<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Sands Communications &#187; The Wall of Why: English Anguish</title>
	<atom:link href="http://sandscommunications.com/archives/tag/grammar/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://sandscommunications.com</link>
	<description>writing, editing, proofreading and web design services</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 31 Oct 2011 22:04:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>How not to begin a sentence</title>
		<link>http://sandscommunications.com/archives/341</link>
		<comments>http://sandscommunications.com/archives/341#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Feb 2009 03:34:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>vsands</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Musings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Wall of Why: English Anguish]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mistakes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[words]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sandscommunications.com/?p=341</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-350" style="border: 0pt none; margin: 3px;" title="blah" src="http://sandscommunications.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/blah.jpg" alt="blah" width="120" height="113" />A full day of copyediting today reminded me of another pet peeve: Goofy words at the beginning of sentences.</p>

<p>They're the lazy guy's way of communicating, the equivalent of <em>n</em> in an algebraic equation. In these sentences as in algebra, the objective is to get rid of the <em>n</em> and replace it with something meaningful. And when we're successful, the whole equation—the sentence—adds up more sensibly.</p>

<p>Two <em>n</em> words stand out: <span id="more-341"></span>"there" and "it." In this post, I'm focusing on "there." (Next week, we'll move on to "it.")</p>

<p>Check out how much better these sentences become when we solve for<em> n</em>:</p>

<p>Bad: There is a dog on the sofa.<br />
 <br />
 Better: A dog is on the sofa.</p>

<p>Aside from the fact that a canine is smelling up your furniture, that first sentence stinks. <em>Everything in the universe</em> is somewhere...either "there" or "here," depending on your vantage point. There is a pencil! There is a chair! There is a superfluous exclamation point!! Are we really asking the question, "Where is the dog?" Nope. We're just saying, hey, a dog is drooling on your couch cushions. Why not say it crisply? A dog is on the sofa, damn it! Get him off! Much more direct than the wimpy, "Ooh, there is a dog...not here, <em>there</em>..."</p>

<p>Try flipping sentences that begin with "there" around, and you'll see that it forces you to come up with action words and concrete constructions:</p>

<p>Bad: There can be no other explanation.<br />
 <br />
 Better: No other explanation makes sense.</p>

<p>Bad: There is no easy way to say this.<br />
 <br />
 Better: I can't find a way to say this easily.</p>

<p>Bad: There are instances when editors are annoying.<br />
 <br />
 Better: Sometimes, editors are annoying.</p>

<p>Maybe it's just me.</p>

<p>P.S.: My dog is <em>always</em> on the sofa.</p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://sandscommunications.com/archives/341/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

