Grammar & Usage · Source
Life, as you no doubt realize, is complicated enough these days. Yet puristic textbooks and English teachers with puristic ideas are striving to make it still more complicated. Their contribution to the complexity of modern living is the repeated claim that many of the natural, carefree, and popular expressions that most of us use every day are "bad English," "incorrect grammar," "vulgar," or "illiterate."
In truth, many of the former restrictions and "thou shalt nots" of academic grammar are now outmoded—most educated speakers quite simply ignore them. Students in my grammar classes at Rio Hondo College are somewhat nonplused when they discover that correctness is not determined by textbook rules and cannot be enforced by schoolteacher edict. They invariably ask: "Aren't you going to draw the line somewhere?"
It is neither necessary nor possible for any one person to "draw the line." That is done—and quite effectively—by the people themselves, by the millions of educated people throughout the nation. Of course certain expressions may be considered "incorrect" or "illiterate" or "bad grammar"—not because they violate puristic rules, but only because they are rarely if ever used by educated speakers.
Correctness, in short, is determined by current educated usage.
The following notes on current trends in modern usage are intended to help you come to a decision about certain controversial expressions. As you read each sentence, pay particular attention to the italicized word or words. Does the usage square with your own language patterns? Would you be willing to phrase your thoughts in just such terms? Decide whether the sentence is "right" or "wrong," then compare your conclusions with the opinions given after the test.
1. Let's not walk any further right now.
RIGHT. In the nineteenth century, when professional grammarians attempted to Latinize English grammar, an artificial distinction was drawn between farther and further, to wit: farther refers to space, further means to a greater extent or additional. Today, as a result, many teachers who are still under the forbidding influence of nineteenth-century restrictions insist that it is incorrect to use one word for the other. To check on current attitudes toward this distinction, I sent the test sentence above to a number of dictionary editors, authors, and professors of English, requesting their opinion of the acceptability of further in reference to actual distance. Sixty out of eighty-seven professors, over two thirds of those responding, accepted the usage without qualification. Of twelve dictionary editors, eleven accepted further, and in the case of the authors, thirteen out of twenty-three accepted the word as used. A professor of English at Cornell University remarked: "I know of no justification for any present-day distinction between further and farther"; and a consulting editor of the Funk and Wagnalls dictionary said, "There is nothing controversial here. As applied to spatial distance, further and farther have long been interchangeable." Perhaps the comment of a noted author and columnist is most to the point: "I like both further and farther, as I have never been able to tell which is which or why one is any farther or further than the other."
2. Some people admit that their principle goal in life is to become wealthy.
WRONG. In speech, you can get principal and principle confused as often as you like, and no one will ever know the difference—both words are pronounced identically. In writing, however, your spelling will give you away. There is a simple memory trick that will help you if you get into trouble with these two words. Rule and principle both end in -le—and a principle is a rule. On the other hand, principal contains an a, and so does main—and principal means main. Get these points straight and your confusion is over. Heads of schools are called principals, because they are the main person in that institution of learning. The money you have in the bank is your principal, your main financial assets. And the stars of a play are principals—the main actors. Thus, "Some people admit that their principal (main) goal in life is to become wealthy," but "Such a principle (rule) is not guaranteed to lead to happiness."
3. What a nice thing to say!
RIGHT. Purists object to the popular use of nice as a synonym for pleasant, agreeable, or delightful. They wish to restrict the word to its older and more erudite meaning of exact or subtle. You will be happy to hear that they aren't getting anywhere. When I polled a group of well-known authors on the acceptability in everyday speech of the popular meaning of nice, their opinions were unanimous; not a single dissenting voice, out of the twenty-three authors who answered, was raised against the usage. One writer responded: “It has been right for about 150 years …” Editors of magazines and newspapers questioned on the same point were just a shade more conservative. Sixty out of sixty-nine accepted the usage. One editor commented: “I think we do not have to be nice about nice any longer. No one can eradicate it from popular speech as a synonym for pleasant, or enjoyable, or kind, or courteous. It is a workhorse of the vocabulary, and properly so.” The only valid objection to the word is that it is overworked by some people, but this shows a weakness in vocabulary rather than in grammar. As in the famous story of the editor who said to her secretary: “There are two words I wish you would stop using so much. One is ‘nice’ and the other is ‘lousy.’ ” “Okay,” said the secretary, who was eager to please. “What are they?”
4. He's pretty sick today.
RIGHT. One of the purist's pet targets of attack is the word pretty as used in the sentence under discussion. Yet all modern dictionaries accept such use of pretty, and a survey made by a professor at the University of Wisconsin showed that the usage is established English.
5. I feel awfully sick.
RIGHT. Dictionaries accept this usage in informal speech and the University of Wisconsin survey showed that it is established English. The great popularity of awfully in educated speech is no doubt due to the strong and unique emphasis that the word gives to an adjective—substitute very, quite, extremely, or severely and you considerably weaken the force. On the other hand, it is somewhat less than cultivated to say “I feel awful sick,” and the wisdom of using awfully to intensify a pleasant concept (“What an awfully pretty child”; “That book is awfully interesting”) is perhaps still debatable, though getting less and less so as the years go on.
6. Are you going to invite Doris and I to your party?
WRONG. Some people are almost irresistibly drawn to the pronoun I in constructions like this one. However, not only does such use of I violate a valid and useful grammatical principle, but, more important, it is rarely heard in educated speech. The meaning of the sentence is equally clear no matter which form of the pronoun is employed, of course, but the use of I, the less popular choice, may stigmatize the speaker as uneducated. Consider it this way: You would normally say, "Are you going to invite me to your party?" It would be wiser, therefore, to say, "Are you going to invite Doris and me to your party?"
Key grammar and usage rules covered in this intermission.
6 grammar entries
Both words are interchangeable for physical distance in modern educated usage. The old distinction (farther = space, further = degree/extent) is an artificial 19th-century Latinism that the majority of professors, dictionary editors, and authors now reject.
Homophones often confused in writing. Principle = a rule or belief (ends in -le, like rule). Principal = main, or the head person/sum of money (contains an a, like main).
Using nice to mean pleasant, agreeable, or delightful is fully accepted in educated speech — unanimously endorsed by 23 polled authors and 60 of 69 magazine editors. The only valid objection is overuse, which reflects a limited vocabulary rather than a grammar error.
Using pretty as an adverb intensifier ("pretty sick," "pretty good") is established English, accepted by all modern dictionaries and confirmed as standard by a University of Wisconsin usage survey.
Awfully used as an intensifier ("awfully sick," "awfully good") is accepted by dictionaries in informal speech and confirmed by the University of Wisconsin survey. It gives stronger emphasis than very or quite. Note: "awful sick" (adjective misused as adverb) is less cultivated.
After a verb or preposition (as the object), use the objective pronoun me, not I. "Invite Doris and me" is correct; "invite Doris and I" is a hypercorrection rarely heard in educated speech and may mark the speaker as uneducated. Test: remove "Doris and" — "invite me" ✓ vs. "invite I" ✗.