As requested, I am going to attempt to talk about the words "who" and the pigeon word, "whom."

Face it, "whom" is practically in the ranks with the DoDo bird (research with DNA has shown that the DoDo bird was related to the pigeon). People just don't use "whom" much. I figure in another 100 years the word will be extinct.

However, certain people insist on using the word "whom," so it remains in the English language although it sounds extremely formal (and pretentious I might add). If you are going to use it rather than reword the sentence, then by all means use it correctly.

So when do you use "who," and when do you use "whom"? 

"Who" is used as a subject, and "Whom" is used as the object. Is that clear as mud?

For a simplistic explanation, if a preposition can be used in front of the "W" word, it usually will be "whom."

For example, to whom am I speaking; for whom is this letter; by whom was this written. And so it goes.

"Who" is going? You can't say "To Whom" is going. I guess you could, but that would be so wrong. Use "who" in most cases and in the subject slot.

There are other nuances about these two words, but just as dumb as pigeons are, "whom" is, too. If you insist on using the correct "W" word, make sure you follow the rule in the bolded sentence above.

By the way, this goes for whoever and whomever. Whatever.

There is a preferred spelling of that delicious method of cooking: It's "barbecue."

I've seen it spelled a million different ways (forgive the hyperbole). I'm sure you've seen it, too. And all of these spellings are incorrect:

BBQ, barbeque, BBque, BarBQue, B-B-Q, Bar-B-Q and some other vague variations.

The one and only correct spelling, however, is "barbecue."

Some think, for marketing purposes, the spelling of barbecue may be directly related to how good the barbecue is. Not sure how, but this theory might or might not be true. I have had good barbecue at all spellings of it. However, I tend to go to places that spell the name correctly. If they spell the name correctly, maybe the barbecue is done correctly, too.

Some dictionaries recognize that "barbecue" is also spelled "barbeque," but they also mention that "barbecue" is the preferred and correct spelling.

On the other hand, maybe a place coming up with a totally original spelling for the delicious food might be successful: Check my title for this blog to see what I mean.

Parallelism is a construction method used to smooth out words while making the meaning of the words clearer and concise. Parallelism provides rhythm and tempo in writing.

Picture yourself in a car and you want to parallel park. You have to line up the car with the curb. Parallelism in writing is similar.

Verbs, adverbs and -ing words (gerunds) should be parallel when each is used in a series (or patterns) of words, phrases and clauses.

Here is a parallel construction of verbs: Bill petted the cat, fed the cat and bathed the cat. See how the verbs match -- petted, fed, bathed.

Another example: Jane liked  to run, (to) swim, and (to) box. (infinitive phrases).

Here's an example of bad parallelism: Jane liked to run, swim and boxing.

Here's an example of adverbs in parallelism: He drove sleepily, drunkenly and dangerously.

Here's an example of bad parallelism: He drove sleepily, drunkenly and he was dangerous.

Here's and example of -ing (gerunds) words in parallelism: Harrison liked running, swimming and talking.

The example of bad parallelism: Harrison liked running, swimming and he talked a lot.

Writing parallel improves your writing. It gives your writing pizazz. It makes your sentences correct and concise. Try it. You'll like it. You'll love it.

Always refer to people with "who." Refer to things and animals with "that."

For example: They are the people who are going overseas. Not they are the people that are going overseas.

Those are the animals that are for sale. Not those are the animals who are for sale.

Exception: An animal with a name (Bowwow or Fluffy, for example) gets the use of "who."

No, the title to this blog is not a variation on the song, "Tea For Two," or some new musketeers' vow to one another. 

But it is a little ditty: Cannot is one word, not two; a and lot are two words, not one.

The word "cannot" dates back to the Old English "ne cunnan," and is traced back to 1400. It's modern cousin "can't" appeared in 1706, according to the online etymology dictionary (http:www.etymonline.com).

Of course, the definition of "cannot" is the negative of the verb "can." For example, you can or you cannot. Now it can be, or it can't. But cannot survives as one word, not "can not" in this usage.

"Cannot" is unique because it has survived the ages. In contrast, consider should not and could not as contractions: shouldn't and couldn't. Of course there's the contraction for shall not, shan't, which is pretty unique, just as won't (will not) is.

The point is, when writing, use "cannot" as a single word when meaning the inability to do something. Don't use two words in that sense: can not.

Now about the words "a" and "lot." They are two words, not one. Many writers incorrectly write "alot." Don't do it because you cannot in English.

However, there is the word that sounds like the two words: allot, which means to give out or distribute.

But "a lot" means many or several or numerous.

Aficionados of English call "a lot" a dead metaphor that is passable in conversation, but not preferred in writing. Use the word "many" or "much" instead.

