She is Outgoing

I heard someone say, "She is outgoer." As with many errors in English, half the time, we can actually figure out the meaning of what was said. Still, the error remains. In this case, it's clear that the person wanted to say, "She is outgoing."

When we want to describe someone as being warm and friendly, we use the adjective outgoing, which literally means "someone warm and friendly." Outgoer is simply incorrect.

I'm leaving tomorrow for a vacation in Boracay with my in-laws. Yahoo! I'm finally going out-of-town for fun and not for work.

See you all when I get back!

It's On Behalf Of!

Much as I don't like to repeat myself, I had to post on this topic again. The improper use of "in behalf of" is starting to irritate me.

Yesterday, Casey and I were in Megamall for some errands and we stopped by Toy Kingdom, my husband being a toy collector after all. Toy Kingdom had a voice over the PA announcing birthday celebrants who were shopping in the store. The announcer kept saying, "In behalf of Toy Kingdom, we would like to greet...." After the announcement, all the employees would clap and this rather annoying birthday jingle would play. My irritation at the music aside, I kept wincing every time I would hear "in behalf of Toy Kingdom." How many Toy Kingdom shoppers had their birthday yesterday anyway?

One of my earliest posts was on this topic. When we are representing someone else, we say "on behalf of". "In behalf of" is used when we're doing something for the benefit of someone else. Hence, it's "On behalf of Toy Kingdom" (the person over the PA is representing everyone in Toy Kingdom) and "We collected goods in behalf of the flood victims" (the speaker collected charity for the benefit of the flood victims).

Now, I do know that English is a living and evolving language. In fact, "on behalf of" and "in behalf of" are often interchanged now. Still, I think it's important to know how to use English correctly just the same.


Thanks for reading!

Good At That Activity

I've been hearing people say, "good with that activity." I understand the sentiment, but I have to correct the expression.

It's not "good with that activity" but "good at that activity." We use this expression when we're talking about a person's skill level when it comes to performing a task. For example, my husband Casey is good at writing while I am good at teaching. We can also use this sarcastically: "She is good at lying."

Tatz left a comment asking me whether I do seminars. Yes, Tatz, I do. You can contact me here but please let me know how I can contact you.

Thanks for reading, everyone!

Mail and E-mail

Hello everyone! As you can all see, I took a long break for the Easter holidays. I had a fantastic time! I hope I'm now over a horrid sinusitis problem and ready to work and blog.

On this Easter Monday, I'd like to discuss something mundane but very important: the mail. We've all mailed something at one time or another and I'm sure there is not a person who does get excited upon receiving something from the mail. Today, though, things have changed as the internet is now often used to send messages whereas the post was the method of choice in the past.

I wanted to blog about mail because I've heard people say "I will mail a letter to post" and "I will mail to the internet." In both instances, of course, the person is talking about how the letter will be sent, although the expressions used are wrong.

When we're talking about sending something through the mail, we can say any of the following: "I will send this via post," "I will mail this letter, "I will send this letter through the mail." We do not say "I will mail a letter to post." The letter is not going to the post. Rather, we are sending it using the postal service; hence, we say, "I will send this letter through post" or "I will send this via post." Or, we can simply say, "I will mail this letter." In this case, "mail" is used as a verb to describe the action of using the postal service.

Now, when speaking of sending letters through the Internet, we are definitely not mailing anything (to mail something, as I've said, means to use the post office). We cannot mail things through the Internet. Rather, we just send things through the Net. The correct expression, then, is "I will send this letter through the Internet." Or, to simplify things further, we can just say, "I will e-mail my friend (or relative/boss/etc.)." E-mail, after all, is what we call letters send through the Internet.

Happy Easter, one and all!

Elaborate On

I'm in Manila as of the moment but I'm leaving for Cebu in a few hours. Since I'm rushing, this will be a quick post.

One of the students I met in Baguio kept saying, "Ma'am, could you please elaborate the question?" I had to correct her right away. The expression is elaborate on. We always say, "Could you please elaborate on the question?"

I'm not sure why the preposition on is necessary. It's just the way it is! If you want to use another expression when you want to say something similar, just say "could you please explain further?"

Have a nice weekend!

Bring and Take

There's a small confusion about the difference between bring and take. Both are verbs used to talk about moving an object from one place to the other. The difference between them is very slight but useful to know. Check out this dialogue:

"Can you bring the cake?"
"Yes, I can take it to the party."
"Would you mind bringing other items?"
"Sorry, I can only take the cake with me."

Did you catch the difference? Bring is used if you're talking to someone and asking him/her to move the object from one place to another. Take, on the other hand, is used if you are talking about actually moving the object from one place to another.

