3 MIN READ

What Words Are You Pluralizing Wrong?

There’s no clear-cut path to pluralization for some English nouns, forcing us to memorize grammatical oddities. Are you guilty of these pluralization faux pas?

by Rachel Gresh
group of college graduates throwing their hats in celebration

Pluralization can be unexpectedly complex. While updating my writer’s bio recently, I found myself tangled in the semantics of “alumna.” It’s a Latin-origin noun that takes different forms when referring to genders and in the plural: “Alumna” refers to a singular female graduate, “alumnus” is a male graduate, and “alum” is a gender-neutral casual choice. But “alumna” seemed like the plural form to me at first, because I was thinking of other Latin plurals, such as “phenomenon” pluralized to “phenomena.” 

In this case, however, there’s another Latin pattern at work, which turns “alumna” and “alumnus” into “alumni,” just as one cactus becomes many cacti. Why invite one fungus to the party when you could have several fungi? (Sorry for the dad joke.) The more I dug into the possibilities of plurals, the more I realized that this section of English grammar rules requires navigating a minefield of irregularities.

Advertisement

Plural words ending in “f,” for example, can cause grammatical grief. The appropriate plural form of “roof” is “roofs” — but “rooves” is an archaic alternative that sounds at home in a Shakespearean drama. And then there’s the deceptively simple word “beef.” It would make sense for the plural form to be “beefs,” in line with “chefs” or “reefs” (or the aforementioned “roofs”), but the proper form is actually “beeves” (promise!), following the same pluralization pattern as “leaves” or “hooves,” which swap out the “f” in “leaf” and “hoof” for the suffix “-ves.” 

Of “beeves,” language Professor Roly Sussex explains, “It’s archaic and dialectal and not really used very much nowadays,” though it is still correct. The word “beef” is most commonly used today to refer to the meat that comes from cows, rather than the farming usage of the word, which is “a cow, bull, or ox fattened for its meat.” It’s the latter sense that would use the plural “beeves,” so unless you’re a farmer selling cattle, it’s OK to use “beef” as a collective noun on your grocery list. 

When pluralizing other nouns, the most common rule is “add an ‘s'” — but with words ending in certain letters (“y,” “f,” “ch,” “x,” “s”), there are additional general guidelines.  Plural nouns for names of animals are often confused because there is no blanket rule for when they change form. “Sheep,” “deer,” and “moose” remain the same in singular and plural, while “goose” turns into “geese.” But perhaps one of the most flip-flopping animal names is “fish.” Generally speaking, “fish” is the correct singular and plural version, as in, “Look at those beautiful koi fish.” But in some literary, poetic, or scientific contexts (primarily when referring to multiple species), “fishes” gets the nod — as heard in the iconic line from The Godfather, “Luca Brasi sleeps with the fishes.”

Even familiar phrases for groups of people can be bewildering, especially in compound nouns. It’s essential to pluralize the principal noun and not other parts of the word. For example, you’d call a group of people walking on the street “passersby,” not “passerbys,” because “passer” (the base noun) must be pluralized. Similarly, “sisters-in-law” properly pluralizes the noun, not the suffix. However, you’ll still find an occasional compound noun that tacks an “s” onto the end, regardless of the noun placement, such as “forget-me-nots.” Just remember that English is full of exceptions that make the rule.

Featured image credit: SDI Productions/ iStock
3 MIN READ

Why Do We Say ‘Put a Sock in It’?

Where exactly are we putting our socks? A classic method of telling someone to stop talking — “put a sock in it” — comes from the battlefield.

by Julia Rittenberg
Holding out a pair of socks on solid background

When I catch myself talking a bit too much or too loudly because I’m excited, I gently tell myself to put a sock in it. It’s a silly mental image, so if it’s said with a jovial tone instead of with a harsh bark, the phrase can disarm, not offend. This lighthearted way of telling someone to quiet down comes from our friends across the pond. 

“Put a sock in it” is an informal British phrase used to tell someone to stop talking. However, it’s not just for a chatty pal — it also works when someone is being too loud or causing a ruckus. To explain the phrase, a reader wrote to the London literary magazine The Athenæum in 1919: “The expression ‘Put a sock in it,’ meaning ‘Leave off talking, singing or shouting,’ should be included in the lists of ‘Slang in War-Time.’” Indeed, Paul Dickson wrote a book about wartime slang and pinpointed “put a sock in it” to  World War I, with the definition of “be quiet (as if one had a sock stuffed into one’s mouth).”

