Author Topic: The importance of grammar-perfect English - IV  (Read 1899 times)

Joe Carillo

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4646
  • Karma: +202/-2
    • View Profile
    • Email
The importance of grammar-perfect English - IV
« on: February 11, 2017, 09:56:38 AM »
In my previous column (“The importance of grammar-perfect English – III”), I dissected this seriously flawed sentence from a newspaper: “Therefore, the government should recognize the film industry as an essential commodity. It should be taken cared of so that it flourishes and gives back beneficial returns to a caring government.” I pointed to its erroneous use of the idiom “taken cared of” and to its misuse of the clause “it flourishes and gives back beneficial returns to a caring government” as a simple fact instead of as a wish, then suggested this improved version: “Therefore, the government should recognize local filmmaking as an essential industry, one that should be taken care of so it can flourish and bring beneficial returns to the country.”


My suggestion drew the following interesting response from a reader, Rod Larson, who described himself as a great fan of the Philippines:

“I first want to congratulate you on your excellent article on the use of correct English grammar. It is so rare these days for anyone to pay the slightest attention to such mistakes. However, I am displeased that you insisted on using a phrase that most Americans who know good grammar find quite distressing. ‘Taken care of’ should always be followed by a prepositional object! This problem is similar to that of dangling prepositions. One does not say, ‘In that house I want to go in.’ The preposition must be directly followed by an object.

“A better sentence (than your version would be this): ‘Therefore, the government should take care of local filmmaking as an essential industry and recognize that this industry can flourish and bring beneficial returns to the country.’

“I hope you don’t find me overly abrasive, but I do think that English is a very difficult language and that most Americans themselves are unable to use it to any degree of success. [In any case], I do compliment you on your efforts to improve the standard of English usage.”
   
Here’s my open reply to Mr. Larson’s comments:

Thank you for your compliment regarding my efforts to promote good English. I would like to assure you that I don’t find your comments about my suggested use of the idiom “taken care of” abrasive at all. Your own rewrite of the statement in question is excellent, but I beg to differ with your prescription that “taken care of” should always be followed by a prepositional object.

Remember that in English, the past participle of a verb expresses completed action and is used in (1) forming all the tenses in the passive voice, and (2) forming the perfect tenses in the active voice. I’ll take up only one aspect of the first function here and defer a fuller discussion of both functions to a later column.

Now, in passive voice constructions, we have the option to mention or not to mention the doer of the action conveyed by the verb. In the case of “taken care of,” in particular, we can say, “The discrepancy was taken care of by our accountant,” or, if for some compelling reason we don’t want the doer identified, we can simply say, “The discrepancy was taken care of.” The preposition “of” does dangle in the latter sentence, but that sentence is grammatically, structurally, and semantically correct nonetheless.

Of course, some grammar purists insist that dangling prepositions should be totally avoided, but many respected authorities of English have debunked this prescription. (Remember Winston Churchill’s classic retort? “This is the sort of nonsense up with which I will not put.”). And many accomplished writers largely ignore it. See, for instance, how the English novelist George Eliot used “taken care of” in this passage from the novel Silas Marner: “The child was being taken care of, and would very likely be happy, as people in humble stations often were—happier, perhaps, than those brought up in luxury.”

I rest my case.   

This essay, 520th in the series, first appeared in the weekly column “English Plain and Simple” by Jose A. Carillo in The Manila Times in its January 22, 2007 issue, © 2007 by Manila Times Publishing. All rights reserved.

The Manila Times ran one column on “The importance of grammar-perfect English” series each week for seven weeks in 2006, and my Facebook Gateway to the Forum is now running one of them every three days in succession on February 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, and 21, 2017 for the benefit of new Forum members and English learners.

(Next: The importance of grammar-perfect English – V (February 15, 2017)
« Last Edit: February 11, 2017, 11:36:34 AM by Joe Carillo »