Jose Carillo's Forum

ESSAYS BY JOSE CARILLO

On this webpage, Jose A. Carillo shares with English users, learners, and teachers a representative selection of his essays on the English language, particularly on its uses and misuses. One essay will be featured every week, and previously featured essays will be archived in the forum.

Avoiding the embarrassing pitfall of misusing certain English words

Some otherwise good writers in English ruin the fine tapestry of their writing by habitually misusing certain words and phrases—mostly adverbial modifiers, similar sounding or similar looking verbs, and adjectival modifiers with overlapping but not necessarily the same meanings. If not spotted and corrected by a good editor, these misused words and phrases could mark the writer of a published piece as either reckless or not so competent with his or her English.

I wrote the essay below, “Some often misused English words,” for my English-usage column in The Manila Times in 2004 to keep writers and speakers on red alert against these very common pitfalls in word usage. I think now’s as good a time as any to reactivate that red alert, so I have decided to post that essay in this week’s edition of the Forum. I do hope that it could spare Forum members from an embarrassing situation or two arising from the misuse of these words and phrases.

Click on the title below to read the essay.

Some often misused English words

Let’s discuss some frequently misused English words and phrases, and I suggest we begin with the problematic word-pair “maybe” and “may be.” The first is, of course, an adverb that means “perhaps,” as in “Shifting from ceramic to plastic maybe a good alternative.” The other, “may be,” is a compound verb that means the same thing: “You may be wrong about this, but I will support your decision.” Always keep in mind, however, that “maybe” and “may be” are not interchangeable in writing, and that the first syllable of “maybe” is pronounced with a much heavier stress than the second, while the two words of “may be” get equal stress.

Now let’s proceed by taking up six similar looking, similar sounding, or very closely related word-pairs or phrase-pairs that often get mistaken for each other:

Respectively/respectfully. The adverb “respectively,” of course, denotes that the order of mention of sequentially listed items corresponds to precisely the same order of mention as their antecedent words: “Eduardo, Jennifer, and Alberto made it to the honor roll. They took the first, second, and third honors, respectively.” On the other hand, the adverb “respectfully” means “marked by or showing respect,” as in “Normally very assertive, she talked respectfully when she addressed the presiding judge.”

Rightly/rightfully (rightful). The first means “in a proper or correct manner, but with no presumed legal basis,” as in “They rightly decided to boycott the proceedings.” In contrast, “rightfully” means “having a right or just claim to some property or position”: “She proved that she was rightfully the owner [or “the rightful owner”] of the bank account.”

Assure/ensure/insure. These three words are perhaps among the most carelessly interchanged synonyms in English. Their meanings differ very substantially, however, and the verbs “assure” and “ensure” behave differently as well. “Assure” means “to convince” or “guarantee,” while “ensure” means “to make certain.” “Assure” needs a direct object to work properly, “ensure” does not: “You have to assure me that you will come promptly at noon tomorrow.” “You have to ensure that you will come promptly at noon tomorrow.” On the other hand, “insure” means “to guard against loss”: “It is prudent to insure your car with comprehensive accident coverage.”

Compose/comprise/consist of/include. Correctly choosing among these closely related but definitely unsynonymous words will perhaps remain slippery both to native and nonnative English speakers. As a rule of thumb, parts compose a whole, and the whole comprises or consists of its parts. The differences between them may also be stated this way: “comprise” could refer to all parts or only major parts, “consist” means that all parts are listed, but “include” does not guarantee that the list of those parts is complete. See how these words work: “Two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom compose a water molecule.” (Conversely: “A water molecule is composed of two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom.”) “A water molecule comprises [consists of] two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom.” “A water molecule includes two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom.” Never catch yourself making this grammatical atrocity: “A water molecule is comprised of two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom.”

Almost the same/very similar/nearly identical. Like the misshapen phrase “almost unique,” the phrase “almost the same” is extremely informal and is particularly unsuited for technical or scientific writing: “The two computers had almost the same features.” Things are either the same or they are not. Better and more precise for expressing the idea are the phrases “very similar,” “nearly identical,” “highly comparable,” or—in the case of quantitative comparisons—“nearly equivalent”: “The two computers had very similar [nearly identical, highly comparable] features.” “The hard disk capacities of the two computers are nearly equivalent.

On the contrary/in contrast. Some people use these two phrases interchangeably, little knowing the fundamental differences between them. “On the contrary” is a subjective qualifier—often used in informal speech—indicating disagreement or opposition to another person’s position or opinion; “in contrast” is an objective qualifier that dispassionately indicates a marked distinction or opposite effect. Feel the difference: “On the contrary, sir, I am very much opposed to your proposal.” “In contrast, the subordinate was adversarial toward his superior’s proposal.”

Healthy/healthful. “Healthy” has always meant “enjoying or having good health,” and the other “full of health” or “promoting good health.” Some advertisers, however, have lately been taking undue liberties with “healthy” in their product advertising, making absurd claims like this: “The healthy milk that’s good for you.” Don’t be taken in by the misguided semantic acrobatics; stick to “The healthful milk that’s good for you” to keep your prose sound and wholesome.

