“Separate” has two A’s separated by an R.

Back to list of errors

BUY THE BOOK!

Video created by NBC:

It looks cheesy to spell “hundreds” as “100’s.” And it isn’t really
logical because “100″ doesn’t mean “hundred”—it means specifically “one
hundred.”

Back to list of errors

BUY THE BOOK!

When you grind coffee beans the result is fresh grounds. How finely you grind them determines what grind you produce, such as a coarse or medium grind. In this sense the noun “grinds” can refer only to the size of the coffee granules, not to the granules themselves.

Some people like to put their used grounds into the ground to fertilize their plants.

But fresh or used, that ground-up stuff is not “grinds” but “grounds.”

Back to list of errors

BUY THE BOOK!

Lieu is French for “place” and the expression “in lieu of” means “in place of.” Example: “When I retired my boss gave me a framed picture of himself in lieu of the final paycheck he owed me.”

Don’t confuse this expression with “in light of” or “in view of” which means “because of” or “considering.” Example: “In light of his outrageous behavior I decided to sue him.”

And don’t misspell “lieu” as “lue” or “loo” (the latter would be a British bathroom).

Back to list of errors

BUY THE BOOK!

Another example of the oral transformation of language by people who don’t read much. “For all intents and purposes” is an old cliche which won’t thrill anyone, but using the mistaken alternative is likely to elicit guffaws.

Back to list of errors

BUY THE BOOK!

An atheist is the opposite of a theist. “Theos” is Greek for “god.” Make sure the “TH” is followed immediately by an “E.”
Back to list of errors

BUY THE BOOK!

Click the link below to a text only version of the Common Errors

Text only version of Common Errors

Back to list of errors

BUY THE BOOK!

The saying attributed to Winston Churchill rejecting the rule against ending a sentence with a preposition must be among the most frequently mutated witticisms ever. I have received many notes from correspondents claiming to know what the “original saying” was, but none of them cites an authoritative source.

The alt.english.usage FAQ states that the story originated with an anecdote in Sir Ernest Gowers’ Plain Words (1948). Supposedly an editor had clumsily rearranged one of Churchill’s sentences to avoid ending it in a preposition, and the Prime Minister, very proud of his style, scribbled this note in reply: “This is the sort of English up with which I will not put.” The American Heritage Book of English Usage agrees.

The FAQ goes on to say that the Oxford Companion to the English Language (no edition cited) states that the original was “This is the sort of bloody nonsense up with which I will not put.” To me this sounds more likely, and eagerness to avoid the offensive word “bloody” would help to explain the proliferation of variations.

A quick search of the Internet turned up an astonishing number. In this era of copy-and-paste it’s truly unusual to find such rich variety. The narrative context varies too: sometimes the person rebuked by Churchill is a correspondent, a speech editor, a bureaucrat, or an audience member at a speech and sometimes it is a man, sometimes a woman, and sometimes even a young student. Sometimes Churchill writes a note, sometimes he scribbles the note on the corrected manuscript, and often he is said to have spoken the rebuke aloud. The text concerned was variously a book manuscript, a speech, an article, or a government document.

Here is just a sample of the variations circulating on the Net:

1. That is a rule up with which I will not put.
2. This is the kind of arrant pedantry up with which I will not put.
3. This is the type of arrant pedantry up with which I will not put.
4. Not ending a sentence with a preposition is a bit of arrant pedantry up with which I will not put.
5. That is the sort of nonsense up with which I will not put
6. This is insubordination, up with which I will not put!
7. This is the sort of nonsense up with which I will not put.
8. This is the sort of thing up with which I will not put.
9. Madame, that is a rule up with which I shall not put.

One poor soul, unfamiliar with the word “arrant,” came up with: “That is the sort of errant criticism up with which I will not put.”

Then there are those who get it so scrambled it comes out backward:

1. Ending a sentence with a preposition is something up with which I will not put.
2. Ending a sentence with a preposition is something up with which we will not put.
3. From now on, ending a sentence with a preposition is something up with which I will not put.
4. Please understand that ending a sentence with a preposition is something up with which I shall not put.

I checked the indexes of a dozen Churchill biographies, but none of them had an entry for “prepositions.”

Ben Zimmer has presented evidence on the alt.usage.english list that this story was not originally attributed to Churchill at all, but to an anonymous official in an article in The Strand magazine. Since Churchill often contributed to The Strand, Zimmer argues, it would certainly have identified him if he had been the official in question. It is not clear how the anecdote came to be attributed to Churchill by Gowers, but it seems to have circulated independently earlier.
Back to list of errors.

BUY THE BOOK!

One might suppose that this common misspelling was a product of skepticism were it not for the fact that it most often occurs in the writings of believers. The word should make clear that Jesus was affixed to the cross, not imply that his killing is regarded as a fiction.

Back to list of errors

BUY THE BOOK!

Crevices are by definition tiny, like that little crevice between your teeth where the popcorn hulls always get caught. A huge crack in a glacier is given the French spelling: crevasse.

Back to list of errors

BUY THE BOOK!