Remember that a "lot" is a parcel of land with so many square feet. The square footage varies from lot to lot. "Lot" can also mean your fortune, overall circumstances or condition in life. For example, "He had a bad lot in life." Hence, this is the metaphor for many or much in the expression "a lot."

I cannot stay any longer. I have a lot...eh, much to do. One for two! Two for one!

I'm going to revisit plurals a little later (but the request to thoroughly cover plurals  will not be forgotten). Something pressing came up, and I want to talk about it now.

First, I'd like to think I had something to do with CNN changing its motto some years ago. The TV network's mantra used to be "Real News, Real Fast." Some of you might remember that saying. I'd estimate it was about 10 to 12 years ago when CNN was trying to update its look and its anchors.

You might think the network was using "poetic license." Well, according to the Associated Press Stylebook, "poetic license" is for poetry, not news or features.

Back then, I quickly became tired of hearing CNN's ditty, especially because it was grammatically incorrect, and a world-renown news organization touting journalistic excellence shouldn't have such blatant misuse of the language.

OK. If it is "real news," what is unreal news? I have seen other signs with that kind of usage: "We serve real chicken." Gosh, I'd like to know what the heck I've been eating these past years. I guess it was some kind of unreal chicken, maybe cardboard.

And "real fast" is incorrect. The word "real" is an adjective. And the phrase assumes you will get the verb "get it," as in real fast. So "real doesn't work in the sentence. The correct phrase and word should be "really fast."

"Really" is an adverb and it would agree with "get," the unheard verb. 

How many times have you heard someone say, "That's real good." Or you might have heard, "You did good."

"Good" is an adjective, so the word does not agree with "did," a verb. The rule is adverbs modify verbs, and adjectives modify nouns.

So a person can "do well," but  he or she cannot "do good."

"Well" is an adverb so it can go with the verb "did" or "do."

So I wrote CNN and pointed out its bad grammar. It was shortly after that communication that the network dropped its little motto. I hope it was me, but I suspect a lot of grammarians sent the network messages complaining about its misuse of the language.

Get it? Got it? Good ... it's always good to get real.

In other words, give me lots of dollars, not dollar's. 

My colleague Rusty Bucket asked if I would do a blog on plurals because numerous writers are using an apostrophe to create a plural. Let's start by noting that an apostrophe is used primarily for expressing a possessive -- to signal (magically) that this word owns the following word or words.

When one looks in a grammar book, most of the time one will find the rules for forming the plural smack dab in the middle of possessive usage. That's because many writers confuse the two.

How many times have you seen something like this:

"In saying that a 'house' can make people get divorce's, the 'house' can also bring people together."

In the above sentence "divorces" had an apostrophe in it-- that is possesive usage. Divorces can't own anything can they? The plural for the word is simply "divorces."

The simple rule for possessives is to add an "s."

What is confusing in the English language is that some plurals are formed by an apostrophe "s."

Here they are:

1. Use apostrophes to form the plural for single letters: For example, "I have several A's and B's." "There were numerous p's in the text." She made all "A's."

2. However, do not use an apostrophe for multiple letters. For example, "Do you know your ABCs?"

3. Also, do not use an apostrophe for numbers or years. "They loved the '60s" or "They loved the 1960s." -- Notice that the apostrophe in the first example works to replace the first two digits in the year, but it does not work to form the plural for the years in the decade. Also, here is another example: They had three "1s" and four "9s."

 This might be where the confusion lies. But who knows because most of the time a plural is formed with a simple "s."

I will post more on plurals later (and there are tons of situations for forming the plural), but this is the main rule to be aware of. In the meantime, please send those "dollars," not "dollar's."

To come: Did you know that several words have their own plurals ... (so how do you form their possessives?)

Men, women, children, mice (now that we have a computer mouse, maybe we have a plural for that word that is mouses), deer, feet (just to name a few).

The title of this blog certainly indicates the White Lamp is "complimentary" of the White Curtain. But lamps are inanimate objects and can't think abstractly to deliver such a compliment. 

More appropriately, one could say that the white lamp is complementary of the white curtain. This is a completely different definition of the word in usage.

Notice the difference between "complimentary" and "complementary." One has an "i" and one has and "e." The root of this word is also different in the same way: "compliment" and complement."

Definitions of each word are very different: "Compliment" means praise. "Complement" means "a part of, or goes with." One way to remember this is that "Complement" comes from "Complete."

Note: Because these two words are homonyms and homophones (words that sound alike), it only matters in text (writing) that you must make sure you get the correct meaning across. It does not matter orally, but most of the time the person listening will take it the correct way.

