Kirk Mahoney . com

Google, or any other search engine for the Web, can be a tool for examining English usage on the Web.

For example, one can use Google to get the number of Web pages containing a correctly spelled word vs. the number of Web pages containing one or more misspelled forms of that word.

One can also look for bad grammar, bad punctuation, and so on.

Several of my blog posts have included my results of these kinds of searches at Google.

To find these blog posts, simply go to the blog archives, enter “Google” (without the quotation marks) in the search box, and click the [Search] button.

However, don’t expect these Google-based comparisons of correct versus incorrect usage to remain static. As usage changes, so will the Google results.

My wife saw this title yesterday on a manual from ChildBuilders.

Problems:
1. The first adjective is misspelled.
2. The range is written incorrectly.
3. Everything before “Curriculum” should be hyphenated.

Explanation:
ChildBuilders is an admirable non-profit organization aimed at preventing mental-health problems in children.

So this title on the cover of a printed manual aimed at teachers and school administrators is especially embarrassing.

First, “Forth” (spelled without a “u”) should be “Fourth” (spelled with a “u”) — as in fourth grade.

Second, a range of ordinal numbers should be written with the preposition “to” in the middle — as in first to third or as in seventh to ninth.

Third, when a range is used to modify a noun (for example, “Grade”) that in turn modifies another noun (for example, “Curriculum”), everything before the final noun should be hyphenated.

The solution comes from these three corrections.

Solution:
“Fourth-to-Sixth-Grade Curriculum”

I saw this in an email message from a new supervisor of a department of employees.

Problem:
The word “seemless” is nonsensical.

Explanation:
The supervisor sent a “Good Morning!” email message to the employees in an existing department to which he had just been assigned.

He was trying to tell them that the transition from the previous supervisor to him would be smooth — that effectively it would have no seams.

That gives us the solution.

For fun, I searched Google for each of the following words (without the quotation marks) and got about the indicated numbers of matches:

• “seamless” — 33,700,000 matches
• “seemless” — 771,000 matches

This tells me that Web authors favor “seamless” over “seemless” by a ratio of 43.7:1 — good, but not great, especially given the nearly one million matches for the misspelled word.

Solution:
“… as seamless as possible.”

My wife saw this on a sign in a high-school attendance office.

Problem:
The noun is misspelled.

Explanation:
The sign directed the student assistants in the office to pay attention to their responsibilities.

You might have to say this aloud a few times to get it.

The sign writer meant “Duties” when she wrote “Dutties” instead.

I believe that the writer saw nothing wrong with the misspelling, given that “Dutties” was in a one-inch font on the sign.

What’s sad is that this appeared on an official sign in a high school. Either nobody saw the misspelled word, or nobody had the nerve to tell someone in the attendance office about it.

Solution:
“Duties”

I saw this in a PowerPoint document.

Problem:
This adjective is misspelled.

Explanation:
I believe that the misspelling of the adjective “accessible” is mostly due to the common mispronunciation — as “accessable” — of that adjective.

Other adjectives that use “ible” instead of “able” include “visible” and “horrible”.

The suffix “ible” is a variation of the suffix “able”; most people use memorization to know which suffix to use.

For fun, I searched Google for each of the following words (with the quotation marks to avoid hyphenated forms) and got about the indicated numbers of matches:

• “accessible” — 130,000,000 matches
• “accessable” — 2,170,000 matches

This tells me that Web authors have written the word correctly vs. incorrectly by a ratio of 59.9:1, which is good, but the fact that the Web contains more than two million instances of “accessable” is disappointing.

Solution:
“Accessible”

I saw this in a television advertisement for a business named Surplus Furniture.

Problem:
The noun is misspelled.

Explanation:
The misspelling is obvious: “Quanities” should have been “Quantities” in the big headline in the TV commercial.

What is not as obvious, perhaps, is why the misspelling occurred.

Not enunciating distinctly the first ‘t’ in “quantities” is common among many American speakers, so the misspelling could be due to the headline writer unconsciously spelling “quantities” in the way that he or she heard the noun dictated by the furniture-store owner.

I also believe that the misspelling is consistent with my “Devolution toward Simpler” linguistic hypothesis. It’s simpler to drop the first ‘t’ than to include it.

For fun, I searched Google for each of the following spellings (without the quotation marks) and got about the indicated numbers of matches:

• “quantities” — 50,800,000 matches
• “quanities” — 165,000 matches

This tells me that Web authors have written the word correctly vs. incorrectly by a ratio of 308:1, which is a very good sign.

