As I watch and listen to everything from commercials to newscasts, children’s programs to soap operas, I can’t help being annoyed by some of the poor sentence construction we hear on television. Some are amusing, confusing or outright ridiculous when we analyze the meanings according to the way the sentences are put together. I sometimes wonder if any of those writers of scripts and news bulletins would have passed eight grade English. Here are just a few examples of what I hear on a daily basis as I browse through the various channels available to me:
I am told that something is “different to” another thing. Unless meanings have changed an awful lot recently, I believe that things are either “similar to” or “different from” others. I can’t imagine how something can be “different to” another.
A certain insurance commercial admonishes us to “only pay for what you need.” Are we being told to obtain those things only by buying them as opposed to receiving them as gifts, stealing, borrowing or begging for them? If the intended message is that we should not pay for things that we don’t need, then that could be made much more understandable by putting the word “only” closer to “what you need” as in; “Pay for only what you need.” The main reason we have rules for grammar is to promote clarity. What’s the point in bothering to script a commercial for television, hire actors, cameramen, studio space, film editors, and pay the station for that expensive commercial time if your message ends up being ambiguous, even ridiculous?
Far too many advertisers need to consult their dictionaries for the definition of the word “gift.” A gift, by definition, is given without recompense. To claim that a gift is “free” is not only a redundancy, it implies that you just might, at some time, offer a so-called gift with strings attached. And while we’re discussing the word, “gift” is a noun – you shouldn’t try to turn it into a verb by adding “ed” to it. There’s already a perfectly good verb for that purpose — “gave”, please use it instead of “gifted” which, incidentally, is an adjective meaning talented or exceptionally intelligent – a quality not reflected by the faddish use that seems to be so prevalent these days.
I wonder why so many people don’t seem to know the difference between numbers and amounts. Almost daily, I hear someone refer to numbers of something being “less than” other numbers. In recent times, I’m glad to be told that there are fewer cases of the Covid virus being reported – but that good news is too often blemished by being reported as “less cases.” This mistaken usage may be the result of the simple idea that the opposite of “more” is “less.” That is true when it comes to amounts, as in “There is less water in my pond than at this time last year.” But when referring to numbers, the opposite of “more” is “fewer” as in, “We caught fewer fish this year than in the year before.” You would never say that there is “fewer water” in the pond this year, and you shouldn’t say that you caught “less fish” than before – please remember the difference.
An error that truly puzzles me is why some people say ‘’try and” in place of “try to.” Recently a world-famous news anchor reported that, “It is believed that sanctions would hinder efforts to try and negotiate a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine.” Now, that articulate and experienced reporter would never say,” …efforts to attempt and negotiate…” which gives the sentence an entirely different meaning, so why would he say, “try and negotiate”? (It must have been something in the water.)
A yogurt ad; “Real good, real fruit, real smooth.” uses – or misuses the word “real” in some truly inventive ways. Other recent “inventions” I’ve noticed are the words “anxiousness” which could better expressed as “anxiety,” and one I’ve never heard before — “don’t use your “woundedness” as an excuse.” “Wounds” is a better word. I know that language changes through usage – but I hope none of those just mentioned will become permanent.