Q. In “Who shall I say is calling?” is who the object of say (and therefore whom would also be acceptable), or is who the subject of is (and therefore whom is wrong)? I always thought one rearranged the order of the sentence to check (“I shall say whom”).
A. Who is the subject of is. When you rearranged the order to check, you stopped too soon: “I shall say who is calling.” I is the main subject, and shall say is the main verb. The entire phrase “who is calling” is the direct object of the main verb, shall say. (If you don’t trust your ear regarding who/whom, switch to a different pronoun and it may become clear whether to use the subject or object form: “I shall say she [not her] is calling.”)
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I recently reviewed a scientific test report and my comments included recommendations to correct the use of over 80 instances of passive voice. I rewrote (corrected) each of the instances of passive voice for the author and included them in my comments. The author rejected each of my comments with the rationale that the avoidance of passive voice does not apply to scientific test reports. Is this true?
A. It is true that scientists have a long tradition of using the passive, probably because it is usually clear that the writers performed the actions being described. In such contexts the passive can be more efficient and less distracting than the active (“the temperature was adjusted to 212°F and the beakers were positioned in order of volume” rather than “Roger and I adjusted the temperature to 212°F and Harriet and Waldo positioned them in order of volume”).
On the other hand, passives can obscure the actor in places where it should be revealed (the “mistakes were made” problem). They can also be awkward (“the weights were lifted by the subjects”) or pretentious (“it was concluded that”) or invite a dangler (“after measuring, the beakers were filled”). And when overuse of the passive makes for dull reading, changing some instances to the active voice is an improvement.
Since there is nothing ungrammatical or inherently wrong with the passive and all good prose makes some use of it, it’s hard to say whether you overstepped by trying to eliminate it. But if you marked every instance of the passive as incorrect regardless of whether it caused a problem, then you may have annoyed the writer and damaged your credibility, causing the writer to reject your editing wholesale.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I have a question that my colleague and I can’t find a definitive answer to, and that is whether less or fewer is used with countable, but singular, nouns. For example, “one less/fewer group,” “one less/fewer number,” and so on.
A. If the countable noun is plural, choose fewer; if it’s singular, choose less. (When CMOS says to reserve fewer for countable things, it’s talking about plural countable things. When it says to reserve less for mass nouns, it means singular mass nouns.) One is always singular: there is one less food group in the new pyramid; there is one less number in this column. Two (or more) is plural: there are two fewer food groups in the new pyramid; there are three fewer numbers in this column.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Please give me your thoughts on subject/verb agreement in the following construction: “History, and the efforts of many people, [have or has] given this island a valuable gift.” Does an and phrase set off in commas change the number of the verb?
A. It doesn’t. Treat the text between commas as though it were in parentheses. But while you’re at it, notice that the construction is awkward. You aren’t sure which verb to use because neither singular nor plural sounds or looks right. That means no matter which you choose, some readers are also going to think it doesn’t sound right. It would be better to use parentheses or reword the sentence.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I’m trying to get clarification on the shined/shone issue, as all the sources I have found seem to differ, and it is driving me crazy. Can you confirm for me, once and for all, the use of each of these? Would the following sentence use shined or shone, for instance? Mary shone/shined the flashlight in front of them to light the way.
A. Please see CMOS 5.250:
shine. When this verb is intransitive, it means “to give or make light”; the past tense is shone {the stars shone dimly}. When it is transitive, it means “to cause to shine”; the past tense is shined {the caterer shined the silver}.
So the flashlight shone (gave or made light) because Mary shined it (caused it to shine) in front of them. (Note that “causing something to shine” has more than one meaning. Presumably, Mary didn’t shine her flashlight along with her forks.)
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. The following wording seems problematic to me: “Additional software may be required to use the fingerprint reader.” This could be interpreted to mean that the software might have to use the fingerprint reader. Your thoughts?
A. There is certainly room for misunderstanding. Transposing into the active voice might help: The fingerprint reader may require additional software.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I received a lease agreement and am questioning the meaning of one line in it. The line says, “Landlord will be responsible for any structural or major maintenance and repairs, other than routine maintenance and repairs that are not due to Tenant’s misuse.” I believe this means that the landlord will not be responsible for repairs that are not due to tenant’s misuse, whereas I’m being told that it means that the landlord will not be responsible for repairs that are due to tenant’s misuse.
A. That messy sentence is almost impossible to figure out. It appears to be an instance of misnegation; the writer probably didn’t mean what the sentence actually says. Unfortunately, I’m afraid you need a lawyer, not a style guide.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Which is correct? “Because of the affect/effect of unpaid interest, your loan balance has become larger than its cash value.”
Q. I’m confused over when to use the article the in expressions like “the British psychiatrist Michael Rutter’s study.” Although readers will know it might not be the case, to me, using the makes that person the only one in that field.
A. It’s just a matter of how you read it. When you see that the name Michael Rutter is a restrictive appositive defining which British psychiatrist we’re talking about, the does not make him the only British psychiatrist—quite the contrary. See CMOS 5.23.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. When used in footnotes what does the Latin word pace mean?
A. Pace is Latin for “in peace,” and in footnotes it means something like “no offense intended” toward a person or source that you are contradicting. For example,
This conclusion is usually incorrect (pace Smith and Jones 1999).
Although in Chicago style familiar Latin terms are set in roman type, put pace in italics if there’s danger of mistaking it for the English word pace.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]