to like as an alternative to “such as” are also prone to replace like with as in such sentences as “He charges as a bull.” “He charges as a bull would do” is correct but stilted; the shorter form implies “He charges in the capacity of a bull,” rather than “He charges in the manner of a bull.” What’s not to like about like?

3. Double Adverbs

Avoid the urge to append an -ly ending to an adverb that doesn’t require it. Flat adverbs do just fine without the suffix, and so do doubtless, much, seldom, thus, and others.

4. Foreign Articles Preceding Foreign Terms

When a noun phrase is temporarily borrowed from another language, writers might be tempted to precede it with an article from that language, as in “At the countess’s wedding, she served as la fille d’honneur” (“maid of honor”). The term alone merits both the emphasis of italicization and the retention of the other language’s form: “At the countess’s wedding, she served as the fille d’honneur.”

5. I Substituted for the Object Me

Some people, when they learn that the object in such constructions as “You and me are the same height” and “Me and John are the candidates” should read “You and I are the same height” and “John and I are the candidates,” generalize that me is an undesirable pronoun, even when used in a sentence’s subject, but “There’s no difference in height between you and me” and “The candidates are John and me,” unlike the sentence versions ending in the word I, are perfectly correct.

6. Latin Plurals Formed Incorrectly

The plural forms of words derived from Latin that end in -us are -uses or -i. Sometimes, the -uses ending is preferred over the alternative (for example, octopuses); sometimes, the reverse is true (as with foci); and sometimes only one form is correct (prospectuses). When in doubt, check the dictionary. When not in doubt, double-check anyway.

7. Prepositions Prevented from Ending a Sentence

Despite admonitions from numerous sources, including a previous post on this site, to ignore the pedantic prohibition against sentence-ending prepositions, some writers, in order to adhere to this fallacious “rule,” persist in uncomfortably trussing sentences up. For example, “What did you do that for?” need not be twisted into “For what reason did you do that?” One could easily write “Why did you do that?” but that kind of cleanup is not always a viable alternative.

8. Unsplit Compound Verbs

There is a curious misunderstanding about compound verbs — phrases consisting of an auxiliary verb (a form of “to be”) and another verb — analogous to the spurious “rule” about infinitives discussed below: Some writers mistakenly believe that adverbs should not be inserted between one verb and another, but that syntax is preferable. Nevertheless, they prefer the clumsy construction “They quietly were calling her name” to the perfectly acceptable wording “They were quietly calling her name.”

9. Unsplit Infinitives

The persistent belief that the elements of an infinitive — to followed by a verb — should not be separated by an adverb can result in an ambiguous sentence, such as “I was preparing quickly to depart,” which could mean “I was hurrying to prepare to depart” or I was preparing to depart hurriedly” — which are not the same thing. The former meaning should be expressed “I was quickly preparing to depart” and the latter should be written “I was preparing to quickly depart” (yes, it’s acceptable to separate infinitives with an adverb) or “I was preparing to depart quickly.”

10. Whom in Place of Who

The troublesome pronoun whom entangles many writers, not only at the head of a sentence but also when leading off a subordinate clause, as in the erroneous example “The top vote-getter is Smith, whom Jones knows is a poor choice.” Whom, here, is not the object of knows; it is the subject of is, and who is the correct companion of a linking verb.