Kirk Mahoney . com

Huh?!

Reader Brian P. wrote to me yesterday with (quote) “It’s third ten on the forty.” (unquote) as an example of a statement that he heard recently while watching an NFL football game on television.

The statement meant (quote) “It’s third down and ten yards to go on the forty-yard line.” (unquote).

I believe that what bothered Brian the most was the omission of the conjunction “and” between the word “third” and the word “ten” in the statement.

In other words, I believe that Brian would have preferred to hear (quote) “It’s third and ten on the forty.” (unquote) at the very least.

I believe that the omission of the conjunction “and” in the sentence is consistent with my “Devolution toward Simpler” linguistic hypothesis. It is simpler to omit the conjunction than to include it.

Brian’s impression is that the omission is a broadcasting-school gimmick:

Dropping one[-]syllable words (many prepositions, plus articles, “and”, “if”, “as”, “is”, “are”, “have” and others) is the latest broadcast[ing-]school gimmick, and to my ear the most grating (with constant use of “actually” and “as well” running place and show).

If that is what broadcasting schools are teaching these days, then that is very discouraging.

On a brighter note: Happy New Year!

I heard about this phrase the other day.

Problem:
The preposition “in” is incorrect.

Explanation:
My friend Nickie F. told me about this phrase.

It seems that someone was telling her about his popularity with his boss.

He said (quote) “Oh well, I guess I’m not the apple in her eye anymore.” (unquote).

An “apple in one’s eye” is a humorous misstating of the idiom “an apple of one’s eye”, which means a person that one loves very much (FreeDictionary.com).

Good catch, Nickie!

Solution:
“… the apple of her eye …”

This is a bastardization of a phrase.

Problem:
The second “in” is incorrect in this phrase.

Explanation:
The conjunction “and” is often mispronounced by Americans as if it were the preposition “in”.

The correct phrase is “in this day and age” — with the conjunction “and” between the word “day” and the word “age” — because one can write (quote) “in this day” (unquote) or (quote) “in this age” (unquote).

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

• “in this day and age” — with the conjunction “and” — 3,030,000 matches
• “in this day in age” — with the preposition “in” — 113,000 matches

This tells me that Web authors have used the correct “in this day and age” versus the incorrect “in this day in age” by a ratio of 26.8-to-1, which is very good.

Solution:
“in this day and age”

The problem with this most likely is not obvious, so let me explain.

Problem:
A preposition is missing.

Explanation:
I saw (quote) “Documenting Clarify” (unquote) as the subtitle in a troubleshooting article that I was helping to edit for a company’s customer-service representatives (CSRs).

Clarify is a customer-relationship manager (CRM) program, and the CSRs use Clarify to document how they have helped the company’s customers.

So a CSR will open a “case” in Clarify when a customer calls the company. While the CSR is helping the caller, the CSR makes notes about the problem and resolution within the case.

(quote) “Documenting Clarify” (unquote) in the article that I was editing introduced a section about how the CSR should make notes about the particular problem to which the article pertained.

The grammatical problem, then, with (quote) “Documenting Clarify” (unquote) is that it implies that the readers is documenting the CRM program itself instead of the problem covered by the troubleshooting article.

Solution:
“Documenting in Clarify”

I often see or hear this and similar sentences.

Problem:
A preposition is missing.

Explanation:
I heard someone say the other day (quote) “She graduates high school this year.” (unquote) while talking about his daughter.

But the verb “graduate” means to receive a diploma or degree.

So (quote) “She graduates high school this year.” (unquote) literally means (quote) “She receives a diploma or degree high school this year.” (unquote).

This reveals the preposition that is missing from (quote) “She graduates high school this year.” (unquote).

I believe that this omission is consistent with my “Devolution toward Simpler” linguistic hypothesis. It is simpler to omit the required preposition than to include it.

And, as with yesterday’s blog post, this post illustrates a simple method for discovering whether a preposition is missing, excessive, or just right: Simply replace the verb with the verb’s definition.

Solution:
“She graduates from high school this year.”

I heard this recently during a TV news broadcast.

Problem:
A preposition is missing.

Explanation:
The news broadcaster said (quote) “He escaped prison.” (unquote) while describing a prisoner who had managed to illegally free himself from a prison.

But the verb “escape” means to get away, or to gain or regain freedom.

So (quote) “He escaped prison.” (unquote) literally means any of these:

• “He got away prison.”
• “He gained freedom prison.”
• “He regained freedom prison.”

Any of these sentences reveals to us the preposition that is missing from (quote) “He escaped prison.” (unquote).

I believe that this omission is consistent with my “Devolution toward Simpler” linguistic hypothesis. It is simpler to omit the required preposition than to include it.

And this blog post illustrates a simple method for discovering whether a preposition is missing, excessive, or just right. The method entails simply rewriting the sentence or phrase or expression with the definition of the verb in place of the verb.

Solution:
“He escaped from prison.”

