Everything English

Writing and Grammar Tips (beta)

Contact a customer support specialist at 1-206-494-5992

Category : Mechanics

Each, Every, Either, Neither

Distributive adjectives are normally used with singular nouns. They include “each”, “every”, “either”, and “neither” and are used to refer to members of a group as individuals.

For example, the sentence, “The group received informational brochures before beginning its tour” does not specify whether all the group’s members received brochures. Rather, this is conveyed by the sentence, “Each member of the group received an informational brochure before the tour began.” (Note that the use of “its” no longer makes sense, as “its” refers to “group” in the first sentence – since the subject of the second sentence is “each member of the group”, a more personal pronoun, such as “her” or “his”, or a construction that uses no pronoun at all, such as “before the tour began”, is correct.)

As the foregoing example illustrates, “each” is used to specify that a condition applies to all of the individual members of a group:

Each book in the series had a foreword by a noted scholar.
Each participant was asked to complete a survey.
Each of the participants received compensation.

Note that when the noun to which “each” refers is plural, the construction “each of the” is used.

In most cases, “every” and “each” are interchangeable, as far as meaning goes, though they require slightly different constructions:

Every book in the series had a foreword by a noted scholar.
Every participant was asked to complete a survey.

Note that it would never be appropriate to use “every of the” – as in, “every of the participants”, which is wrong. “Every” is only used with singular nouns.

The primary difference between “every” and “each” is the degree to which they emphasize the individual, versus the group. While “every” suggests “all” (think “everyone”), “each” suggests “every one”. The difference is subtle and intuitive.

“Either” implies one or the other of two options, as in:

Either of these movies would be interesting to me.
Either title is age-appropriate, but I suggest the former.

The options need not necessarily be mutually exclusive, but it is presumed, when “either” is used, that only one option will be selected. However, you might find while in a restaurant, for instance, that you can’t decide what to order because either of two options on a menu look good – and so you order both.

“Neither” implies not one or the other of two options, as in:

Neither pen will do, as I need to sign in pencil.
Neither person in the relationship seems to understand the dilemma.

Whilst suggesting the separate identities of two things (the pens, the people), “neither” negates the viability of both.

Tags : distributive adjectives

Posted under : Mechanics

Gerunds

by EKurtz | 2 Comments

Gerunds are nominal forms of verbs (i.e. forms of verbs that act as nouns) that end in “ing”. They are used to indicate action or state of being.

Gerunds often appear as subjects:

Flying is frightening.
Walking quickly to the store was out of the question, so we drove.
Spending time with friends is as important as studying.

Note, in the first example, that “flying” is a gerund, while “frightening” is an adjective. In the second example, note that gerunds may be modified by adverbs.

Gerunds may also appear as direct objects:

Gerald likes driving.
Susan faked sleeping when her mother entered the room.
John enjoys running marathons.

In each of these cases, the gerund is the direct object of the verb that precedes it.

Gerunds may be the objects of prepositions:

From sailing, to waterskiing, to wakeboarding, to tubing, John tried and loved all water sports.
Carol thanked Stan for stepping in when she couldn’t make it to the meeting.
After months of negotiating, the parties reached an agreement.

They may be subject complements, too:

The fire is burning brightly.
The clock is running slow.

Note that in each case, “ing” implies the continuity or progression of action (“running”, “burning”).

Tags : gerunds

Posted under : Mechanics

“If” Clauses

by EKurtz | 54 Comments

There are three types of “if” clauses – or “conditionals”. Conditionals present conditions under which certain things are possible, to varying degrees.

One class of “if” clauses sets up conditions that are relatively likely to be realized:

If James takes a nap, he’ll have the energy he needs to run a mile. (where “he’ll” = “he will”)
If Karen studies the material, she may pass the test.
If Dr. Knight listens to the opinions of his colleagues, he will be better informed about the debate over the change in policy.

The active voice (“takes”, “studies”, “listens”) provides an immediacy that suggests that in the real world, there is a real chance that each of the people above will do each of the things mentioned.

The second class of “if” clauses sets up conditions that are less likely to be realized. The situations presented are more hypothetical “what ifs”:

If James took a nap, he’d have the energy he needs to run a mile. (where “he’d” = “he would”)
If Karen studied the material, she might pass the test.
If Dr. Knight listened to the opinions of his colleagues, he would be better informed about the debate over the change in policy.

There’s no easy, rule-based or grammatical way to explain the difference between the two sets of sentences, but it helps to note that the second set presents possibilities in a way that is more speculative. The element of passivity (“took”, “studied”, “listened”) in the second set affords less immediacy that the element of activity (“takes”, “studies”, “listens”) in the first set and so makes the possibility of the events specified actually occurring seem less remote.

Note that there’s another way of expressing the same conditions:

If James were to take a nap, he’d have the energy he needs to run a mile.
If Karen were to study the material, she might pass the test.
If Dr. Knight were to listen to the opinions of his colleagues, he would be better informed about the debate over the change in policy.

This is the subjunctive form, and it might seem counterintuitive at times. It is appropriate, for example, to say, “if I were to” but not “if I was to”, even though “I” is typically paired with “was” when “I” is the subject and the verb “to be” follows in the past tense (e.g. “I was thinking …”). They key here is to remember the construction, “If [someone] were to [do something]… [that someone] might/would/could [be/do something else].”

The last set of “if” clauses presents conditions that are presently impossible to fulfill but if fulfilled in the past would have led to particular results:

If James had taken a tap, he would have had the energy he needed to run a mile.
If Karen had studied the material, she might have passed the test.
If Dr. Knight had listened to the opinions of his colleagues, he would have been better informed about the debate over the change in policy.

Note the use of the past perfect tense (“had taken”, “had studied”, “had listened” and “would have had”, “would have passed”, “would have been”). In these scenarios, the opportunities presented (to take a nap, to study the material, to listen to the opinions of colleagues) have passed, but had the people specified done the things noted, the outcomes listed would have occurred.

Tags : conditionals, if

Posted under : Mechanics