As always, when stumped by confusing words or phrases, don’t just hazard a guess as to what they mean. Eliminate all doubts by checking them with your dictionary. After all, your job as speaker or writer is not to share your confusion but to clarify things for your listeners or readers. (January 20, 2004)

-----------
From the weekly column “English Plain and Simple” by Jose A. Carillo in The Manila Times, January 20, 2004, © 2004 by the Manila Times Publishing Corp. All rights reserved.

Click here to discuss/comment


Previously Featured Essay:

The virtue of elliptical constructions

Often in our English-language readings, we come across sentences that have certain words evidently missing yet surprisingly read right and sound right as well: “Those who wish to [...] can very well join me.” “The youngest staff in the office is as competent as the eldest [...].” “If she wants more of those 1905 coins, my brother can give her plenty [...].” In each instance, although a noun and a verb have been shed off somewhere, the sentences prove to be grammatically and semantically correct. They are, in fact, none the worse for the grammatical holes in them.

As suggested by the three periods enclosed by brackets, each of those grammatical holes is an ellipsis, and the sentences where they occur are called elliptical sentences. We can say that elliptical sentences reflect the natural aversion of humans to unnecessarily repeat themselves. The elliptical sentences shown above, for instance, are simply more concise constructions of these sentences: “Those who wish to join me can very well join me.” “The youngest staff in the office is as competent as the eldest staff in the office.” “If she wants more of those 1905-issue coins, my brother can give her plenty of those 1905-issue coins.”

By now the pattern and logic of elliptical constructions should be clear: they gracefully knock off repetitive words and phrases. The ellipsis takes it for granted that the reader would just mentally fill in the gaps with the missing grammatical elements.

As a rule, elliptical sentences consist of two independent clauses, one containing the grammar elements the other has left out. The independent clause with the missing elements is the elliptical clause—an abbreviated adverb clause stripped of its subject and verb.

Consider this sentence: “Although she is known for her ravishing beauty, Cornelia has an uncommonly vile temper.” Its adverb clause is “she is known for her ravishing beauty,” with “although” as subordinating marker; the independent clause is “Cornelia has an uncommonly vile temper.” Now see what happens when we make the adverb clause elliptical: “Although […] known for her ravishing beauty, Cornelia has an uncommonly vile temper.” Even after shedding “she is,” the sentence works just fine—more concise and emphatic, in fact, than the scrupulously complete one.

Ellipses can streamline sentences in many ways. Here are some of the common elliptical forms we’ll usually encounter in our English-language readings:

(1) The routine omission of “that” in modifying clauses, particularly in spoken English. This is the most familiar use of the ellipsis. Example: “They knew […] two years would be the shortest time […] they would need to subdue the enemy forces.” (Normal form: “They knew that two years would be the shortest time that they would need to subdue the enemy forces.”) Tongues are normally averse to wagging too many “that’s.”

(2) Elliptical noun phrases. Example: “Jennifer asked for the pink blouse but the salesclerk gave her the red […].” (Normal form: “Jennifer asked for the pink blouse but the salesclerk gave her the red blouse.”) Quite naturally, the disciplined mind resists the need to belabor the obvious.

(3) Ellipsis of the verb and its objects or complements. Example: “The beleaguered Supreme Court chief justice would fight it to the very end if he could […].” (Normal form: “The beleaguered Supreme Court chief justice would fight it to the very end if he could fight it to the very end.”)

(4) Medial (middle) ellipsis.  Example: “Arlene will take care of the girls and Eduardo […], the boys.” (Normal form: “Arlene will take care of the girls and Eduardo will take care of the boys.”) This fine ellipsis separates sophisticated English-language users from rank beginners.

(5) Ellipsis of clause. Examples: “They can leave now if they want […].” (Normal form: “They can leave now if they want to leave now.”) Certain elliptical clauses, however, need a comma to indicate that some words have been intentionally left out; otherwise, confusion might arise. Properly elliptical: “My tour group chose Paris; theirs, Rome.” Improperly elliptical: “My tour group chose Paris; theirs Rome.” (Normal form: “My tour group chose Paris; their group chose Rome.”)

(6) Ellipsis when words are left out in comparisons using “that” or “as.”  This is the trickiest ellipsis of all because we need to first establish the correct pronoun by filling in the missing words in the elliptical clause. Consider these two sentences: “Helen loves you more than I.” “Helen loves you more than me.” Gut feel tells us that only one of them is grammatically correct, but both actually are. For each of the sentences, in fact, we can fill in the missing words in a different way. The first turns out to be the elliptical construction of “Helen loves you more than I love you”; the second, of “Helen loves you more than she loves me.” Each is as grammatically and semantically airtight as the other.

Isn’t it nice that with the ellipsis, we can have it short and sweet both ways? (April 25 and May 2, 2005)

-----------
From the weekly column “English Plain and Simple” by Jose A. Carillo in The Manila Times, April 25 and May 2, 2005 issue, © 2005 by the Manila Times Publishing Corp. This condensed version subsequently became Chapter 70 of the author’s book Give Your English the Winning Edge, © 2009 by the Manila Times Publishing Corp.

Click here to discuss/comment


Click to read more essays (requires registration to post)




Copyright © 2010 by Aperture Web Development. All rights reserved.

Page best viewed with:

Mozilla FirefoxGoogle Chrome

Valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional Valid CSS!

Page last modified: 26 June, 2010, 7:45 a.m.