I hear this a lot, often from supposedly educated people.

Problem:
The preposition should not appear in this expression.

Explanation:
The full sentence goes something along the lines of (quote) “Let’s see where we’re at in this project.” (unquote).

Whoever says or writes (quote) “where we’re at” (unquote) is making the common English blunder of applying “where at” — a mistaken way to use “where” — to a location (physical or virtual).

I believe that this expression when spoken is consistent with my “Devolution toward Simpler” linguistic hypothesis. It is simpler to say (quote) “where we’re at” (unquote) than to say (quote) “where we are” (unquote).

Try saying each expression. You will hear and feel what I mean. The words “we’re” and “at” blur together in speech to become a one-and-a-half-syllable “whurrat”. In contrast, the words “we” and “are” must be spoken distinctly.

Given a choice, most speakers will choose 1.5 syllables over two syllables almost any day, especially in informal speech.

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

• “where we are” — 17,400,000 matches
• “where we’re at” — 479,000 matches

This tells me that Web authors have used the correct “where we are” versus the incorrect “where we’re at” by a ratio of 36.3-to-1, which is good but not wonderful, especially considering nearly half of a million instances of the incorrect expression.

Solution:
“where we are”

I heard this earlier today.

Problem:
What follows the preposition does not refer to a past event or time.

Explanation:
I heard (quote) “She’s been competing since she’s been fifteen years old.” (unquote) on the Fox News Channel program “Fox & Friends” this morning.

The host was introducing Katie Stam, the latest winner of the Miss America contest.

I suspect that the host’s statement was a gaffe, but the statement is still worth reviewing.

The preposition “since” should be followed by a reference to a fixed, earlier point in time because “since” means between a past event or time and the present.

(Quote) “she’s been fifteen years old” (unquote), which is equivalent to (quote) “she has been fifteen years old” (unquote), does not directly refer to a past event or time, so it should not follow “since”.

In contrast, (quote) “she was fifteen years old” (unquote) does directly refer to a past event or time. This gives us the solution.

Solution:
“She’s been competing since she was fifteen years old.”

I heard a gardening expert say this today.

Problems:
1. The speaker misused the pronoun “on”.
2. The speaker misused the verb “need”.

Explanation:
I was listening this morning to a talk-radio program about gardening.

A caller asked the host about a topic.

The host responded with (quote) “You need to do a little bit more reading on it.” (unquote).

(Quote) “read on” (unquote) is correct in sentences such as these:

• (Quote) “I read on the website that he is divorced.” (unquote)
• (Quote) “I read on the subway the entire booklet.” (unquote)
• (Quote) “I read on the electrical panel that it was rated for only 120 volts.” (unquote)

But (quote) “read on” (unquote) is incorrect in a sentence such as (quote) “I read on the topic.” (unquote).

Such a sentence requires the preposition “about”, not the preposition “on”.

The pronoun “it” in the statement made by the host to the caller referred to a topic.

So (quote) “reading on it” (unquote) is incorrect, and the host should have used “reading about it” instead.

I believe that the use of “on” in place of “about” is consistent with my “Devolution toward Simpler” linguistic hypothesis.

It is simpler to say or write the one-syllable, two-letter “on” than it is to say or write the two-syllable, five-letter “about”.

The second problem was that the talk-show host used the verb “need” where another verb was required.

There are very few actions that humans need to take because there are very few things that humans need.

The verb “should” is the correction for (quote) “need to do” (unquote) in the statement.

The avoidance of “should” in favor of “need to” in American English has become a common blunder.

My impression is that this blunder originated in the popular psychology of the 1960s, when the focus was on needs and when many started to say the catch-phrase (quote) “Don’t should on me!” (unquote).

Solution:
“You should do a little bit more reading about it.”

Yesterday I wrote about days that I like to label as “Prepositions Gone Wild”.

Today I want to discuss the complement to this: what I like to label as “Prepositions Gone Missing”.

Again, I have to wonder when, where, why, and how American instruction about English prepositions went astray.

There seems to be a growing trend for many Americans to omit necessary prepositions.

And this trend seems to be consistent with my “Devolution toward Simpler” linguistic hypothesis. Omitting prepositions is simpler than including them.

The “Prepositions Gone Missing” label applies to any of these expressions:

• “arrived home”
• “graduated high school”
• “graduated college”
• “graduated university”

I wrote a blog post more than a year ago about “graduated college”. Similar discussions would apply for “graduated high school” and “graduated university”.

The travel-related use of the verb “arrive” requires a preposition between the verb and the destination.

Just as one does not (quote) “arrive the Moon” (unquote) or (quote) “arrive England” (unquote), one does not (quote) “arrive home” (unquote).

Instead, one (quote) “arrives on the Moon” (unquote), (quote) “arrives in England” (unquote), or (quote) “arrives at home” (unquote).

Have you noticed any other common expressions with necessary prepositions that have been omitted? Please contact me, and I will write about them here!