5.2: Abusing Rules of Grammar

Bad spelling is a source of communication problems, though not an especially subtle one. The great individualist from Tennessee, Davy Crockett (1786-1836), was a frontiersman who had little respect for book learning; he spelled words any way he wanted and said that the rules of English spelling are contrary to nature."

He had a point, because English spelling isn't designed for easy learning—ask a foreigner. But none of us can change that situation. Crockett couldn't, and you can't. So, if we are to communicate effectively, we've all got to spell words the way most everybody else does.

One of the first rules of good communication is to use grammar and semantics correctly. For example, the sentence "She is a person lovely" is bad grammatically, but the semantics is OK. The sentence "She is a negative square root" uses good grammar but bad semantics, although people will know what you mean if you say the sentence is grammatically weird. In this book we won’t worry about the fine difference between grammar and semantics and will stick to the big picture: your primary goal as a communicator is to communicate your meaning clearly. Don’t make your audience do extra work to figure out what you mean when they encounter bad grammar or bad semantics.

A common error is to make phrases modify unintended parts of a sentence. The reader can get the wrong idea. Here is an example from a newspaper article:

Coach Pucci offered his resignation effective at the end of the current school year, on Christmas.

This report puzzles the reader because the school year ends in the spring, not at Christmastime. It would have been better to put the words on Christmas closer to the part of the sentence they relate to, as in the following rewrite:

Coach Pucci offered his resignation on Christmas, to be effective at the end of the current school year.

The original sentence was odd—odd enough that the reader had to stop and do extra work to figure out what you meant. In doing this, we readers apply a special principle of logical reasoning:

According to the principle of charity, you should give the benefit of the doubt to writers or speakers whose odd statements you are trying to understand; if the statements appear to be silly, then look for a less silly, but still likely, interpretation. In a conversation, when a new speaker makes a comment, we listeners apply the principle of charity by assuming that what they said is intended to be a relevant contribution to the conversation. In fact, it's a sign of mental illness if a person too often makes a comment that is irrelevant to the conversation. We mentally healthy people try to make contributions that can be easily understood to be relevant.

The lesson the principle of charity offers to speakers rather than listeners is that we should clearly say what we mean so that our listeners or readers won't be put through unnecessary mental gymnastics trying to figure out what we really intended to say.

Communication is often hampered when people are sloppy and don't realize what they are saying. Here are some humorous but authentic examples. Imagine being a teacher at an elementary school and receiving these two excuses from Anne's parents:¹

• Anne didn't come to school. She was in bed under the doctor and could not get up.
• Please excuse Anne. She was sick and I had her shot.

With a little charity and empathy, you can figure out what the parent meant.

What would you think if you were a welfare department employee and you received this letter from a woman applying for financial assistance?

• I am forwarding my marriage certificate and six children. I had seven, but one died which was baptized on a half sheet of paper.

If you take her literally, you might wonder when the six kids will be arriving. Can you imagine the scene as that seventh child was baptized while it sat balanced on a half sheet of soggy paper? There are effective ways to clear up such writing problems. Here is one way:

I am mailing you my marriage certificate and the birth certificates of my six children. I had a seventh child, but he died. That child's baptismal certificate is on the enclosed half sheet of paper.

Writers need to take some care in expressing themselves or run the risk of saying something they don't mean; conversely, readers must be continually aware of not taking writers too literally.

Exercise \(\PageIndex{1}\)

The person receiving the following letter at the welfare department knew not to take it too literally:

"I want money quick as I can get it. I have been in bed with the doctor for two weeks, and he doesn't do me any good."

Select one of the following choices as the better rewrite of the welfare letter:

1. "I am in urgent need of funds. For two weeks I have been in bed with the doctor, but I am still ill."
2. "I want money quick as I can get it. At my doctor's request, I have been in bed for the last two weeks, but I am still ill."

Answer

Answer (b). The point is to eliminate the sexual allusion.

---

1 From The Sacramento Bee newspaper, February 24, 1988.