Solution:
“Limited Quantities”

I saw this in an April-23 article on the RCR Wireless News website.

Problems:
1. The verb is wrong.
2. A hyphen is missing.

Explanation:
The missing hyphen is a common English blunder, but a simple rule tells us that the hyphen is required in a particular part of this expression.

Here is the rule: When an adjective (e.g., “early”) and a noun (e.g., “termination”) together modify another noun (“fee”), there should be a hyphen to join the adjective to the first noun — to create a “compound” modifier, if you will, of the second noun.

I am not sure how common the other English blunder is: writing “wave” where “waive” — which means to forgo or give up — is required.

However, I believe that both problems are consistent with my “Devolution toward Simpler” linguistic hypothesis. It is simpler to write “wave” than to write “waive”; it is simpler to omit a hyphen than to include one.

For fun, I searched Google for each of the following phrases (with the quotation marks) and got about the indicated numbers of matches:

• “waive the fee” — 106,000 matches
• “wave the fee” — 1,790 matches

This tells me that Web authors have written the phrase correctly vs. incorrectly by a ratio of 59.2:1, which is heartening.

Solution:
“… Comcast will waive its early-termination fee …”

I occasionally see “supercede” when the writer means something else.

Problem:
“Supercede” is a misspelled word.

Explanation:
“Supercede” is a misspelling of “supersede” and reflects the combination of the influence of other words (e.g., “intercede”) and an ignorance about the roots of words.

The verb “supersede” literally means to sit upon or above — from “super” (from the Latin “super”: upon or above) and “sede” (from the Latin “sedére”: to sit).

In contrast, the “cede” in verbs such as “concede” comes from the Latin “cédere”: to go or yield.

For fun, I searched Google for each of the following words and got about the indicated numbers of matches:

• supersede — 2,780,000 matches
• supercede — 838,000 matches

This tells me that Web authors have written the word correctly vs. incorrectly by a ratio of 3.32:1, which is pitiful.

I recall a software manufacturer once naming its product “Supercede” and wondering whether the maker intentionally misspelled “supersede” in order to create a unique name or unintentionally misspelled the verb out of ignorance.

In any case, I found it disheartening that the maker would use a common misspelling as its product’s brand name.

Solution:
“Supersede”

I occasionally see “superceed” when the writer means something else.

Problem:
“Superceed” is a misspelled word.

Explanation:
“Superceed” is a misspelling of “supersede” and reflects the combination of the influence of other words (e.g., “succeed”) and an ignorance about the roots of words.

The verb “supersede” literally means to sit upon or above — from “super” (from the Latin “super”: upon or above) and “sede” (from the Latin “sedére”: to sit).

In contrast, the “ceed” in verbs such as “succeed” comes from the Latin “cédere”: to go.

For fun, I searched Google for each of the following words and got about the indicated numbers of matches:

• supersede — 2,780,000 matches
• superceed — 19,000 matches

This tells me that Web authors have written the word correctly vs. incorrectly by a ratio of more than 146:1, which is satisfying to see.

If one can remember that “supersede” literally means to sit above, then one can use the mnemonic trick that there is an ‘s’ in both “sede” and “sit”.

Solution:
“Supersede”

I saw this in a headline on the Weather Channel.

Problem:
The adjective is misspelled.

Explanation:
The correct spelling of the adjective is “arctic”.

Wondering about the frequency of the misspelling of “arctic”, I searched Google separately for each of “artic front” and “arctic front” with the quotation marks included in each search. I got about 3,110 matches for the former and about 44,300 matches for the latter. That’s a dominance ratio of more than 14:1 in favor of the correct spelling.

I then searched Google for each of “artic” and “arctic” (with no quotation marks necessary for the searches). I got approximately 11,300,000 matches for the misspelled adjective(!) and approximately 63,000,000 matches for the correctly spelled adjective. That’s a dominance ratio of less than 5.6:1 in favor of the correct spelling.

That’s equivalent to saying that more than fifteen percent of all occurrences of this adjective on the Web are misspelled! Shame on the Weather Channel for having at least one staff member in that 15%. The adjective “arctic” is a weather term, after all!

I believe that the misspelling of “arctic” as “artic” is consistent with my “Devolution toward Simpler” hypothesis. It’s simpler to say “artic” than to say “arctic” (given that it takes concentration to say the hard “c” sound immediately before the “t” sound), and speech has a spillover effect into spelling.

Solution:
“ARCTIC FRONT”