More Grammar Errors that Make You Look Dumb: The Readers Speak

Which of these common grammatical mistakes do you make in your business communications?

Source: Getty Images

Don't let a stupid mistake in business correspondence ruin  your day. Check out these readers' favorite grammatical missteps.

My recent article, 7 Grammar Errors that Make You Look Dumb must have gotten reposted and retweeted somewhere, because the comments section is rather epic, as well as hilarious. With almost 250 comments so far, and counting, it's a wild ride.

Some of the comments are correct, some are completely off base, some are defiantly (and definitely) clueless, and some are rolling-on-the-floor-laughing-out-loud funny.

In case you don't have the time or patience to read them all, here are some highlights.

First, there were style complaints.

Some felt I should have said "7 Grammatical Errors" instead of "7 Grammar Errors," and one person even suggested that it was such a bad choice that it should be on David Letterman. Here's the deal: I chose the shorter word because it reads better in a headline, and it communicates just as clearly. I also knew it would draw comments. It worked.

Next, there were complaints that just because you make a grammar mistake, it doesn't mean you're stupid.

A few thought it was just mean and unfair to say someone is "dumb" or "stupid" because they make an error in grammar or spelling. I understand this, and think I was pretty clear that some brilliant people make some stupid mistakes, but the article is about grammatical errors in business writing that "make you look dumb." Whether you are actually stupid is not for me to judge.

And there were complaints that anything goes because language is fluid.

Yes, language constantly changes, but written business communication has higher standards than spoken communication. You can say whatever you want when you're speaking, but if you write for the corporate market, there often is a right way to say it.

Always remember context matters.

Remember, please, I am a career expert, not a schoolteacher. The context of this article is written business communication that might get someone to wondering if you communicate well enough to represent their business.

That said, here are more audience-choice mistakes that seem to drive a lot of people crazy.

  • That / who

I regretted not including this in the first blog, as it really is one of my biggest pet peeves. We want to hire someone who is great at grammar, and we will buy books that we can use for reference. Use the word "who" when you are talking about people, and "that" when you're talking about objects.

  • Me, myself and I

This one got a lot of enthusiastic complaints about people using the word "myself" in sentences like "You will have a meeting with Bob and myself." Myself is a reflexive pronoun, and it's a bit confusing, so I will turn to my favorite source, Grammar Girl, who gives a great explanation about when to use I, me or myself, and when myself can be used to add emphasis, as in "I painted it myself." But the short answer? Please, never say "You'll be meeting with Bob and myself."

  • Should have / should of

I think the problem here is that the words "should have" and "could have" were contracted in spoken English to "should've" and "could've" and some people now think that means "should of" and "could of." The correct expression is "should have," "could have," or "would have" and that is how you write it out.

  • Pluralizing with apostrophes

The way we make words plural in the English language is usually by adding the letter 's'  to the word. So egg becomes eggs and CEO becomes CEOs. Apostrophes are not used to pluralize words. Ever.

  • Less / fewer

Fewer is used when you're talking about something you can count, and less is used for things you can't specifically quantify. So if you want to weigh less, you will want to eat fewer candy bars.

  • Then / than

This pair got a lot of mention in the other article's comments section. If you're confused on this one, "then" refers to the passing of time, and "than" indicates a comparison. First you need to be better than she is, and then you can win.

  • Loan / lend / borrow

This one is kind of tricky. Traditionally, "lend" is a verb and "loan" is a noun. In American English, you go to the bank and ask for a loan, and they lend you money. Or they loan you money, and then you can tell people that they lent you money. Or loaned you money. And now you have a loan to pay off. I told you it was tricky. Our faithful source Grammar Girl has a tip to remember: "loan" and "noun" both have an "o" in them, and "lend" and "verb" both have an "e."

  • To / too

I didn't include this because I rarely see it in cover letters, resumes or business correspondence. But apparently others see it a lot, so here you go. "To" means in the direction of, as in They went to the movies. "Too" means in addition to, as in Our daughter came along, too, or to an excessive degree, as in, We left early because it was too hot in the theater. Of course, none of these are the same as the number two. Duh.

By the way, a simple grammar check caught most of the mistakes here. When in doubt, let your software tell you when you've got it wrong.

My favorite comments:

  • "Pls post this on Facebook." Actually, I post all of my blogs on Facebook. You can follow me here. If you want to post this on your own Facebook wall, just look above the headline on the post and you'll find the little blue "F" that says "share" for Facebook.
  • "Far too often I seen sentances like this: There are to many people invited to next tuesday's meeting." Gracious. One step forward, four steps back.

And then there was the reader who shared about the tattoo they saw in a movie: Born Too Loose. I absolutely love that one!

More about grammar, spelling and general nitpicking:

I'm almost afraid to ask... but what other common mistakes in business writing do you encounter?
Share Your Thoughts
I'm almost afraid to ask... but what other common mistakes in business writing do you encounter?
For your protection, ensure that no personally identifiable information (like full name or email address) is submitted in your comment.

