Jesse Kornbluth's article on common grammatical mistakes—"Hopefully (Not)"—elicited a tremendous response from readers with their own pet peeves. There were also a few dissenting voices who thought Mr. Kornbluth was too aggressively wielding his Strunk & White. Below is a sampling:

***

Very nice eleven. Rules of tropes and speech, that is. But those are the easy ones to remember. What about those awful, obstreperous "I"s and "me"s or those gruesome "he"s, "her"s, "she"s, "his"s, and so forth. If it were up to I, uh, me to decide what is the most maddening, it would be those little friends of Everyday Speak.

"Fewer" vs. "Less than" is a day at the beach by comparison. In the reading, I remain,

Thomas Bride

***

Great article!! You missed one major grammatical pet peeve of mine—"irregardless"—no one seems to realize this is not a word. Here's what dictionary.com has to say about it: Irregardless.

Usage Note: Irregardless is a word that many mistakenly believe to be correct usage in formal style, when in fact it is used chiefly in nonstandard speech or casual writing. Coined in the United States in the early 20th century, it has met with a blizzard of condemnation for being an improper yoking of irrespective and regardless and for the logical absurdity of combining the negative ir- prefix and -less suffix in a single term. Although one might reasonably argue that it is no different from words with redundant affixes like debone and unravel, it has been considered a blunder for decades and will probably continue to be so. Ilana Zalika

***

Bravo! I taught junior high language arts for many years and had to prove many of the grammar/usage/dictionary definitions to my students, especially toward the end of my career. So many students heard the wrong grammar and were shocked when the grammar book and teacher said otherwise. Some students, in fact, became a bit argumentative and would say, "Well, that is how my mom/dad, etc. says that!!"

For example, when we were working on pronouns and verb usage, we talked about "This is she/he" instead of what the kids normally heard and said—"This is her/him." They would say, "No way, Ms. P.! The book has to be wrong!" So I would show them on the computer monitor what one of the dictionaries said. They believed the computer dictionaries, but not the grammar book!

So whenever the kids disputed what the grammar book or I said, we went right to the computer dictionaries, and that solved the problem in my classroom. However, how do we solve this problem in the workplace, Jesse? More and more errors are being overlooked and our society looks somewhat illiterate, don't you think?

Also, I will get your book to show to people because even some of my adult friends dispute me about grammar and word usage, and we have friendly arguments and make bets with each other about some of these. I could carry a grammar book with me, but my friends would just think that was weird! Your book might be a better solution to the friendly "word wars" we have!

Jan P.

***

I've been a copywriter for over 20 years, and one of my favorite client phrases is "New and Improved!" (I always have to ask them, how can it be improved if it's new?)

Jeff Adams

***

I must object to a section of Jesse Kornbluth's otherwise quite useful (and pleasingly Salinger-quoting!) article on grammar and usage errors. "Everyone uses 'hopefully' as a shortcut for 'I hope,'" he writes. "It is not. Yes, the dictionary allows it, but that's just bending to popular usage."

Like, the horror, for sure! Mr. Kornbluth's denial of spoken, idiomatic, and sometimes appropriately wrong language will soon enough lead him to the lonely end of the embittered grammar-freak. To scorn popular usage is to scorn popular users.

Choire Sicha

***

This was a great article.

I'm also one of those to whom grammar really does matter. You would not believe (or maybe you would) the derisive looks and expressions I am given, as well as eye rolls, when I tell people that the language should be respected and used correctly. What s with the ubiquitous (how's that for a pretentious word?) apostrophe people use lately when they are simply trying to pluralize a word? "My dog's like to eat snack's all day." It makes me want to scream.

I don't pretend to be a grammarian or professional writer. On the other hand, I try not to intentionally butcher the English language. Most people who mess it up grew up in this country and should really know better.

Arrrggggghhhh!

Thanks for the chance to vent.

Rachel Bogner

***

Thanks, Jesse, for your ten reminders about grammar and usage. And about the shoes. The young ones among us seem to be speaking and writing in a different language. Your first example, "hopefully," is used freely as a synonym for if only and maybe and perhaps and I hope, but it's hard to tell the young ones they're wrong when they've been hearing bullshit English like this on TV for at least a generation. That one and any modified use of "unique" make me grind my teeth. Thanks for getting this into wide distribution. It's needed.

Jim McCraw

***

Please help the average and not so average American citizen understand the correct meaning of "to beg the question." Even Paula Zahn uses it incorrectly!

Becket Cook

***

Whenever I find an article about grammar and the decline of correct usage, I become excited to see how much I really know compared with all these grammar experts. This excitement often turns into shame as I quickly realize my copyediting skills could benefit from a few refresher courses, if not a complete overhaul. But after reading Jesse Kornbluth's "Hopefully (Not)" I was left feeling cheated, the same way you feel cheated when you visit a psychiatrist and he or she tells you you're depressed. Come on, Jesse, any decent copy editor knows the difference between it's and its, and the use of very unique (or just plain very) in any sentence should be immediately questioned. Tell me something I don't read in most grammar rants, such as when to use a hyphen with a compound. Write about the importance of consistency in font, leading, kerning, and, well, everything. Explain why "Guess what" is a command and not a question. These are examples copy editors need; rehashing the latest edition of "The Elements of Style" is not.