Advertisement

In the 1925 book Soldier and Sailor Words and Slang, however, the writers explain the sock idiom as such: “suggested by the handiest method of gagging a gramophone.” A century before Spotify and Airpods, a gramophone played records by projecting sound through a horn. Stuffing a balled-up sock into the horn would successfully muffle the music from the gramophone.  

Still, the author of A Concise Dictionary of Phrase and Fable (1993) thought it was unlikely discarded socks would be found around the gramophone in the drawing room (clearly they haven’t lived with teenagers) and put more credit into the soldier-slang origin story:  “In a barrack-room, however, socks would certainly be lying around at night and one can imagine a heavy snorer being shouted at and told to ‘put a sock in it’ (in his mouth).” It’s easy to imagine soldiers playing the prank of stuffing a sock in someone’s mouth in a joking threat: “Stop talking or I’ll put a sock in it!” 

Whether the origin is a drawing room or barracks, the meaning is the same: We’re putting metaphorical socks in someone’s mouth to muffle their voice. The wry imagery of “put a sock in it” makes it feel like a kinder way of telling someone to stop talking. So if someone does tell us to put a sock in it, we can assume they mean it with love.

Featured image credit: Pixel-Shot/ Adobe Stock
4 MIN READ

8 Slang Words All Midwesterners Will Know

We know there’s more than corn in Indiana and more reasons to visit Wisconsin than the state fair cow made of butter, but do you know this Midwestern slang?

by Jennifer A. Freeman
Aerial photo over a field and dirt road lanes

Ask any Midwesterner and they’ll give you a list of activities that are quintessential to living in the middle of the United States: playing cornhole, eating casserole, and taking 30 minutes to say goodbye at a social gathering, just to name a few. Another requisite is the use of terms such as “pop” and “Naptown” that may sound strange to folks from other places. Natives of the Midwest have an endearing lingo all their own, and we’re here today to shed some light on this unique vernacular. You’ll be saying “Ope!” and making puppy chow in no time.

Ope!

Pronounced like “hope” with the “h” dropped, this is the Midwestern flavor of “whoops” or “my bad.” The origins of this interjection are unclear, but it comes in handy when you’ve bumped into someone, dropped your keys, or made a wrong turn. Essentially, “ope” is the way Midwesterners apologize to anyone for anything.

Hotdish

Hailing from the Minnesota-Dakotas-Wisconsin corridor, “hotdish” is usually considered a synonym for a casserole, although there’s a key difference between the two words. Casseroles are versatile enough to be considered a main course, side dish, or even a dessert. A hotdish, on the other hand, is always a standalone main dish because its ingredients encompass all the food groups. It must contain either a “cream of” soup or a tomato base, a starch, veggies, and typically some form of meat. Then there’s a topping with some crunch to it (such as Tater Tots, breadcrumbs, or cornflakes), and, of course, cheese — because it wouldn’t be a Wisconsin dish otherwise.

Advertisement
Pop

You know what would go well with that hotdish? A pop! Though folks in other parts of the U.S. may also say “pop,” the term is most closely linked to the Midwest. In most regions, people order sodas — except in the South, where folks collectively (and somewhat confusingly) refer to any kind of soft drink as a “Coke.”

You betcha!

Possibly the most delightful way to agree with someone, reassure them you’re on the same page, or even just show acceptance of another person’s point of view, this Midwestern expression works well as an affirmation in just about any situation.

Advertisement
Dontcha know?

In Minnesota, this is commonly tacked on to the end of sentences as a way to elicit a response. “You betcha!” and “Dontcha know?” make for a harmonious combo in conversation.

Brewski

To unwind after a long day, you might head to the bar and grab a brewski — a combination of the word “brew” and an ending perhaps inspired by the common Slavonic suffix -ski. According to the New Oxford American Dictionary, it’s a combination of “brew” and “the pattern of Russian surnames ending in -skiĭ.” This term originally spilled out of frat houses in the Midwest and made its national debut in a 1977 Saturday Night Live “Coneheads” sketch with the line, “Yes, we were extremely upset to find six-packs of brewski in the children’s trick-or-treat bags.” Speaking of beer, a “red beer,” a Nebraskan specialty, is a brewski mixed with tomato juice and a shot of hot sauce.

