Questions sent by e-mail by reader Jose Oliveros, May 30, 2014:Sir:
May I request your comments on these announcements being made at our parish church: (a) before the start of the Mass, “Welcome to our Eucharistic celebration as we celebrate etc. etc.”; and (b) before the final blessing, “You are invited to attend the etc., etc.” and “The free medical check-up (or whatever it is) is on a first come, first serve basis.”
To me, “Welcome to our Eucharistic celebration as we celebrate etc. etc.” is redundant and should be rephrased as follows: “Welcome to our Eucharistic celebration on this Feast of the Holy Trinity (or whatever is the occasion).” In “You are invited to attend,” “to attend” can be deleted because when you invite, you expect those invited to attend.
I have called the attention of the people concerned in our parish about these glaring errors but they said that they cannot change what our Parish Priest had written. (Reminds me of Pontius Pilate when requested by the Pharisees and Scribes to change the inscription on the Cross of Jesus from “Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews – INRI” to “This man claims to be the king of the Jews.” Pilate’s reply: “What I have written, stays written.”)
Another thing: “First come, first serve” should be “First come, first served” because the complete phrase is “First to come, first to be served.” This is what our teachers in English during our high school years taught us. Unfortunately, the same error appears in a tarpaulin of a local college which, ironically, is urging and encouraging its students to use correct English.
My reply to Mr. Oliveros:You’re right about the faulty English grammar and usage of your parish priest and local college, and your suggested corrections are absolutely correct:
1. The statement “Welcome to our Eucharistic
celebration as we
celebrate the Feast of the Holy Trinity” is indeed so awfully redundant that it’s a wonder why the staff of your Parish priest have not succeeded in making him correct the faulty usage or why, if his English is at least adequate, he persists in foisting it on his parishioners. He should realize that the conversion of the noun “celebration” to the verb “celebrate” in the next breath doesn’t eliminate the redundancy; the action of celebrating the particular feast is already grammatically subsumed by the noun “celebration” that precedes it. So don’t hesitate to let your parish priest know that I am wholeheartedly endorsing your revision as a model for such opening statements: “Welcome to our Eucharistic celebration
on this Feast of the Holy Trinity.” (Alternatively, “Welcome to our Eucharistic celebration
marking (or
commemorating) the Feast of the Holy Trinity.”) If after that he still persists in acting like Pontius Pilate and doesn’t correct the error of his ways, I suggest you appeal to a higher religious authority like Cardinal Luis Antonio Tagle, who assuredly knows his English as well as his theology.
2. Yes, it’s likewise advisable to apply the redundancy rule to the phrase “to attend” when, before giving the final blessing, the parish priest makes an announcement like, say, “You are invited
to attend a seminar on the perils of premarital sex.” It will be much clearer and more concise to drop the verb “attend” and say “You are invited to a seminar on the perils of premarital sex.” I’m sure that your parish priest will much more quickly see the wisdom in applying the redundancy rule in this case, so I don’t really anticipate any need to bring this matter up to a higher ecclesiastical authority.
3. As to the parallel construction “First come, first serve,” you’re right that it is grammatically faulty. Being an ellipted or streamlined form of “First to come, first to be served,” it should indeed take the form “First come, first served.” And just in case your English teachers in high school overlooked explaining or didn’t know how to explain why it should be so, here’s why: In the unellipted two-part parallel phrase “First to come, first to be served,” the first part “first to come” consists of the adverb “first” followed by the active-voice infinitive form “to come,” while the second part “first to be served” consists of the adverb “first” followed by the passive-voice infinitive form “to be served.” The elliptical form of the active-voice infinitive form “to come” drops the function word “to” and becomes the bare infinitive “come,” while the elliptical form of the passive-voice infinitive form “to be served” drops both the function word “to” and the auxiliary verb “be” and becomes the past participle “served.” This is why the elliptical form of “First to come, first to be served” is “First
come, first
served.”
I do realize, of course, that this grammar analysis could be too abstruse and difficult to comprehend for most people, particularly nonnative English speakers, but it pays to know that even the most puzzling grammar forms in English actually have a logical basis. It’s just that it takes a lot of time and effort to explain them, and often a much longer time and effort to understand and internalize them.
RELATED READINGS:No earthly reason why the clergy should be bad in English grammarDeconstructing and understanding those puzzling elliptical sentencesElliptical sentences often read and sound better than regular sentences
