Author: andrewcareaga

Former higher ed PR and marketing guy at Missouri University of Science and Technology (Missouri S&T) now focused on freelance writing and editing and creative writing, fiction and non-fiction.

National Grammar Day: to infinitives and beyond

grammarToday is National Grammar Day. Missouri S&T’s public relations manager, @mhstoltz, informed me of this yesterday.

Today is the day to celebrate grammar. Get out your Strunk and White, undangle those participles, rejoin those infinitives and get your good grammar groove on. (Or should that be “get on your good grammar groove,” so as to not end the sentence with a preposition?)

(And yes, I’m sure true grammar lovers are shocked — shocked! — that there is no serial comma in the second sentence in the above paragraph. Sometimes more modern writing conventions, or the Associated Press Stylebook’s punctuation edicts, trump those old-school grammar rules.)

In honor of this day, maybe we should talk about the subject of grammar. In this day of text msgs, telegraphic tweets and the death of the serial comma, what constitutes good grammar?

Or maybe we should air our pet grammar peeves? Here’s one of mine:

10itemsorlessConfusing less and fewer. Grocery stores do this all the time with their “10 items or less” signs. Here’s an easy way to remember which is which:

If it’s stuff you can count, use fewer. As in: “I have fewer than 10 items in my shopping cart — that is, if my six-pack of light beer, which contains fewer calories per serving than regular beer, counts as a single item — therefore, I shall check out via the ’10 items or less’ lane.”

If it’s stuff you can’t count or quantify, then use less. As in: “I am less drunk than Bob, even though he drank fewer beers than I.”

If that isn’t clear enough, consult Grammar Girl’s tip on the fewer/less conundrum.

And tell me:

  1. How do you plan to celebrate National Grammar Day?
  2. What is your pet grammar peeve? (Limit two or less fewer per commenter, please.)

* * *

* Top image from Behind the Grammar. Bottom image from a Yahoo movie page.

Time to let down our social media defenses

The U.S. Department of Defense recently released its official policy on social media, proclaiming that “the default for the DoD non-classified network (the NIPRNET) is for open access so that all of DoD can use new media.” The new policy also allows “[s]ervice members and DoD employees … to use new media to communicate with family and friends” at home or abroad, but cautions that safety is a top concern.

The DoD even has a social media hub to facilitate discussion and to share resources.

Hey, if the Defense Department, of all agencies, is cool with allowing its 3 million-plus employees to engage in social media, isn’t it time for our organizations to loosen up a bit? David Meerman Scott puts it in perspective in his recent Huffington Post blog: “What’s fascinating about the DoD Social Media Policy is how far out in front the military is compared to many U.S. corporations.” And, we might add, U.S. colleges and universities.

The other fascinating thing, from my perspective, is that the official policy is only 9 pages long. Pretty impressive for a government bureaucracy. (My university’s social media guidelines document is a mere 4 pages.)

Let’s take a cue from the DoD and move forward with social media.

(Hat tip to @chrisbrogan, who pointed me to Scott’s post on the DoD over the weekend.)