Naptown

It’s also a nickname for Maryland’s capital city, Annapolis, but “Naptown” is what Hoosiers call Indianapolis — a town once considered sleepy because of its slower pace of life in the early 20th century. Club musicians may have coined the nickname to avoid saying the six syllables of “Indianapolis,” and area radio stations such as WNAP popularized the term by featuring it heavily on their airwaves in the 1960s. Indianapolis is now the 16th most populous city in the U.S. (and home to the Indy 500 automobile race), so it seems to have outgrown its “sleepiness,” but the moniker is here to stay.

Puppy Chow

Also called “muddy buddies,” this snack — especially popular in Iowa — consists of Chex cereal coated in a mixture of peanut butter, chocolate, and confectioner’s sugar. Puppy chow got its name because, at first glance, it looks a lot like dog food.

Featured image credit: Nicholas Smith/ iStock
5 MIN READ

The Most Commonly Misused Words in English

To quote Inigo Montoya from “The Princess Bride,” “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”

by Bennett Kleinman
drawing a message bubble around many adhesive notes

Just like an instruction manual to assemble an IKEA dresser, the manuals for the English language (dictionaries and grammar textbooks) can be hard to decipher. Ask an English teacher and they’ll tell you that certain grammatical mistakes are easily overlooked and regularly repeated. One common error that people make is saying words that sound right, despite the actual meaning being different than what was intended. Words are constantly evolving and changing over the decades and centuries, so a word that was intended to be used in one way might mean something new in 100 years. Let’s dive a little deeper to examine some of the most commonly misused English words today.

Travesty

People often misuse the word “travesty” as a synonym for “tragedy,” implying a situation is filled with suffering or distress. But the true usage of “travesty” is better suited to describe an absurd or distorted representation of something. If a lenient sentence is a “travesty of justice,” for instance, that doesn’t necessarily mean it will cause distress. Rather, it suggests that it’s a mockery of the expected result.

Advertisement
Poisonous

Snakes, spiders, and other critters can be both poisonous and venomous, but the terms mean different things. Something that’s poisonous may cause illness if a toxin enters the body through consumption or absorption. Something that’s venomous, however, will cause suffering if the toxin is forcefully injected through a bite or sting. In other words, biting into a toxic snake (as unlikely as that may be) makes it poisonous, whereas being bitten by that same snake makes it venomous.

Empathy

Showing empathy for another person is different from having sympathy, though many people use the words interchangeably. To have empathy for someone means to be able to understand the emotions they’re feeling, even if you haven’t been in their position. You can empathize with the sadness someone feels after losing a loved one, or the happiness they exude after a promotion at work, but you don’t need to have personally experienced similar situations. “Sympathy” has two common usages, the first being the counterpart to “empathy.” It means to understand the emotions someone is feeling because you have experienced a similar circumstance. Perhaps you can sympathize with your neighbor after they lose their job because you were laid off last year. The second usage of “sympathy” relates to misfortunes above all else, as it means to feel pity for someone.

Advertisement
Jealousy

Though they’ve come to mean the same thing in modern parlance, “jealousy” and “envy” aren’t quite identical. Historically, jealousy implies fear of losing something one already has; for instance, someone may feel jealous when their spouse receives flirtatious attention. “Envy,” on the other hand, implies a desire for something currently lacking, such as good health, money, or a partne

Ambivalent

Some people may not care about how to use the word “ambivalent,” but we sure do. People often say this term as a way to claim they’re indifferent, but to be ambivalent is to have mixed opinions on the topic in question.  Let’s say someone is watching a TV show and they love certain episodes but hate others. In this case, the opposing feelings show true ambivalence, as they aren’t sure how they feel about the show on the whole.

Peruse

If a book lover goes to a bookstore and peruses the entire selection, they’ll end up there until close. That’s because while many folks use “peruse” as a synonym for “to skim,” it means the exact opposite. To peruse something implies to read it thoroughly, carefully, and in great detail — not to quickly glance over a few pages.

