Tag Archives: English usage

Nouning

Leave a reply

Calvin, of the Calvin and Hobbes comic strip, says that “verbing weirds language.” So does nouning, my term for changing another part of speech into a noun. I’m not necessarily against the practice, but I must admit that these signs made me pause. (Paused me?) First up is a sign from an outpost of a coffee empire that will remain nameless:

A handcrafted?

The chalk is a bit smudged, but the intent is clear. Buy “a handcrafted” after eleven and you get a cheaper (but not cheap) “lunch item.” I wonder whether employees discuss their favorite handcrafts while they’re on lunch-item break.

Moving on:

A good what?

Yes, I cropped the photo, but no, I didn’t cut any words. Nothing appeared with “daily” except clouds. I snapped this one a couple of years ago, and I still haven’t figured out what it means. Theories welcome.

Last one:

I don’t shop for new “wears” at the dry cleaners, but maybe I should. I’m going to a wedding in a couple of weeks, and even an imperfect wear would come in handy. If you have any cocktail wears you don’t need, let me know. In the meantime, have a good daily.

Happy Halloween!

2 Replies

Before or after you hit the trick-or-treat trail, take a minute to enjoy  these holiday photos. This one comes from my friend Milton:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“Punking” seems perfectly suited to the “trick” part of the Halloween slogan, don’t you think?

Mary Shelley’s famous novel, Frankenstein, is also a good fit for this holiday. The Morgan Library has a fine exhibit celebrating the 200th anniversary of the monster, who, by the way, has no name and is actually much less monstrous than most of the human characters in the book. (Frankenstein is the name of the doctor who sewed body parts together and animated the creature.) I learned a lot from the exhibition, including this information about early theatrical performances of the classic work:

Leave it to Mary Shelley, inventive in so many ways, to add an apostrophe and the letter S to a row of hyphens to create a possessive form of “the unnameable.”

Once Halloween is over and you’re fighting sugar rush and paying dental bills, you might plan for another holiday, one that tends to be stressful. Show this sign — sent by my friends Pilar, Naomi, and Aracelly — to any of your unruly offspring:

“Behave or I’ll drop you off.” Simple but effective! But before your kids call Children’s Protective Services, be sure to explain that you’re just punking them.

I Give Up

2 Replies

After decades of bellyaching about the sad state of NYC signs, I have officially given up  — on some issues, not on all. Grammarian in the City will no longer object to the following:

As far as I’m concerned, BOGO all you want. I once thought that the concept of “buy one get one” was an unnecessary statement of the standard deal between buyer and seller. But now I see that most BOGO-users are too busy surfing social media to add an “F,” for “free.” Or maybe they think that BOGOF sounds like a mediocre brand of caviar. I commend this sign-writer for specifying the terms of the deal, spelling out “buy one get one” for “50% Off,” though strictly speaking the sign should read “BOGAOF50%O” (buy one get another one for 50% off). I concede that such a sign resembles the kind of password people concoct and promptly forget. I will, however, raise an objection to “tight.” I  prefer to cover both legs with “tights,” not just one with a “FREE tight.” And $75 is a little steep, don’t you think?

I’ve also thrown in the towel when it come to hyphens:

My first glimpse of this truck made we wonder whether Bunsen burners are prone to out-of-control blazes. If so, I thought, there is certainly a need for “scientific-fire prevention.” But perhaps this company pursues customers who prefer that the laws of physics take priority in battling flames? That meaning would call for “scientific fire-prevention.” Whatever. I’m done with fulminating about hyphenating.

Nor will I say one word about the silliness of this sort of sign:

Okay, just a couple of words: Is there anyone who believes that amateurs rent stores, buy equipment, and have signs painted so that they can repair “hand-bags,” zippers,” and “luggage”?  Judging from the trend to specify “professional” dry-cleaning, barbering, and other services, I guess the answer is yes. No matter. I don’t care. I can even live with this sign’s reference to moribund footwear (“dying” not “dyeing”).

Inaccurate acronyms, missing hyphens, and dead shoes:  This “professional” grammarian has given up on them all.

What’s Open?

Leave a reply

When my son was little, we couldn’t walk down our block without having the baker rush over with a piece of bread, the dry cleaner offer candy, and the deli clerk donate a cookie. Toddler paradise! When I walk down that same street with my granddaughter, her experience is different. So many stores have closed! E-commerce and, I’ve read, some unwise rent laws have led to a surge in vacancies. What’s open, and when? These signs offer absolutely no help:

Given this timetable, I expect another empty storefront soon. Here’s another:

I’m happy about the “Grand Open”; at least the storefront isn’t vacant. I do wonder whether the $29 price includes both feet. I also wonder how long after the “grand open” I’ll see this sort of sign:

Near where the “out business” used to be is this sign, professionally printed and posted all over a building under construction:

According to the dictionary, “amenities” are “desirable or useful features of a building or a place.”  This sign is okay — grammatically, at least. Winding through scaffolding to play billiards or to sit near a communal wine cellar before your apartment is constructed is not okay, at least for me. But if you don’t care, go for it.