This is really a very small difference and one that is based on usage rather than meaning. Still, it's best to know these things.

Manny, as to the question you left me, I agree. You can add "for" if the word request is used that way.

I'll be in Baguio for work till Friday. Hopefully, I'll be able to post when I get back as I'm leaving for Cebu on Saturday. Have a good week, everyone!

Happy New Year!

This will be a quick post as I'm still running around due to the holidays. I was in Baguio having a blast at a vacation with my in-laws. Needless to say, there was no Internet where I was. Anyway, I just want to remind everybody that the word "gift" is pronounced with an "f" sound and not a "p" sound. It's "giFts" NOT "giPs."

Happy New Year to one and all! Thanks for reading and see you all in 2008!

Demand A Receipt

My aunt Myra sent me a message the other day about a sign that many Philippine restaurants have: "Please demand for your receipt." I appreciate restaurants informing their consumers about the right to get a receipt but there's an English problem here.

When it comes to using the word, demand, we don't need to use "for." Some expressions using this word are "demand an apology," "demand that they return your money," "demand a raise." When it comes to receipts, we just have to say, "Upon payment, please demand a receipt."

I think the error of saying "please demand for your receipt" comes from the confusion between "demand" and "ask." When we use "ask," we add for: "Please ask for your receipt." Either way, though, we don't say, "demand your receipt" or "ask your receipt."

Toodles!

I Have Free Time

While teaching an English class for adults, I heard one of my students say, "When I have a free time, I like to watch movies." I'd like to concentrate on "when I have a free time." That class was not the first time I heard this error. In fact, I hear it fairly frequently.

The correct expression does not use the article "a:" "when I have free time." As an article, "a" is used if you're talking about one thing among many: "a bag," "a watch," "a movie," "a song." In all four examples, the person is talking about a particular bag, watch, movie, or song. We know that there are many varieties of these things. Consider this dialogue:

Prixie: I think I want to watch a movie today (there are many movies, but I'm only interested in one).
Chris: Ok, what movie?
Prixie: How about "Enchanted?"
Chris: Is that supposed to be a good movie (there are many good movies, is this one of them)?

Following the proper use of the article "a," we can see that "a free time" is incorrect. Free time, after all, does not come in varieties. When we say "free time," we always mean "time to do something other than work," or "time to do something fun." Even if you spend your free time doing a variety of activities, there is still just one free time.

Enjoy your free time today.

Conducive for What?

I've heard people describe certain places as "conducive." Let's say they're talking about their study areas and they say, "My study area is conducive." Much as I admire the use of vocabulary, we never just describe something as "conducive."

The word conducive means "ideal for a certain situation." As such, it doesn't work as an adjective on it's own. For the word to make sense, it has to be attached to the situation it is describing. If you say, "My study area is conducive," the meaning of your sentence is unclear because you didn't say what your study area is conducive for or why your study area is conducive. The correct way of using the word would be, "My study area is conducive for working silently." Or, you can use the word to say something negative, "My study area is not conducive for work because I share it with my younger brother who always makes a lot of noise."

This rainy weather is conducive for sleep.

Turn Off The Lights!

I often hear people say, "I put on the light" or "I put on the electric fan." We do not use the expression "put on" to mean to "turn something on."

One of the meanings of the verb "put" is to place something in a definite place or location. Hence, we "put the plates on the dining table" and we "put the pots and pans in the pantry." We also "put on clothes" like, "I just need to put on my socks." When we're hitting light switches or electric fan switches, we're not "putting on" lights or fans or any appliance. Instead, when we want lights or fans, we say, "We turn on the lights and fans when we get home."

When we use the verb "turn," one of the things we mean is to "start a process." When we're talking about appliances, we need to switch them on to start the process that will make them work. So, when we "turn on the lights," we're starting the electrical process that makes lights work. We also say "turn off the lights" when we want to stop the process.

We do say "put out," though, when we're irritated with someone or something: "I was put out because they arrived so late!" We can also say "put on" when we're saying that someone is teasing us or giving us false information: "You say aliens exist in the Philippines? You're putting me on!"

Want to save energy? Turn off the lights when you don't need them or you might put out the environmentalists out there!

From a Certain Point of View

I think there's some confusion regarding when to use "a" or "the" with the expression, "point of view." What is the difference when we say "a point of view" and "the point of view"?

A and the are articles which differ in terms of specificities: when we use a, we're thinking in general terms while when we use the, we're thinking of specifics. For example, if a person says, "Bring me a bag," he or she is asking for any bag. If he/she says, "Bring me the bag," he/she wants a specific bag.