Advertisement
Irony

While irony can be humorous by coincidence, that’s not always the case. In reality, the word “irony” signifies the opposite of what was expected more than anything else. One example of irony would be a marriage counselor filing for divorce; in this case, it’s not inherently funny, but the situation is contrary to what might be anticipated. For humorous situations that don’t fit the bill, consider calling them funny coincidences rather than ironic.

Chronic

Someone who says they have a chronic injury is implying they’re suffering from great pain all the time. But “chronic” has less to do with severity and more to do with the duration of an issue. Think of “chronic” as“habitual” instead of “very bad,” as it’s possible to have a chronic ailment that’s a mild discomfort.

One thing to keep in mind is that the English language is always evolving. Some of these “misuses” are based on centuries-old usages, and new meanings have become accepted in casual conversation and are even listed in the dictionary. We like to consider ourselves lifelong students at Word Smarts, and we’re always open to seeing how vocabulary changes.

Featured image credit: Warchi/ iStock
8 MIN READ

30 Words We Picked Up From Cooking Shows

If you’ve ever watched a cooking competition or food documentary, you’ve probably heard a number of these culinary terms. Will you qualify as a master chef?

by Bennett Kleinman
Overhead view of cooking supplies and ingredients

One of the best ways to relax on a lazy weekend is with a Food Network marathon. Watching  these shows is not only a good way to decompress, but also helpful in expanding your culinary vocabulary. You might learn about a new ingredient to try in a recipe or hear your favorite celebrity chef use a term that you end up incorporating into your own vernacular. Here are 30 culinary words and phrases pulled straight from the kitchens of popular cooking shows.

Mise en place

Mise en place is French for “to put in place,” and it’s a preliminary step that involves cutting and sorting ingredients prior to cooking. This process allows a chef to have everything prepared in advance so that the actual cooking is more efficient.

Spoonula

A favorite term of TV chef and talk show host Rachael Ray, “spoonula” refers to a curved spatula. It can perform the stirring and spreading tasks a normal spatula can, but as an added benefit, the curved nature of the utensil makes it easy to scoop out food bits from the bottom of any jar.

Soggy Bottom

Fans of The Great British Bake Off know that “soggy bottoms” are an absolute nightmare for bakers. This term refers to any underbaked base on a pie, tart, or similar pastry, often due to the wet filling seeping into the crust.

Basting

The surest way to avoid a dry turkey on Thanksgiving is by basting it, a process that involves soaking up and reapplying the juices to the meat as the cook progresses. This prevents the bird from drying out and becoming too chalky.

Advertisement
Al Dente

Giada De Laurentiis — star of the smash hit show Giada at Home — will be the first to tell you that al dente is the best way to prepare pasta. Al dente is Italian for “to the tooth,” and it means the pasta maintains a firm texture without being overly hard or mushy.

Chiffonade

French chefs such as Jacques Pépin are familiar with a technique called “chiffonade.” This comes from the French chiffon, referring to fine adornments used by women in the 18th century. The knife skill involves slicing herbs or greens into long, thin ribbons.

Heard

While it’s not explicitly a cooking term, fans of The Bear have heard chefs yell “heard” while in the kitchen. This is another way to say “understood” and convey you got the message, which is particularly helpful in loud, busy kitchens.

Blanch

Not to be confused with boiling something, “blanch” is an adjacent term that refers  to briefly cooking food in rapidly boiling water and then dipping it into cold water to stop the cooking process. Chefs may commonly blanch nuts or fruit to help remove the skin.

Advertisement
Deglaze

Any chef worth their muster knows how to deglaze a pan, by adding wine or stock to a hot pan to loosen browned bits of food. Those caramelized bits (called “the fond”) are packed with flavor, and after the deglazing they can be mixed into a sauce for added depth.

Emulsify

To emulsify something in the kitchen means to create a smooth mixture of multiple ingredients that normally wouldn’t combine so easily. Mayonnaise is an emulsion of oil, egg yolk, and an acidic agent such as vinegar or lemon juice.

Aubergine

If you’ve ever watched a show centered around British chefs — for instance, Masterchef UK — you may have seen them prepare an aubergine-based dish. Americans will recognize the main ingredient as an eggplant.

