Q. Greetings, I am an editor at a law firm in Tokyo. I have explained to a colleague that, in my opinion, the term “in the meantime” appears to have evolved, as certain expressions do, and now may be being used incorrectly. Based on my research, the original, and certainly, the principal, meaning of this term, which obviously functions as an adverb, is “in the intervening period.” Based on letters she has received from England and the States, she firmly believes that this is an acceptable substitute for “by the way.” Neither of us is budging on this point. Though she is quite proficient in English, as a native English speaker, I (hopefully!) have the advantage of knowing what is natural, specifically in terms of such standard introductory phrases. I’m genuinely interested in knowing if my “theory of incorrect evolution” has any merit.
A. Your theory is probably correct, but that doesn’t mean you can do anything about it. An expression evolves because people understand the new meaning and begin to use it that way. In time, dictionaries record the new meaning and resisters begin to look like fuddy-duddies. (Nothing personal, understand.) Merriam-Webster says that the adverb “meantime” means “meanwhile,” and that the adverb “meanwhile” can mean “at the same time.” To my ear, “at the same time” could easily convey the meaning “while I’m at it,” or, as your colleague notes, “by the way.” If so, then your expression has already evolved its way into the dictionary, and your Japanese colleague would turn out to have her finger on the pulse of “natural” English.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. Is it incorrect to say: “x values are shown in table c” or “The following graph shows x”? When editing scientific reports and articles for my coworkers I tend to replace “show”
and “shown” (in the context of graphs, tables, and results) with “reveal”
or “demonstrate,” but I’m told this is a question of style.
Am I being unreasonable, or is there a good reason why the use of “show” in scientific
articles grates on my nerves?
A. Tables and graphs show stuff. I can’t think of any reason to avoid saying so in the most direct way.
You’re not the first person to ask this question, however, which makes me suspect that there’s
a superstition floating around out there prohibiting this usage. (My reference books are silent on the issue.)
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. It has come to my attention, over the last few years, that people are now using the phrase “different than” instead of “different from.” Please warn your readers against this gross misuse of the English language!
A. Yikes—instead, let’s dodge this bullet. Although British English eschews the use of “different than” and Chicago prefers to avoid it, it’s not incorrect, and in fact is sometimes the more elegant choice when followed by a clause. Various dictionaries and grammars support this view, including not just CMOS (see the entry for “different” in the glossary at 5.250) but also Fowler’s Modern English Usage and Merriam-Webster.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I have often disliked authors in the habit of introducing a statement with Firstly or Secondly, and so on. Are there any good rules on this or should it be banished from usage?
A. Merriam-Webster (which Chicago follows) seems just fine with firstly, and secondly. And according to the American Heritage Dictionary, the meaning of firstly is “In the first place; to begin with; first.” So I guess you’ll have to find another reason for disliking authors.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. When writing about an author’s work, do you write in the past or present tense? Example: The author
argues (argued) that it was the correct choice. Please help. Thanks.
A. Different kinds of writing have different conventions. In academic writing, it’s not wrong to use the
past tense when quoting written works, but it’s conventional to use the “historical
present,” even when the author is dead (Heraclitus says, “No one steps into the
same river twice”). In a newspaper interview, however, the present implies that someone is in the habit
of saying something, rather than that he or she said it one time, and it is more likely to be found with paraphrasing than
with a direct quotation (Mr. Obama says that the health care system needs fixing). “Said”
in the same context implies that a person said something on a particular occasion (in his speech last night Mr. Obama said
that the health care system needs fixing). And “said” used with quotation marks
indicates that the person spoke the actual words on a particular occasion (Mr. Obama said, “We spend
one and a half times more per person on health care than any other country, but we aren’t any healthier
for it”).
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. I hope that you can settle a minor dispute between a colleague and me. In a journal article that we are writing, we have
a passage similar in syntax to the following: “I don’t like animals. An exception
is cats, which are warm and furry.” The dispute is over the verb in the first clause in the second sentence,
“An exception is cats . . .”
My colleague believes that the verb in this clause should be plural, “are,” since
the subject is the plural noun “cats.” It isn’t clear to
me that the subject in the sentence is “cats.” Who is correct?
A. You are. In English the first noun gets to be the subject, so “exception” is
the subject. And since it’s singular, “is” is the verb.
You have noticed, however, that this is an awkward sentence that will probably make half of your readers wonder whether you
got it right, so instead of using the technically correct phrasing, why not rewrite it altogether? Think “aside
from cats,” “other than cats,” “Cats
are an exception,” and so on.
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. What is the rule about using a product or company name that implies the type of product to avoid redundant words, for example,
Fred’s Bakery bakery products are the best in town? What is the justification for not including the
adjective for products (bakery)?
Q. Is the word “not” subject to the “neither . . . nor” rule? As in: “I will not be angry nor upset if you don’t attend my party.”
Q. The word “whose” used as a possessive with an inanimate object never sounds correct
to me. Example: She had changed into a long green dress whose very modesty highlighted a long lean body. The modesty refers
to the green dress. Is it correct to say it this way? I always thought “whose”
referred to a person.
A. Yes, it’s correct, and there really isn’t an elegant alternative. The old Fowler’s Modern English Usage might give you a chuckle. After some ridiculous examples that use “of which” in
order to avoid “whose,” the article closes with, “Let us,
in the name of common sense, prohibit the prohibition of whose inanimate; good writing is surely difficult enough without the forbidding of things that have historical grammar, and present
intelligibility, and obvious convenience, on their side.”
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]
Q. In reading a marketing piece written by a co-worker, I thought that the following sentence contained a possessive pronoun that disagrees in number with its antecedent: “We tailor each client’s portfolio to meet their investment objectives.” Personally, I think “their” should be “his,” “his/her,” or “its” because “each client” is singular. Another approach, in my opinion, would be to make the entire sentence plural, i.e., “We tailor our clients’ portfolios to meet their investment objectives.” However, that construction loses some of the connotation that each portfolio is individually constructed for each client. Please help!
A. Although your colleagues are using bad grammar, that construction is very popular and tough to fight. The use of “their” replaced the use of “his” as the latter pronoun came to be considered sexist. “His or her” can get annoying if used frequently. Writers of lengthy books or articles can use “his” in some passages and “her” in others. That’s not an option if you are writing a short document or a slogan, but rephrasing (often by changing the subject to a plural) is almost always possible. Since you don’t want a plural subject, you could say, “We tailor each portfolio to meet the client’s investment objectives.” For more ideas, see our “nine techniques for achieving gender neutrality” (CMOS 5.255).
[This answer relies on the 17th edition of CMOS (2017) unless otherwise noted.]