Daniel Rivera

***

I loved this article. The phrase that gets me is "dead body" as in "A dead body was found today behind a dumpster." Doesn't the statement that a body was found imply that it was dead? I've never read any report that said "A live body was found today." One of my editors uses "dead body" all the time.

Yayoi Lena Winfrey

***

Sadly, some of these items are no longer part of stylebooks. Frankly, I don't think anyone cares. I was trained by John Bremner, student of Theodore Bernstein, who wrote NYT stylebook, and I had a solid background in grammar from six years of Latin.

However, now the New York Times now uses "data" as a singular noun and says this is correct. And those giving style tests tell you that good grammar is wrong.

I can't get a job as a copy editor or editor because my grammar and style are now incorrect. I wonder whether these new experts know how to use a dictionary!

Mary Mitchell

***

Wonderful piece.

My suggestion: Completely Destroyed. Oh, when something is partially destroyed, that makes it easier to rebuild?

Frank Klimko

***

I'd like to applaud Jesse Kornbluth's fixation on correctness, but, unfortunately, he's not as au fait as he'd like to think with correct usage and grammar. For example, he decries the use of since to suggest causation, rather than the passage of time. A quick trip to the OED, however, explains that this particular usage for since has existed since 1450. Moreover, one of the more arcane punctuation rules in English--the use of a comma preceding adverb clauses at the ends of sentences beginning with the words as, for, or since, when they signify because, but not because itself—is based on differentiating the causal use meaning of since from its denotation as a marker of time.

J Yellowlees Douglas

***

Although I am guilty of one or two of the improper usage of grammar listed in Jesse Kornbluth's article, the one that stands out is "More Than" and Over.

I used to write marketing communication materials for a financial institution. I truly believe I was let go, because I told my supervisor, on more than one occasion, that it is never over one thousand dollars but more than. Thank Mr. Kornbluth, I wish I could send her this article. I no longer work there but at least I wasn't wrong; that is satisfaction enough!

Now what's the grammar rule for its or their when referring to inanimate objects and/or non-human entities. For example,

Lackawanna bank and similar financial institutions has their holdings in Pennsylvania

Or

have its holdings in Pennsylvania.

I think it was that final argument that got me kicked to the curb. (Smile)

Mel Hopkins

***

Good article. Agree 100%. There is nothing bad about using good grammar. Writers write down to the lowest common denominator, instead of elevating the reader. Ethel Geary

***

I would love to read more pieces like this. They remind us of those skills we learned long ago, but may have forgotten. Poor grammar is a slow plague these days and our busy culture doesn't allow for much refresher time with Strunk and White!

"mb fan"

Number 12, "I could care less". If I could care less, then I care some. I couldn't care less and therefore have no care at all. I am always amazed when someone tells me they care when they are intending to say the opposite.

Thanks, I feel better.

Jon

***

Great piece.

A few contributions for the collection: "Join together" (you can't join separately) and "foreign countries" (all countries other than one's own are foreign.) I recently found this gem, which would have delighted both Kornbluth and William Safire: "a fanatic afficionado." A fanatic is someone obsessive or passionate about something. An aficionado (that's one "f," the word comes from Spanish) is also someone who has a marked preference for something.

Rodolfo A. Windhausen

***

I just wanted to let you know that the article by Jesse Kornbluth was perfect. OOPS..it can't be perfect since nothing is perfect. Let me say instead, that his article was informative, fun to read and made me think of other grammar errors and phrases that I hate (including the phrase "and much more" at the end of a list of items or activities). Kornbluth's first paragraph about Paris Hilton and rappers was great! I'm sending this to several of my other friends who are also writers. Thanks!

Naoma Welk

***

Having read Mr. Kornbluth's commentary, I want to thank him for his on-the-target grammar lesson. I write and realize I've become sloppy. Editors appear to be a disappearing breed. Hopefully, this comment is well-written. (Or, I hope)?

Karen Fawcett

***

While you're on the subject of usage and grammar, why not mention the number one offender: "Less" instead of "fewer than."

Almost every reporter on television says "less," as in "less people," rather than "fewer." And there are quite a few—only a few fewer than on TV—who do so in print. Grrrr. Nails on the blackboard. (Maybe if there were still blackboards for nails to grate on there'd be, uh, fewer, howlers such as these.) As for... "A BRUTAL MURDER Really? Tell me about the other kind." How about the ending to "Million Dollar Baby"? Yeah, maybe George Bush thought it was brutal, but what does he know?

Tracy Young

What makes you instinctively lunge for the proverbial blue pencil? Send your biggest grammatical peeves to letters@mediabistro.com. (Letters may be edited for length or clarity.)