Mandoline

Not to be confused with the musical instrument known as a “mandolin,” a mandoline is a kitchen tool that’s perfect for slicing thin strips of food. Many people use mandolines to portion ingredients like potatoes and zucchini into equally sized strips to ensure an even cook all around.

Eighty-Six

If you hear someone in the kitchen yell “eighty-six,” it means that a menu item is no longer available. During busy dinner services, restaurants may have to eighty-six specials or popular dishes as they run out of ingredients.

Shortening

Baking shows commonly refer to an ingredient called “shortening,” which is a fat that turns into a solid at room temperature. Adding shortening to flour  results in a crumbly, flakier crust by reducing the elasticity of the dough.

Advertisement
Behind

Active kitchens are full of people moving in every direction, which can result in disastrous collisions and spills if people aren’t careful. That’s why you’ll hear many chefs yell “behind” to alert fellow chefs of their presence when walking behind someone, or “corner” when turning a blind corner.

Dredge

To dredge up a ship means to remove it from the seabed, but in the context of cooking, “dredge” means something entirely different. Dredging involves coating a food in a dry ingredient like flour or breadcrumbs, usually prior to frying it or cooking it over high heat. This helps seal in moisture and results in a crispy exterior.

Sous Chef

This term is French for “under chef,” as sous chefs serve as the main assistants in all aspects of food preparation. Every great TV chef has a sous chef working under them behind the scenes, providing the support that’s essential to run an efficient kitchen. 

Pinch

A pinch of salt is often added to a dish at the end of cooking to perfect the flavor. But it’s not just any old pinch. To chefs, a pinch is a precise measurement — one-sixteenth of a teaspoon, to be exact. Furthermore, a dash is one-eighth of a teaspoon and a tad is one-fourth.

Butterfly

What some TV chefs call “butterfly,” others may call “spatchcock.” Both are terms used in reference to cooking poultry — the method involves cutting into the backbone and laying the bird flat so that it cooks more evenly. The term “butterfly” comes from the fact that the bird will look vaguely like a set of butterfly wings.

Advertisement
Binder

No three-hole punch necessary here. A culinary binder is essential for keeping ingredients adhered to one another. For instance, egg is a binder in a meatball recipe, as the wetness keeps the meat and breadcrumbs stuck together so the meatball doesn’t fall apart during cooking.

Harissa

This popular Mediterranean paste is made from peppers, spices, garlic, and olive oil, resulting in a decadent spread full of flavor and heat. You can mix harissa into a falafel recipe, or spread it onto a lamb chop for some incredible depth of flavor.

Runcible Spoon

Coined by poet Edward Lear in 1871’s “The Owl and the Pussycat,” the term “runcible spoon” describes a fork that’s curved like a spoon and contains three broad prongs (imagine a spork with an edge for cutting). Perhaps it doesn’t get a lot of traction while cooking, but toss one of these in your lunchbox or keep it in the car for emergencies. 

Sweat

While the bright lights on a cooking set are sure to make anyone perspire, that’s usually not what TV chefs mean when they say “sweat.” This term often refers to putting veggies and a little bit of oil over heat and stirring to make any liquid evaporate, thus making them tender.

Macerate

The macerating process brings out the flavor of fruits and vegetables by soaking them in a liquid (water, citrus juice, vinegar, etc.). For instance, you may put berries into a bowl of citrus and sugar, let them soak, then add the macerated mixture into a pie.

Advertisement
Fire

Yelling “fire” in a crowded kitchen is different from yelling it inside a packed theater. Any chef who hears the term “fire” knows to get to work, as it means to begin cooking a dish ASAP so that it can be delivered quickly to the customer.

Coriander

British celebrity chef Gordon Ramsay might use the word “coriander,” but Americans will know the leafy green herb as “cilantro.”

Paring Knife

Compared to a cleaver or bread knife, a paring knife is a smaller tool that often measures less than 4 inches long. Its primary purpose is performing precise tasks, such as peeling fruits and veggies or deveining shrimp.

Phở

On his show No Reservations, the late, great Anthony Bourdain traveled around the world to sample the best international cuisine. One of his favorite places to visit was Vietnam, where locals enjoy a delicious soup called phở (pronounced “fuh”). A big bowl of phở usually features a hearty beef broth filled with noodles, meats, and vegetables.