CAPTCHA
This tests that you are really a person and not a computer.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.
Your Privacy
Trust is a cornerstone of our corporate mission, and the success of our business depends on it. P&G is committed to maintaining your trust by protecting personal information we collect about you, our consumers.
Bellevance | Nov 1, 2011
Regarding "lectern" and "podium" and so on, I sympathize, but we have to bear in mind that dictionaries are descriptive resources, not prescriptive ones. They observe; they don't validate or pronounce. Instances of the vernacular will in time make their way into many dictionaries, but when they do they generally reflect only popular use, not propriety.
Anonymous | Nov 1, 2011
'I done it', or 'I seen it' instead of 'I have done it/I did it' and 'I have seen it/I saw it' are common occurrences, though mainly in speech. However it often depends on one's accent and dialect as to which words are chosen (and of course said out loud) or how a sentence is formed. There is a vast regional difference in the UK, especially with the lexis.
Anonymous | Oct 31, 2011
My #1 grammatical pet peeve is the use of an adjective in place of an adverb. I don't take things *personal*, I take them *personally*. Grammar is a serious subject and proper grammar should be taken seriously.
Anonymous | Oct 31, 2011
Grammar is not that serious. "I don't take things personal" is probably much more accepted in any environment than correcting someone for not using the adverb "personally". The one exception is in discussions about grammar, which, to me, proves its uselessness.
Bellevance | Nov 1, 2011
Grammar is hardly useless. In fact, it's vital to the clearest and most effective and most complex forms of communication, which is humanity's most significant skill. Anyway, you've missed the whole point here. The use of good grammar is a minor concern in the everyday lives of most people. But when you're asking others to judge your suitability for a job by inviting them to interview you and to read your job application, crude and basic errors like this one will get you no more than a polite handshake and a "Thank you for your time"—while the job goes to a candidate who uses the language more carefully.
Anonymous | Nov 2, 2011
I'm completely aware of the fact that the job will normally go to the person who uses language better and that's why I've learned to master various dialects of both English and Spanish. However, as a linguist, it is hard not to notice the uselessness of prescribing rules for the sake of choosing a "better" job applicant. Really, what real use do these grammar rules have outside of analyzing grammar? (Hey Bellevance, I think we have an argument going on the other article about "they", "s/he" haha)
Anonymous | Nov 2, 2011
I'm completely aware of the fact that the job will normally go to the person who uses language better and that's why I've learned to master various dialects of both English and Spanish. However, as a linguist, it is hard not to notice the uselessness of prescribing rules for the sake of choosing a "better" job applicant. Really, what real use do these grammar rules have outside of analyzing grammar? (Hey Bellevance, I think we have an argument going on the other article about "they", "s/he" haha)
Bellevance | Nov 2, 2011
It's hard for me to imagine how someone who calls himself (or herself) a linguist can suggest that the rules of grammar can have no practical use. The rules of grammar have been developed and refined over centuries to facilitate the clearest and most efficient communication of thought. The human mind's greatest tool is language, and generally those who use the language most skillfully take best advantage of what their minds can conceive and invent, because they can transmit their thoughts most effectively and lastingly to other minds. To learn to write according to painstakingly evolved standards is to learn to express ideas and images with clarity and precision. It's no exaggeration to say that this is mankind's most significant capability. It has afforded us dominion over the planet and all its life.
Anonymous | Nov 2, 2011
I consider myself a linguist and I believe that being a linguist requires one to look beyond Western Civilization. Many of the ideas you mentioned are true for certain languages, but definitely not all. Despite the fact that numerous languages (some would argue most languages over the history of mankind) have not ever prescribed grammar rules, it is still possible to clearly communicate thoughts with "clarity and precision" using these languages. So your idea that if grammar rules hadn't been developed and refined over the course of history may (I would argue the contrary) work for English, it certainly does not include all languages.
Bellevance | Nov 3, 2011
In considering these issues broadly, any linguist, self-described or not, will naturally look beyond the English language. In this forum and for our purposes here, however, we are discussing English, the richest (by far) and most versatile language ever created. Sure, Eskimos may have 50 words for types of snow (but no word for just plain snow), and those who live in Papua New Guinea may have 100 words for yams, but English is the only language that has, or needs, a thesaurus. Not only is English more nimble and complex in its syntax, but it also has "a commendable tendency toward conciseness," as Bill Bryson puts it. It's worth noting that the French, German, Italian, Russian, Japanese, and many other languages also have firm structural refinements (and rules) that contribute to careful and accurate expression. The development of the rules of grammar has enabled all users of English to express themselves with beauty and precision, as the great body of literature in the language will attest, especially when the ideas up for exchange are intricate. Grammar allows writers to express themselves to discriminating readers most smoothly and effectively. That's why the standards are not only taught in the schools but are scrupulously observed by all careful writers and speakers, as well as by the editors of all national publications and mainstream book publishers everywhere.
follow us
Subscribe to Newsletters
X
About Life Goes Strong Contributors
Newsletter Sign Up Friends
Newsletter Unsubscribe Contact Us
Mobile App Sitemap