How to (almost) never end a sentence

I regularly read sentences that end with prepositions – words like “in” and “for,” which many of us remember being told never to end a sentence with.

Yes, I am officially a rule-breaker. “With” is another preposition, and whenever possible, I recommend reworking a sentence to avoid ending a sentence with one. This is part of what we do when editing or proofreading – both processes that we take very seriously at Goff & Howard.

However, ending a sentence with a preposition is not grammatically incorrect. The Gregg Reference Manual, Goff & Howard’s preferred style guide, tells us to “use good sense in deciding whether or not to end a sentence with a preposition.”

Sir Winston Churchill even left us with some common sense on the subject. In 1948, an editor supposedly reworked one of Churchill’s sentences to avoid ending it with a preposition. Churchill replied: “This is the sort of bloody nonsense up with which I will not put.”*

His point rings as true today as it did 62 year ago. If trying to avoid ending a sentence with a preposition makes the sentence awkward, keep the preposition at the end of the sentence.

*Some historians disagree on Churchill’s exact wording. A few variations of the quote exist, but they are similar to this one.

The ever-changing meaning of change

The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press just released a new study that tests Americans’ reactions to words and phrases that are used frequently in political conversations: “capitalism,” “civil liberties,” “civil rights,” “family values,” “libertarian,” “militia,” “progressive,” “socialism,” and “states’ rights.”

Here are the results, so look away now if you want to rank the words yourself from most positive to least positive impression.

1. Family Values: 89% positive/9% negative
2. Civil rights: 87%/10%
3. Civil liberties: 76%/14%
4. States rights: 77%/15%
5. Progressive: 68%/23%
6. Capitalism: 52%/37%
7. Libertarian: 38%/37%
8. Socialism: 29%/59%
9. Militia: 21%/65%

As expected, Democrats and Republicans differed in their reactions. Democrats were more favorable than Republicans to “civil liberties,” “civil rights,” “libertarian,” “progressive,” and “socialism.” Republicans responded more positively than Democrats to “capitalism,” “family values,” “militia,” and “states’ rights.”

But one word is conspicuously absent from the survey. It is perhaps the most used – or overused – word in politics: “change.” It was spoken so frequently during the last Presidential election that it became part of an Obama speech drinking game.

The word “change” also illustrates well that people’s reactions differ depending on who you ask and when you ask. “Change” generally has more positive connotations with younger people than older people, according to a February 2010 Pew study. During the 2008 elections, most voters would have probably said that change in American politics primarily meant a break from political leaders of the past. Those same voters today might instead associate political change with transforming Wall Street and corporate leadership.

Before the politicians of 2010 become overly fond of using any particular words, I hope they consider that words and connotations are ever-changing. If there is a politician out there who wants to talk semantics strategy, I’m all ears.

Acronyms need a SWAT

Consider the acronym SWAT. It could, of course, mean Special Weapons And Tactics, or, it could be one version of the marketing assessment, Strengths Weakness Advantages and Threats. But it could also mean Sisters With a Throttle to a motorcycle enthusiast or Sick Wild and Twisted to a hip-hop music lover. Talk about confusing.

Not only are acronyms annoying, as though the speaker doesn’t want you to be part of his little club of people who know what the heck he’s talking about. But they make it impossible to get your point across because no one can follow you.

Recently I went to a day-long training session with several different state and federal agencies. The twist was that acronyms were forbidden ALL DAY LONG. It quickly became a great sport watching staff members from the DNR, DOH, OPS, DPS, and many more try to describe who they are and what they do without using acronyms.

We here at The GH Spin would like to extend that edict to meetings everywhere. Ambitious? Perhaps. Necessary? For sure.