Amuse-Bouche

A French term that translates to “mouth amuser,” an amuse-bouche is a little bite of food meant to tantalize the palate at the start of a dining experience. Competitors on Iron Chef might prepare an amuse-bouche for the judges to showcase their creativity and tease upcoming flavors.

Broken Sauce

The term “broken sauce” may not be as literal as a glass shattering into pieces, but it can be equally distressing. It references when the liquid and fatty components of a sauce separate, thus ruining the entire thing. This often happens when making hollandaise sauce, for example, as the oils may separate from the egg yolk, resulting in a sauce that’s grainy instead of creamy.

Featured image credit: Toa Heftiba/ Unsplash
3 MIN READ

Is It ‘Should Have’ or ‘Should Of’?

Is “should of” ever correct? It’s time for a grammar lesson that your English teachers should’ve taught you years ago.

by Rachel Gresh
Man looking at arrows, trying to make the right chouce

“Would’ve, could’ve, should’ve” — this regretful refrain reflects on past actions, choices, or opportunities, suggesting that someone would have, could have, or should have done something differently. We love to use contractions in English, especially in casual conversation, which is why the expression is styled as such. However, the regular use of “should’ve” to represent “should have” has resulted in one of the most common and unfortunate grammar gaffes in the English language: “should of.” 

We’ve all heard or seen it in action: “I should of called sooner” or “They should of known better.” This pairing — “should of” — is never correct, so how did this unwelcome imposter become so widespread? Grammarians believe it comes down to the pronunciation of the contraction “should’ve,” which sounds nearly identical to “should of,” causing this slip-up to become a permanent fixture in colloquial conversation. The mistake is often imperceptible in spoken conversation and is better caught in writing. Merriam-Webster dates the usage of the contraction “should’ve” to the mid-19th century, suggesting that “should of” has likely been around just as long. Its counterparts, “would of” and “could of,” are similarly confused and are also incorrect.

Advertisement

So, why is “should of” deemed incorrect? It boils down to grammar rules and the appropriate sentence structure of English verbs. Verb phrases are made of one or more auxiliary verbs and a main verb. “Would,” “could,” and “should” are auxiliary verbs — also called “helping verbs” — and they require another auxiliary verb or a main verb (or both) to follow them in order to form a correct verb phrase. “Have” can function as an auxiliary verb, but “of” cannot — it is a preposition. Consider the example “I would have called sooner,” which includes the correct verb phrase “would have called” — no “of” here.

Interestingly, The Merriam-Webster entry for “of” lists it as a preposition (and rightfully so), but has added another part of speech: auxiliary verb. Does that mean “should of, would of, could of” IS correct? Not so fast. It’s listed as a nonstandard version of “have” and defined as being “​​used in place of the contraction ‘ve often in representations of uneducated speech.”

Dictionaries record the ways people use language, but they don’t dictate the rules of grammar. On this point we’ll remain grammar sticklers and say “should’ve” should always be used instead of “should of.” 

Featured image credit: Yuri_Arcurs/ iStock
3 MIN READ

Should We Retire the Use of ‘Whom’?

An enduring pronoun since the days of Old English, “whom” has graced the works of Shakespeare, Austen, Hemingway, and countless others. But does it have a place in modern English?

by Rachel Gresh
whom? word or concept represented by wooden letter tiles

I don’t claim grammatical authority, but if I may humbly make one recommendation, I move to retire the use of “whom” — or at least stop reprimanding writers who’d prefer to use “who.” I’m not the first to suggest this; even Merriam-Webster notes that the demise of “whom” has been discussed by scholars since 1870. Many proponents of the discontinuation of “whom” point out that in most cases, “who” can take the place of “whom,” rendering the latter redundant. I agree that while “whom” sounds charming when used properly, it’s largely impractical.

To understand the fuss, let’s revisit the respective functions of “whom” and “who.” “Whom” is an object pronoun — much like “him,” “her,” or “me” — as seen in the example, “Whom did you see?” in which the subject is “you” and “whom” is the object of the verb “see.” On the other hand, “who” is used as a subject pronoun, akin to “I,” “he,” or “she.” For instance, “who” is the subject in the sentence, “Who was elected?” 

Advertisement

Although this grammatical practice has endured for centuries, there’s now a tendency to excessively police the usage of “whom”/”who,” resulting in a linguistic landmine that causes distress to students, writers, and professionals who (erm — or is it whom? — no, definitely who) agonize over which one is correct. 