If you say, "that's the right thing to do, from a point of view," what you mean is that there could be several points of view and you are just talking about one among many. However, if you say, "the point of view," you're talking of only one point of view, there are no others. Consider the difference here:

From the point of view of the investigators, the Glorietta blast was not caused by a bomb. (The investigators only have one point of view).
That the blast was caused by a gas leak could be true from a certain point of view. (There could be other points of view or theories regarding the blast.)

If you want to talk about a person's specific point of view about a topic or issue, you say something like, "From the point of view of my boss, we should have a vacation." We never say, "From a point of view of my boss, we should have a vacation."

Don't you think we should all study proper English? That is my point of view.

S-V Agreement: Is and Are where Subjects are Concerned

Hello everyone! I'm back from a fruitful Cebu trip. Here's today's post and thanks for reading while I was gone.

The basic subject-verb agreement rule of the singular subject taking the singular verb and the plural subject taking the plural verb becomes difficult when the sentence seems to have more than one subject. Consider these examples:

"Prixie is cooking."
"Prixie, Justine, and Maisa are cooking."
"Prixie, along with Justine and Maisa, is cooking."

What's the difference between the three sentences? In the first sentence, the subject is singular (only one person is cooking); hence, the singular verb, is. In the second, there are three people cooking, so we use the plural verb, are. The last sentence, though, contains one subject, with two others seemingly inserted in the sentence. In this case, the verb is singular because the subject is singular. The two other names are not the subject of the sentence, they just help to further explain the subject (the one cooking is helped by two others).

When deciding whether to use the plural or the singular, know your subject!

S-V Agreement: Everyone and Every

I'm flying to Cebu tomorrow and will be back late Sunday night. I may not be able to post while I'm there so my next entry might be on Monday. Have a good weekend!

As I've been saying in my previous posts on subject-verb agreement, the only way to get around this confusing area of English is to memorize the rules. Here is a post on another s-v agreement rule: when using the words every, everyone, and everything, the verb that follows is singular. Consider these examples: "Every student has to take the test," "Everyone is joining the field trip," "Everything is a mess right now."

I understand why the use of the singular is confusing where these words are concerned. These words, after all, talk about more than one person or thing. When we say everyone, we are talking about more than one person. In this instance, unfortunately, English is not very helpful at explaining the reason for the rule. I just think we use the singular because we are referring to the individual persons or things that are referred to by everyone or everything.

If this confuses you, remember the title of the well-reviewed book, Everything IS Illuminated.

I Know Whom To Trust Now!

Hi everyone! I'm sorry I was not able to post this entry yesterday. I was facilitating a workshop all day and I got home so late. When I get busy, it's hard to find the time to post an entry.

My aunt, Tita Myra Chan-Cruz, sent me an SMS message the other day detailing a glaring English error she was told about. This error occurred in a half-page ad in a major newspaper. The ad was Kris Aquino's latest endorsement for some body-improvement center. No offense to Kris Aquino, but the error still has to be addressed. The ad read, "I know who to trust now!" In this case, it's not "who to trust" but "whom to trust."

The difference between who and whom is one that is often neglected now. The reason is whom has lately been considered rather formal in tone, which is why it is rarely used. Simply put, the difference lies in how the word is used in a sentence. If the subject is the person, then we use who; if the person is the object, then we use whom. In the ad mentioned, the person is the object of the sentence; therefore, whom is appropriate (the subject of the sentence is Kris Aquino, who is talking, the "I" in the sentence). Who is used in sentences such as these: "Who drank the last bottle of wine?" and "Who are you going to the movies with?" In both cases, who is the subject of the sentence (the person who drank the wine, the person who is going to the movies).

The lesson in all this? Don't always believe the English in newspapers. If you want to learn English via reading, it's best to read very good books.

Complain and Complaint

While calling to complain about errors in my phone bill, I realized that the difference (and the corresponding usage) of complain and complaint can be confusing for people. The two words, after all, mean similar things and in all cases, also carry the same bad feelings. What's the difference between the two?

Complain is a verb which means "to express grief, anger, or disappointment about something or someone." It also means "to make an accusation." So, I call to complain about the mistakes in my bill (I'm disappointed about these mistakes and I'm also accusing the company of mismanaging my account). As a verb, complain can be in the past tense: "I complained to the manager already."

Complaint, though, is a noun. As a noun, it's a name for the grievance, the disappointment, or the problem being discussed. It is then used to refer to the issue a person is complaining about. So, "My complaint is about the bills I've been receiving for a service that I don't use."

