[ Main / Projects / Docs / Files / FAQ / Links ]
Probably because you've made one of the following mistakes that appear to be increasingly and infuriatingly common among native speakers of English. If English isn't your first language, you're forgiven of the following points; it's challenging to learn languages. However, I've seen very few non-native speakers making these errors. This list is by no means exhaustive, but it lists the most egregious offenders.
The following rules are extremely important. If they are not correctly followed, people will cringe and think that you are perhaps rather dull, even if they are too kind to say so where you may see or hear them. There is no excuse for these errors; even elementary students are taught these rules.
I do not understand this error at all, but it is disturbingly common. There is a pronoun. Their is a possessive. They're is a contraction of they are.
You're is again a contraction and always literally expands to you are. Your, like their, is a possessive.
To indicates an infinitive. Some pedants warn of 'splitting' an infinitive by inserting an adverb between the to and the verb it modifies, however, in modern use, 'splitting' infinitives is not generally considered bad style and may improve the meaning of a sentence. It is, indeed, a poor attempt at forcing the rules of Latin grammar upon English. two is both a noun and an adjective that specifies number. too is an adverb that indicates a state of excess.
It's is once again a contraction: it expands into it is. Its is the possessive third-person pronoun.
The apostrophe has only two common uses in English. It can either indicate possession (with 's for singular nouns and ' for plural nouns ending in 's') or it can indicate a contraction. Note that the oft-seen it's is not a possessive. It is always a contraction. Its is the proper third-person singular posessive pronoun. Also keep in mind that when forming the posessive of a plural noun, the apostrophe follows the affixed 's' that indicates plurality. For singular nouns, it is always correct (and consistent) to use 's, even if the noun ends in an 's'. Proper nouns ending in 's' is sometimes given as an exception to the preceeding rule, but the exception is not universally regarded as being valid; indeed, the argument usually given is a historical one that may be discounted.
The following rules are important, but mistakes in informal speech or writing can be tolerated by many people. Errors in this class are still inexcusable in even somewhat formal writing.
This complaint is perhaps less acute than the above points; it is however no less valid. The rule is simple: good is an adjective; well is an adverb.
There is a simple rule for proper use of can and may. Can questions whether an action is possible; may questions whether an action is permissible. The distinction is meaningful and not at all difficult to make.
There are exceptions that will probably not matter unless you happen to be discussing technical psychology, but in general, affect is always a verb and effect is usually a noun. Effect may only be used as a verb when its meaning is synonymous with "to cause" or "to bring about". One may test whether effect is appropriate as a verb by direct substitution. (Affect may be used as a noun in psychology jargon -- there it denotes something that is roughly a mental state.)
There is a simple rule for proper use of further and farther. Farther modifies physical distances, while further applies to everything that farther does not.
The following are errors that I often see, but are far less jarring to see in informal speech or writing. Unfortunately, even in formal writing, outside of very rigorous venues, few people will notice these errors.
This rule is not nearly as important as the other rules on this page. However, I recently saw someone give an incorrect rule for the usage of less and few. The correct rule is trivial. If the modified noun is countable, use few. Otherwise, use less. Tangible objects are usually countable, although there are sometimes contextual judgement calls. A reasonable example would be the number of molecules of air. In most cases, (using the simple perfect gas law PV=NkT) it is possible to approximate the number of air molecules present. However, an approximation is not countability and less should be used when making comparisons involving molecules of air. If, however, one is suspending a number of molecules of air in some very exact and clever apparatus (perhaps a low temperature laser trap in a hard vacuum), it may be appropriate to use few.
The distinction between these verbs is difficult for purely English speakers to make since it appears to be a relic of the vestigial case system that mostly died out of English, but is still strongly present in other Germanic languages. lay takes an accusative object; lie takes a nominative object. Perhaps more comprehensibly expressed, if speaking of an object, use lay. When speaking of a subject, use lie. Another way of looking at things is transitivity (lay is transitive, lie is intransitive), but since English is not ergative/absolutive, this distinction is generally not helpful and indeed somewhat unnatural.
This rule is another remnant of case in the English language. It is again more natural in other Germanic languages (witness setzen/sitzen in German). set takes an accusative object; sit takes a nominative object. Perhaps more comprehensibly expressed, if speaking of an object, use set. When speaking of a subject, use sit.
This rule is again case-related. Who is nominative, whom is accusative. Translating to what is perhaps more familiar in English grammar, who is always a subject and whom is always an object.
This particular rule is for any medieval posers that may be reading this page. Old English, like most Indo-European languages, had distinct second person singular and second person plural pronouns. Also like most other European languages, the use of the second person singular was considered very informal (the T-V distinction to linguists). Modern English decided to always use the more formal method of using the second person plural to refer to a single person directly; thus, in modern English, there is only you. Thou, as you may have guessed by now, was the second person singular pronoun in Old English. Old English also had more of the case system that is present in almost all Germanic languages. Thou was thus nominative, and the corresponding accusative form was thee. The rules are therefore not very difficult at all: thou is always a subject and thee is always an object. Additionally, if it is necessary to indicate possession, the genitive case must be used; thine is the proper word. Knowing the proper history of you in English, it is perhaps amusing for one to consider the rule that when writing formally, one should not use you.
If you aren't absolutely sure of when commas must be used and when they may be omitted, and if you do not know the grammatical function of every word that you use in your sentences, then it is probably best to avoid massively parallel structures, lest you end up constructing a run-on edifice that collapses around you. More seriously, if attempting parallel constructions, each parallel phrase must perform exactly the same grammatical function as its predecessor; this rule is exact -- any deviation will result in an ugly run-on sentence rather than an elegant parallel structure. If you are unsure of your abilities in this repect, do not attempt such complicated structures; instead, write clearly and concisely. It is far better to be terse and correct than flashy and wrong.