Understandably, many people would rather do away with this grammatical dilemma, so “who” has begun replacing “whom” in casual conversation. “Who” feels more informal and intuitive in most scenarios. “Who did you see?” rolls off the tongue far more naturally than its technically correct counterpart. In a modern world that values fast, efficient communication over correctness, “who” often prevails.

With that said, a few reasonable arguments persist in favor of “whom.” The classic prepositional constructions “with whom,” “to whom,” or “from whom” have a rhythmic quality that can’t be adequately replaced by “who.” In these situations, you always have the option of rephrasing. For example, instead of asking someone, “With whom are you traveling?” you might rephrase and say, “Who are you traveling with?” because it feels more natural. This may make your high school English teacher cringe, but it’s what most people would actually say in casual conversation. (And we’re on the side of breaking the rule against ending sentences with prepositions.) 

But before we officially send “whom” off on its farewell tour, we should note that the word seems to have developed another application as part of a new phrase: “whom of which.” It’s used like so: “My ethics professor, whom of which is my favorite teacher, writes many books.” In 2023, MIT linguistics professor David Pesetsky described the phrase as “brand new,” “very colloquial,” and “extremely law-governed.” Respectfully, I will be abstaining from this curious new construction — after all, do we really need another tangled usage of “whom” to debate?

Featured image credit: lexiconimages/ Adobe Stock
2 MIN READ

Why Do We Say ‘Cooling One’s Heels’?

The idiom “cool your heels” has galloped its way into our everyday language — but it originated with hooves, not heels.

by Rachel Gresh
Close-up of galloping horses hooves

Many captivating tales begin with racehorses —  real-life champions Seabiscuit and Secretariat had  their legacies immortalized in film and literature. But there’s one equine anecdote that didn’t make it to the silver screen: the origin of the idiom “cool your heels.” It’s used today to evoke a sense of waiting impatiently or for an extended time, but this expression originated on the racetrack, with  roots tracing back to equestrian practices from several centuries ago.

Advertisement

The idiom comes from a literal sense of cooling hooves. After a tiring ride or a nail-biting race, horses  need to be cooled down to prevent injury, often by dousing their lower legs with water, called “cooling.” This practice, still done today, restricts blood flow to reduce inflammation and soothe weary muscles to promote recovery. Without this equine remedy, star racehorses might not have succeeded, and we would be down one idiom.

The phrase “cooling the hooves” was used during the 16th century in the literal sense, and shortly after it left the stable and entered everyday language as the figurative expression we use today. In the mid-18th century, we see the clear transition from a horse’s steady hooves to the sturdiest part of a person’s foot, the heel. Henry Fielding wrote in Amelia (1752): “In this Parlour, Amelia cooled her Heels, as the Phrase is, near a Quarter of an Hour.”

Today, Merriam-Webster defines this idiom as “to wait or be kept waiting for a long time especially from or as if from disdain or discourtesy.” You’ll see it used casually, whether lightheartedly or out of frustration, in situations like this: “I know you’re anxious to get started, but cool your heels while we get the paperwork together.” You might notice the striking connection between an exuberant racehorse needing a cooldown and an eager human forced into a delay, both parties expelling energy and a sense of urgency.

Featured image credit: KateLeigh/ iStock
4 MIN READ

How Punctuation Marks Change in Other Languages

While many languages that use the Latin alphabet have similar punctuation marks, other languages use different symbols. Let’s learn how some languages around the world punctuate sentences.

by Jennifer A. Freeman
Closeup of a book on a white surface with writing in Japanese

The English language uses the Latin alphabet — the “ABCs” that toddlers learn to sing — and those building blocks of words come with punctuation marks that add structure and nuance to sentences. While many languages that use the Latin alphabet have similar punctuation marks, there are many more languages and alphabets with additional options. Even when the function is the same (ending or pausing a sentence, for example), different symbols do the work. Let’s learn how some languages around the world punctuate sentences.

A Brief History of Punctuation

Many ancient alphabets and languages didn’t include a system of punctuation, but the earliest known recording of punctuation is the Mesha Stele, also called the Moabite Stone, found in what is now Jordan. The artifact, which dates to 840 BCE, is written in a version of the Phoenician alphabet, with points and horizontal strokes to separate words.