I'm sure most of you have stayed in a hotel or motel at some point. How many of you remember that the particular lodging institution offers a newspaper or chocolate on the pillow?

Usually, there is a little note saying something like: "This newspaper (or this chocolate) is complimentary."

You'd think these motels' and hotels' marketing people would get it right. The little written message should be "This chocolate is complementary," or "This newspaper is complementary." It simply means that the chocolate or newspaper goes with the room. The motel or hotel isn't complimenting you with these amenities. Heck, they don't even know who you are--why would they compliment you, an unknown.

Got it? Get it? Good. Now be sure to compliment your loved one. After all, he or she is a complement in your life.

I had a request to do a little primer on the words "lose" and "loose" because the two words are often confused. Writers use lose for loose and loose for lose.

How many times have you seen someone write, "He is going to loose his reputation," or "She acted lose at the party" ?

Well, "lose" rhymes with the Spanish word "luz," which means light, but it also rhymes with Jews, booze, and that northern expression "youse" (youse guys)-- equivalent to the sourthern, "y'all."

"Lose," according to Amercian Heritage Dictionary, means "to be deprived of ownership." That also means it is a verb: to lose.

"Loose" is an adjective for the most part that means "not fastened or restrained." For example, "He is a loose canon." But the word can also be a verb in rare usage: " Loose the dogs." And on even rarer occasions, "loose" can be used as an adverb: "He acted loose." That last usage might indicate the person in question was drunk.

"Loose" rhymes with moose, caboose, juice, duece, goose, and if you don't get this, maybe we ought to get the noose.

When you write and if you have trouble with these two words, maybe you ought to sound it out to make sure you have the correct "L" word.

Of course, when writing the two words, spell check won't be able to read your mind. So spell check will cowardly tell you "OK. This is correct." Not (as Shakespeare said so many years ago).

Here's a little poetry from the Toastmasters "Toastmaster" magazine to conclude this :

An Owed to the Spelling Checker

Wee have a spelling checker.

It came with hour PC.

It plane lee marks four are revue

Miss steaks wee can knot sea.

By the way, the title of this blog was a parody on "lose" and "loose." -- Slainte!

larger view larger view

I'm sure most of you have heard of, or purchased, the cute little book titled,  Eats, Shoots & Leaves by Lynne Truss.

Behind the book's title is the story of a panda, who was upset about a badly punctuated wildlfe manual that under the entry of "Panda" had the description,  "Large black-and-white bear-like mammal, native to China. Eats, shoots and leaves." A badly placed comma changes the meaning of the sentence. The sentence as written suggests that Pandas eat, shoot their weapons and then leave.

As I said, the book is cute, but Americans should take note that the book is the "Runaway # 1 British Bestseller." Place an emphasis on "British."

American's don't speak or write the Queen's English. In Britian, the sentence above would be "Place and emphasis on "British". Note that the period is outside the quotation marks.

In America, all commas and periods go inside quotation marks, and there are no exceptions unless you live in Great Britain.

If you are Ameican and looking for a good punctuation guide, try the The Grammar Bible by Michael Strumpf and Auriel Douglas. There are many more guides that are good, but make sure these guides are for American English, not some foreign version of English.

By the way, there's a parody book out there on Eats, Shoots & Leaves. Its title is Eats, Shites & Leaves and is written by A. Parody. Don't use this book as a punctuation guide, as well (for obvious reasons). 

Be patriotic. Use American punctuation rules.

A friend suggested I write a blog on the punctuation mark that looks like a ball and bat: the exclamation mark.

Correct punctuation: The exclamation point (just one) is a punctuation mark that is more than sufficient to signal an exclamatory sentence. Do not use more than one.

What tha? Well, we see lots and lots of "writers" use more than one exclamation point to, I guess, emphasize a point.

For example!!!!!!!!

In many writing circles, the exclamation point is a waste of punctuation. These grammarians want to do away with the mark.

Have faith! The exclamation point is sufficient (just one). It is the words that one uses that really expresses the exclamatory nature of a sentence. Be strong in your choosing of words!

The "!" came around in existence sometime in the 1400s. It's first message was to convey "Wonderful." Times have changed and so has the conveyance an exclamation point is supposed to achieve. Wow!

It is incorrect to use more than one exclamation point, as it is incorrect to use it with a question mark or other punctuation mark (?!). Studies have been done that show most who use more than one exclamation point after their sentences have weak sentences. Strive for better words to express those exclamatory feelings. Be strong!

Focus and rely more on the words used rather than the punctuation marks that aid in the expression. Besides, two or more exclamation points actually result in a weaker, not stronger, sentence.

Enough said!