Entry 004: Thoughts on Clauses

Before learning about clauses in this course, I was familiar only with two types of clauses:  independent clauses, which could stand on their own as sentences; and dependent clauses, which I understood to mean phrases that could not stand on their own as sentences, but which had to either introduce, or alter, or clarify information in an independent clause.

I enjoyed learning more about the elements of independent (or main) clauses and dependent (or subordinate) clauses, and about adjective/relative clauses and noun clauses, both of which were new to me.  I know that in my own writing, I use all types of these clauses, though I have never had the language or understanding to analyze or think about which specific clauses I use.

It was also interesting to analyze the types of sentences that I use in my writing.  I found, for the most part, that I use complex sentences (one independent clause and multiple dependent clauses), and set them off using occasional simple sentences.  Both of these exercises have given me the opportunity to reflect on my sentence construction and writing tendencies in general.

Entry 003: More Apostrophe Troubles (Rules Project)

Though I spent a full 48 hours in New York City, I did not see as many grammar mistakes as I had expected to see.  Perhaps this is due to the neighborhoods I was frequenting, which were largely residential areas of Brooklyn.  Perhaps I wasn't looking hard enough to find examples of mistakes.  Or, perhaps we have all become a bit more grammar-conscious than I remember, especially when creating signs to address the public.

In any case, I did see this sign in New York, near the Crown Heights neighborhood.  I was waiting for a friend at a subway stop, and over me was this sign:

Another missing apostrophe!

My friend was late in arriving, so I had a good amount of time to study the sign.  It's not clear from the picture, but when standing underneath it, it looked like there was a mark, or possibly screw holes, in between the "e" and the "s" of the sign.   I am not familiar with this fast food restaurant, so I wasn't sure whether this meant that there had once been an apostrophe before the "s," necessary to denote Popeye's possession/ownership of the Louisiana Kitchen, or if maybe I was giving them too much credit, and it was actually just the leftover marks from a bird's nest or something.

To be clear, it would seem to me that this is "Popeye's" Louisiana Kitchen, and as such, there would need to be an apostrophe before the "s."*  If Popeyes was a plural noun, then this sign could remain as such and be grammatically correct, but I've never heard of Popeye, or popeye, used as a plural noun.


*Apostrophe information found on Jane Straus's grammar blog, at this link: http://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/apostro.asp

Entry 002: Leaving Rochester (Rules Project)

As I was leaving Rochester this morning, I realized that there is a grammatical/stylistic mistake in the name of one of my most frequented neighborhood establishments: the grocery store.

Here is the picture of my local Wegmans.  Started almost 100 years ago by John and Walter Wegman, the store has slowly spread from its Rochester roots to states throughout the Mid-Atlantic and New England.

However, this store was started by the Wegmans!  It belongs to them!  One would think it should read "Wegman's" on the front of the store.  As Jane Straus explains on her grammar website*, an apostrophe must be placed before the "s" of a word, to show possession of a singular noun.  In this instance, the singular noun is the grocery store -- it is "Wegman's" grocery story.

Wegmans has publicaly addressed this grammar mishap, both in the press and on its official website, where they offer this explanation:

"It's been missing in action since 1931, when the company incorporated and we simplified the logo. Believe it or not, adding an apostrophe to the sign on the front of each of our stores would cost more than a half million dollars! Not to mention changing the logo on all our products, bags, etc. Just think of it as the plural Wegmans, as in the many generations of Wegman family members that have built the company!"

Wegmans is hardly alone in having to explain themselves for the missing apostrophe.  In their 2013 article, "Why are so many brands forgetting their apostrophes?" (http://blog.mainstreethost.com/why-are-so-many-brands-forgetting-their-apostrophes), Pat DePuy calls out a host of well known companies, from Starbucks, to Michaels, to Tim Hortons, for purposefully neglecting their apostrophes.  See the website for a list of of reasons these companies use to justify their grammar negligence.



*http://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/apostro.asp

Entry 001: Grammar Poses

Though I am off to a late start, I am beginning my grammar blog this evening.

Here I will post general thoughts that I am having about grammar -- both from the course material and from my own day-to-day life -- as well as posts specifically relating to the Rules Project.

Posts about grammar in general will center around various topics.

Posts for my Rules Project will be clearly marked in the title page.  For my Rules Project, my intention is to compile a collection of grammar mistakes committed in public -- mainly on street signs or posters meant to inform the public of an important topic or information.  I will be spending time in Rochester, New York City, and Boston over the next week or so, and I would like to compile real life examples of mistakes that I encounter -- explaining which rules are being broken, and what a grammatically correct sign should read.

I begin my travels tomorrow in New York City.  I look forward to sleuthing for, and sharing with you, acts of grammatical indecency!