Most ancient languages developed without punctuation or even spaces between words in written form, making it tricky for readers to parse out the meaning, but around the fifth century BCE, Greek playwrights began to use marks to help with reading their stories out loud. The Greek scholar and librarian Aristophanes of Byzantium is sometimes credited as the inventor of punctuation because he marked sections of writing with different types of dots — symbols that would come to be known as commas, colons, and periods.

Punctuation became even more widely used with the advent of the printing press in the mid-15th century. And when the typewriter was invented in the mid-19th century, it became important to standardize the use of punctuation marks to aid both reading and comprehension.

Commas

A comma is used in English to indicate a short pause or to separate items on a list. Several other languages also use commas, but they have a slightly different look.

In Arabic, words are written from right to left instead of left to right, so the comma faces the opposite direction (،) compared to a comma in English. Japanese commas don’t curve (、), and the straight-line punctuation mark is used extremely liberally in Japanese writing. Instead of following specific grammar rules for usage, the Japanese comma can be inserted anywhere the writer wants a break or a pause. The Japanese language also uses full-width spacing (giving that extra room around the comma), as opposed to half-width spacing in English.

Quotation Marks

In English, these marks (“) are used at the beginning and end of a quoted passage to set it off from the rest of the sentence. The Filipino, and Hindi languages handle quotation marks the same way American English does, but others take a different approach.

Several language systems, including German, Dutch, Hungarian, Hebrew, Romanian, and Icelandic, use one quotation mark at the bottom and one at the top at either end of the quoted text („…”). French, Greek, Italian, and Spanish occasionally use angular quotation marks, called guillemets («…»). The marks are flipped in the Danish language (»…«). In traditional Chinese, quotation marks appear like little bars on either side of the quote (「…」), but in simplified Chinese, the Western-style quotation marks are used.

Question Marks

Virtually every language has some sort of mark to indicate a query. As with commas, Arabic question marks appear backward (؟). In Armenian, the question mark is shaped like a slight curve (՞), and in Greek, the symbol for a question mark looks like a semicolon (;). In Spanish, sentences are bookended with upside-down and right-side-up question marks (¿…?).

Periods

One of the oldest punctuation marks, a period, indicates a full stop at the end of a sentence. This basic dot is not so simply represented in every language.

In the Bengali language, spoken in Bangladesh, the period is simply a straight line (।), which is an excellent way to indicate a divide between sentences. In the Armenian language, the period resembles an English colon (։), and in Japanese, the period resembles a small circle (。), not a simple dot.

Featured image credit: States of Mind/ Adobe Stock
2 MIN READ

What Is the Difference Between a Hotel and a Motel?

They both have beds, cable television, and ice machines that make way too much noise. So what exactly differentiates a hotel from a motel?

by Bennett Kleinman
View of luxury hotel in Dubai

When booking an overnight stay, semantics are likely the last thing on your mind — you’re probably more concerned with a comfy bed and some free breakfast the next morning. But if you’re curious about what makes “hotels” and “motels” distinct from one another, we have the answer. 

The word “hotel” refers to a place providing overnight accommodations, meals, and other similar services for tourists. This often excludes hostels and Airbnbs, which don’t exactly fall under the same umbrella. “Hotel” is an English word whose etymology dates to the 1640s. It’s derived from the French l’hôtel, which originally meant “a mansion” or “large house,” but now refers to the lodging-for-hire “hotel” in French as well.

Advertisement

“Motel,” on the other hand, describes a specific kind of hotel. The portmanteau combining the words “motorside” and “hotel” was coined in the 1920s amid the burgeoning popularity of the personal motor vehicle. Because of this connection, you’ll usually find motels located along major thoroughfares rather than in the heart of a densely packed city — though not always today, as the term now refers more to a style than to a location. Motels tend to have large, free parking lots for anyone staying the night, and each room is typically accessed directly from that parking area. This differs from other types of hotels, where guests are more likely to access rooms through a communal central lobby.

So, while all motels are hotels, not all hotels are motels. While they’re both likely to offer a comfortable place to sleep at the end of the day, their etymological distinctions set the two types of accommodations apart.

Featured image credit: Imaster/ Adobe Stock