Here's the rule: if you're talking about the act of discussing a disappointment, use complain. If you're talking about the particular thing causing the disappointment, use complaint. Check out this exchange:

Prixie: I'd like to file a complaint about the mistakes in my bill.
Customer Service Guy: Ok, ma'am, I will prepare a customer service file for you.
Prixie: I've complained about this before. You haven't done anything about it!
Customer Service Guy: I'm sorry ma'am, let me work on this complaint as soon as possible.
Prixie: You better! I don't want to have to complain again!

I hope I've made the difference between the two words clear. Remember, it's never wise to complain too much, unless the issue you're facing is really hurtful. Have a nice complaint-free day!

How Do I Get There?

Sometimes, in response to the question, "how do I get to your place?" I hear people saying "There's different access to our place." Now, this response is confusing because it misuses the word, "access."

I think the confusion lies in the various ways we use the word, access. One way of using the word is as a noun. As such, it's a name for getting to or entering or leaving a certain place. So, you can say, "You can access our town via the South Expressway."

I think the problem with the sentence I mentioned is that the speaker was talking about several ways of getting to his/her place. In this regard, the proper expression is "different ways of accessing our place." Here, access becomes a verb which means "to get to a certain place."

Here is the proper sentence now, "There are different ways to access our place. You can take a car, a bus, or the train."

Then again, we use access to mean getting to a website as well. It's nice to know that my readers can all access my blog.

Using "The" With Place Names

My sister Patricia, who is studying in Poland right now, left a question for me the other day. She wanted to know why we refer to our country as the Philippines and not simply Philippines. It's funny how a question as simple as this can make you think about something you've taken as a fact. So, why do we say the Philippines?

I did some research and I found two answers to this question. The first is that some place names (names of countries, regions, mountains, rivers, etc.) use the depending on the grammatical pattern of the name. Hence, Philippines uses the because it is a plural name. After all, our country is composed of several islands and our country's name shows this. In this sense, we are similar to the U.S.A. They're the United States of America (there are several states in one country).

The second answer is that using the for place names is a question of convention rather than the rule. In other words, we use the for certain place names because we're used to doing so. Consider the expression the Bronx. The place name "Bronx" is not a plural name but convention dictates that we say the Bronx instead of just Bronx.

The English language has many cases of convention rather than rules dictating how or why we say things in a certain way. Unfortunately (and this is what complicates the learning of English), the only way to get around this is to be aware of these conventions. Check a grammar book! Check a dictionary! Or, you can ask me!

Thanks for the question, Pat! It's nice to know I have a reader in Poland, even if she is my sister.

Using "Ok" to Link Sentences and Ideas

Last summer, I visited Bohol for the first time. I toured all the important spots, saw the chocolate hills, watched fireflies by moonlight, and visited the Bohol Bee Farm. One of our tour guides, though, kept using the word, ok. She said things like, "Ok, here's the man-made forest, ok. Ok, there are animals here. Ok." Every time she would respond to a question, she would begin with "Ok" and end her response with "ok" as well. She was not only misusing the word, she was also overusing it.

I think that our tour guide kept using ok because she needed it to connect her ideas. In the English language, there are many words that can be used to connect ideas. These are known as cohesive devices or linking words. Some examples of these are but, however, moreover, therefore, and. All these words mean slightly different things but all serve to connect ideas and sentences together.

Here's an example of the excessive use of ok:

"Bees suck nectar from various plants; ok, a particular honey may have a different flavor from another variety. Ok, the flavors of honey are determined by where the bees get the nectar, one variety of honey may have a different taste from another. Ok, all varieties of honey have the same nutritive value. Ok, they are all good for you."

Here is the corrected version using proper cohesive devices:

"Bees suck nectar from various plants; therefore, a particular honey may have a different flavor from another variety. Since the flavors of honey are determined by where the bees get the nectar, one variety of honey may have a different taste from another. However, all varieties of honey have the same nutritive value. Moreover, they are all good for you."

What, then, do we use ok for? Ok simply means that everything is all right (it can also be spelled okay). So, we use it to respond to a question if we mean "yes" or "everything is fine." Here's a sample dialogue:

Mama: "Do you think you did well in the test?"
Prixie: "Yes, Ma, I think I did ok."
Mama: Great. Go and eat dinner now."
Prixie: "Ok."

As seen in the sample dialogue, ok is used to give a positive response. I have not heard of a situation where it is proper to use ok as a linking word. The English language has many linking words, so it's best to use them, ok?

Here It Is

Sometimes, when I ask for something, the person giving me the item says, "Here is it," which is incorrect. The error lies in interchanging the positions of "is" and "it." Since the subject of the sentence is represented by the pronoun "it," it should be placed before the verb "is." So, the correct form is "Here it is."

Consider this dialogue:

Prixie: "Can I have this blouse in my size, please?"
Saleslady: "Here it is."

Have a nice Sunday!