Although the word is correctly used in the last sign, I couldn’t help thinking about another definition of “amenities”: “social courtesies.” Sadly, everything I see in our public life shows me that this sort of “amenities” is absolutely NOT “now open.” If we can’t find our way back to civility, I fear that soon we will also be “out business,” and not just from 11 to 12 each day.

Unmentionables

4 Replies

This morning, for algorithmic reasons beyond my comprehension, a video of a woman squeezing herself into some sort of elastic tube appeared on my social-media feed. Her message, after the tube had turned into a tourniquet around her waist, was that this garment hurt. Well, duh. Call me old-fashioned, but there are a few things I’d rather not see. Or know, such as what this sign means:

I know it costs $4. I know that the number one and “Pcs” don’t match. I don’t want to know what an “ashtray glass bra” is, much less buy or wear one. In case you’re wondering, this sign was in front of a (strapless) jar.

Nor do I care to discuss this sign:

Is $12 the sale price? Or are the bras even cheaper, now that they’re on sale? Are they made of glass ashtrays? Forget I asked. I don’t want to know.

Moral of this post: The Victorians called underwear “unmentionables” for a reason. A good reason.

Punc. Puzzles

2 Replies

What governs whether a sign-maker has room for letters and punctuation? Font? The size of the sign? I’m going for chaos theory, based on these signs. The first is from the “Dept of Transportation”:

Somehow “ped” got a period, but “dept” didn’t. Both are abbreviations, “ped” being the shortened form for “pedestrian” and “dept” for “department.” In case you’re wondering (actually, despite the fact that you’re not wondering at all), I should mention that this NYC “dept” isn’t consistent when it comes to punctuation relating to walkers:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Maybe the plural “peds” seems different to the dept? Grammatically, it’s not.

Not only “depts,” but also building owners get creative with punctuation:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Neither of the two sentences on this sign ends with a period. Also, “owners” should have an apostrophe, before the s or after it, depending upon how many people own the bikes. I gave up the apostrophe battle a long time ago, so I won’t dwell on that issue here. I do wonder (a) how the landlord can figure out who owns a bike and (b) exactly how the “expense” is collected. I’m betting this sign is an empty threat. (Also ineffective, given the number of bicycles that have nearly run me down on New York sidewalks. What’s the dept doing with the time saved by ignoring punctuation rules?) I also wonder about the criteria for capital letters in this sign. If standard rules for caps had been in effect, only “No” and “Removal” would qualify (first word of each sentence), as well as the “Ps” in the title, “Private Property.” If the caps were for emphasis, why is “expense” in lower case?

Another:

I understand that consistency is difficult to achieve in, say, a 200-page document. But if you’re working with only two sentences, you ought to be able to spare a period for each or omit the punctuation mark entirely.

Last but not least:

Okay, no period at the end of this sentence: I’m used to that. But I can’t find any reason for a comma before the conjunction “or.”  For that matter, I can’t find a reason for the text as written. Why not just say “DO NOT FEED BIRDS”? Theories welcome. Punc also.

Quick Questions

4 Replies

I’m not going to ask whether it’s “hot enough for you,” the standard query in NYC during August. In deference to the fact that everyone’s brains are fried, I’ll just post a few signs and ask a simple question about each. Feel free to answer.

On a sidewalk near Second Avenue:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Question: Do they think pedestrians will hurdle over the orange-and-white bars without this reminder?

In a shop on the West Side:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Does the flu vaccine advertised in the small circle to the left of the larger sign complement the lipstick or the powder?

From The New York Times:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Is “wildly unparalleled” a zig-zag or a right angle?

Finally, from a mini-golf course in Seattle:

Does this mean you should ignore the hand rails that are NOT provided?

Prize for the best answers is, well, nothing. But try anyway!

Puzzles

7 Replies

Although it’s still July, I can’t help feeling that we’ve hit the dog days of summer, which should show up in late August. Maybe it’s just me. Or climate change. Regardless, it seems like a good time to present some puzzles to take your mind off the heat. Here we go:

 

 

 

 

 

 

First of all, this sign does not include the word “free,” so it isn’t saying that if you buy one shoe, the store will throw in another one without an additional charge. I don’t need to point out that in the non-shoe world, buying one thing usually results in your getting one thing. An upsetting possibility is that shoe stores are beginning to follow the playbook established by airlines: Charge a basic rate that includes almost nothing, and then add fees. “Want the matching shoe? Upgrade to the pair rate!” If that’s the case, I think I’ll hop.

