A few days past, in this post, I mentioned consulting Mary with a bit of a grammar puzzle. It wouldn't be the first time.
Mary is somewhat older than I and was a proper student and teacher of English. I assume that English was her main university subject, but I've not really asked. She taught the subject when grammar was still a formal part of the curriculum.
I studied geography and taught that subject exclusively for ten years. It was in my eleventh year of teaching that enrollment trends eventuated in me teaching English. I was miffed at first to have to teach outside of my subject area, but I learned to really like it as the years went by. There were six such years before I found myself exclusively teaching geography again. Truth be told, I think I was a better teacher of English than geography — at least in some respects.
When I began to teach the subject in the early eighties, the formal teaching of grammar was no longer in vogue. Nevertheless, I did try to teach myself the basics or at least drum what I already knew deeper into my brain. I hope that my appreciation of grammar and writing shows up, at least a little bit, here on my odd, little blog. I do take a lot of liberties in my writing style for effect, and because we are not composing formal essays with rigid rules, I feel at peace doing that.
It's not that we totally neglected grammar back then, but it was taught more incidentally and, supposedly, in context as needs required.
I had checklists for students, in several classes, that they would keep in a writing folder. If I noticed a sentence fragment, for example, I could tick it off on the checklist (or have them do it). The problem could then be addressed in some way. Yes, I actually stood at the blackboard going over certain things, such as sentence fragments, when the occasion warranted. And I quite enjoyed reprimanding them for committing the dreaded comma splice error.
Getting back to Mary, she knows her stuff much better than I do, and when I struggle over the right way to write something, I have been known to turn to her, as I did in this case:
Here is two seconds of her being cute, blast her royal furriness. (I want to say are two seconds, but I think is is correct as it is one clip that is two seconds long. Are you there Mary? Note: Mary is my grammar guru.)Indeed, Mary was there and disagreed with me:
I would use the plural, as 'clip' is only understood in that sentence, making the 'is' sound wrong. Go with the flow, as they say. Whatever you use, actually, would not be a catastrophic mistake.
23 comments:
I like Grammar Granny & it's good to have a friend like Mary ... she does not appear to be enrolled with the grammar police force, whom seem to patrol in the least likely places.
The clip is two seconds long or there are two seconds of clip. At least hat his how I would differentiate.
Grammar Granny or even better: Grammar Gramma! Or would that be going too far now?
I often just rewrite the sentence if I run into an awkward question. I studied French, Latin and Greek for years, and grasped the grammatical structure from them, rather than from English teachers!
I used to be a real stickler about language usage, but I've mellowed in my old age. Either one of those solutions sounds right and is understood.
A good resource about grammar is important these days. Well done, Mary.
I'm a volunteer editor for church newsletters, which includes proof reading other's work! I'm pretty bad at that. Perhaps just putting other's writing together into a given format is the type of editor I should aspire to be. Oh dear, dangling participle, says my inner grammarian. I had no idea she existed until recently. I've enjoyed seeing how you write "is" when I would say "are" and I just figured it was a Canadian=ism.
Grammar Gramma has a certain logic to it. I like it. Yes, I taught grammar. When I started teaching back in the Dark Ages, the subject distribution allowed 5 periods of literature and two of grammar and writing in the English curriculum.
Yes, AC. English major. Latin minor, so as Boud said, I learned structure there.
I have taught ESL a lot, and I have found that it is necessary to address grammar when doing so.
I like the way Mara parsed it. Or, 'here are two seconds of a clip....'
As I have said before, AC, I think you must have been a fine teacher of English. In fact, a fine teacher, regardless. (Sentence Fragment. ;-))
Oops. Five and two or 5 and 2. Tsk.
My father once appalled at my ending a sentence with a preposition complained about it to my English teacher once. She said English is a naturally mutating language and to just go with the flow. It made me happy but I'm not sure my father bought that argument.
Try working in a law firm where one word or comma can change the meaning of a sentence. Grammar is very important in law.
I have slid into disrepair with my use of grammar when I used to be so good! I blame it on the news media as they always make mistakes and when you hear them again and again, it becomes normal.
I still notice grammar mistakes but am aware that the 'rules' are shifting as repeated 'wrong' usage ends up as accepted. C'est la vie.
The current philosophy is that if it's understandable, it's OK. I have great difficulty with that. I taught a lot of grammar, but mostly French, Spanish and German grammar. I love language rules and how sentences are put together!
English is my second language. My daughter suggested "Grammarly". I feel better with the help.
As you probably noticed when reading my own blog, I am hopeless with grammar. English is my second language and I didn't have much formal teaching. I am quite self conscious about my short comings. English grammar does not nearly as logical and consistent as German grammar (my first language). Maybe one day I'll get around to learning the rules.
Your teaching experience is similar to mine only I taught language arts to the end. I was stubborn and taught grammar and still think grammar should be taught and I do play fat and loose with grammar in my own writing.
I always got frustrated marking projects for content when poor grammar got in the way.
I would have selected “are” from the standpoint that the singular “clip” is only implied, not stated, but “seconds” IS stated. From a diagraming of sentences approach, I would think only “are” would be correct.
I am not an English major, but that is my read of it.
PipeTobacco
Christina, the rules do mutate. Ed's father, and many others, may hate it, but it is happening. Daily. I love the grammar rules, yes, but am quite prepared to break them when that works out. For instance, it is sometimes possible to advantageously split an infinitive. I am holding the line, however, on the differences between 'lie', intransitive verb and 'lay', transitive verb. No matter how much snivelling my students do. (Not you, Ac.)
I had to smile at the comment about Grammarly. I've never used the product. Their ad campaigns are fingernails on a blackboard level of irritating.
Pipe Tobacco has a point. That plural follows a clear rule. But if the implied 'clip' or 'video' echoes, it starts to sound wrong. Sigh. To me, anyway.
Lay and lie always get me. I know "lay" means "place" (Let me lay this on the bed" or "lay the table") but sometimes I want to "lie" instead! I think I'm with Mary on the "are two seconds" (they are plural seconds). I have a terrible time with "was" and "were" and always have to look that up. The right way STILL grates on my nerves! When I was editing a magazine I had to be especially careful. But what really bugs me is hearing bad grammar in speech. I can deal with it if it's in jest ("them's the breaks!" but things like "me and her went to the store" are like nails on a chalkboard! Everyone needs a Mary!
Grammar, ain't it fun?!
Post a Comment