My friend Catherine spotted this sign:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Over several glasses of wine, we decided that this place either offers head-to-toe service or caters to clients with hoof-and-mouth disease. Other theories welcome.

Then there’s this sign:

 

 

 

 

 

 

I didn’t realize that Bento Boxes were “Irish to the Core.” I may have one with a glass of Japanese-to-the-Core Guinness.

Last one:

The truck handle underlines the crucial word, which seems to promise 24-hour service if you need a stringed instrument (the “Viol”) removed. The puzzle: There’s a period after “Viol,” implying an abbreviation (most likely candidate: violation). But there’s also a red dot between “Viol.” and “Removal,” separating the two concepts. Why would a company offer “violation” (abbreviated or not) to its customers? You figure it out. I’m going out for some iced coffee. Or an Irish bento box.

 

Down with Apostrophes!

2 Replies

Maybe it’s the spirit of rebellion inspired by the approach of Bastille Day, but I have to ask: Why do we need apostrophes?  Perfectly respectable languages — French and Spanish come to mind — manage without them. Does anybody really think that writing “Georges flag” instead of “George’s flag” will mislead a reader? Unfortunately, abolishing apostrophes is not an option I can exercise unilaterally. And while they remain part of the language, I do think they should be used correctly. Often, they aren’t:

 

 

 

 

 

 

In this sign “sheets” is a plural, not a possessive. Therefore, this apostrophe isn’t okay. (Neither were the sheets, which looked a bit faded.) Maybe I should have razored out the apostrophe from that sign and inserted it into this one:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry for the blurry photo; a grate, a screen, and a window blocked me, perhaps an unsuccessful attempt to mask a punctuation problem. The space between the N and the S implies that the sign writer had an inkling that “men s” was a possessive requiring an apostrophe, not a plural to be written without one. Yet somehow the punctuation never made it onto the sign. Nor is it clear what “men s wanted current designers” means. But that’s not an apostrophe issue. “Men’s wanted current designers” is just as confusing.

Here’s a fine pair, from two different stores. Care to guess which is correct?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I vote for the second, reluctantly. In the first, “dine” isn’t a noun. The hot dog and fries could be a “kid’s dinner,” or “kids’ dinners,” if they don’t eat much. But something has to change (both grammatically and nutritionally). The case for the second sign is that “kids” functions as an adjective. Despite watching the “Yankees game” instead of “the Yankees’ game,” I prefer “kids’ classes.” Also a hyphen in “pizza-making.” Nobody ever said I wasn’t picky. Just willing to guillotine apostrophes out of the language.

 

Again with the Prepositions

9 Replies

The title of this post begins with an adverb and a preposition, in that order. For those who’ve never heard the expression “again with,” imagine those words spoken in exasperation, the same tone you’d use for “not again!” (eyeroll optional).  I hear “again with” often in New York City, but I don’t know whether it’s in common use in other areas. Custom, not set-in-stone grammar rules, generally governs prepositions. I wait “on line” in New York, but my granddaughter, who lives in Seattle, waits “in line.” Both of us are grammatically correct (and usually impatient).

Although you have a fair bit of leeway with prepositions, some usage is downright strange:

 

 

 

 

 

 

The odd texture of this photo comes from the screen in front of the sign. Every time I pass “these windows,” I wonder why a double preposition (“BY or NEAR”) appears. Either would make the same point. Coupled with the tripled exclamation point in the last line, I suspect the people living behind “these windows” aren’t happy with their ground-floor apartment. In NYC, that location means you’re essentially living in (on?) a crowded sidewalk, because screens and  glass do little to keep out smoke and between-puff conversation.

Another confusing preposition:

 

 

 

 

I hope the company’s food prep is better than its grammar, because “since” means the company was established at some point between 1983 and the present — including, say, this morning. A different preposition, “in,” would place the company in the “thirty years and counting” category, which I suspect is where it belongs.

Another:

 

 

 

 

 

 

I’m not sure why, but “repairs on” sounds odd to me. It makes me envision someone hovering above a necklace or a ring, loupe and screwdriver in hand. A helicopter jeweler, perhaps, for this era of helicopter parents? I’d substitute “to jewelry” or “repair of jewelry” or simply “jewelry repair.”

Last photo:

To be honest, I’m not sure what this sentence means, regardless of prepositions. I do know that “in points” should be “at points,” but the significance of “affected by” escapes me. Theories welcome AT any time, DURING any time period, FOR the foreseeable future.