Archive for January, 2008

Jan 10 2008

“Are You Done Yet?”

Published by Steve Osborne under Writing Rules

“Steve,” writes Lisa, “whenever I hear ‘Are you done yet?’ I cringe. Why? Is ‘done’ being used incorrectly? It sounds much better to say, ‘Are you finished yet?’ But I’m not sure why.”

Good question. Let’s explore it.

Other than the fact that these phrases have some rather negative associations for most men, they do not constitute capital linguistic offenses. They fall more into the category of misdemeanors.

I will admit that the phrase “Are you finished yet?” sounds classier than “Are you done yet?” I suppose this is because the word “finished” is more descriptive in this context than the yeoman “done.” Both versions of these sentences are flawed, however. Why? Because there’s a much better way to express what you’re trying to say.

You see, when you say (or write) “Are you done yet?” you are not being as clear as you could be. The phrase could easily mean, “Have you been sufficiently cooked yet?” which, unless you’re in the habit of carrying on conversations with poultry and halibut, isn’t something you’re ever likely to say anyway.

Similarly, “Are you finished yet?” could mean “Are you washed up, defeated and worthless yet?” If you say that to someone who is, in fact, washed up, defeated and worthless, that person will think you are cruel when you are simply wondering if you can use the toilet stall.

The solution is simple. Instead of saying either “Are you done yet?” or “Are you finished yet?” say this:

Have you finished yet?

Better still, lose the “yet.” “Have you finished?” is crystal clear and concise – and that’s precisely how we should communicate.

Thanks for bringing up this issue, Lisa. If any of you have any questions or comments, click on the Contact page and fire away!

3 responses so far

Jan 05 2008

“Has Got” Has Got to Go

Published by Steve Osborne under Writing Rules

Two phrases should be banished from the English language:

1. has got
2. have got

The contraction forms of these phrases (“he’s got,” “I’ve got,” etc.) should also be banned.

“Why this prejudice against these extremely common phrases?” you are probably wondering. I’ll tell you why: It’s because they are unnecessarily long and tedious, like bad operas. They are weighed down by an unnecessary word, and that word is “got.” To illustrate my point, read the following sentences:

I have got to go to the store.
He has got to get over this.
We have got to vote today.

Now read the same sentences without the “gots”:

I have to go to the store.
He has to get over this.
We have to vote today.

You see? When you get rid of the “got” after a “has” or “have,” the world does not come to a stop. In fact, it’s a kinder, gentler world because it does not burden the reader with superfluous words.

The same goes for getting rid of “gots” after the contractions of “has” and “have,” as in …

I’ve got it right here.
She’s got a cold.
They’ve got a grudge against gerbils.

Instead, write …

I have it right here.
She has a cold.
They have a grudge against gerbils.

By following this strategy, you will not only make your writing more concise, but you will sound a bit more intelligent than you really are.

Please don’t get me wrong. I have nothing against the word “got.” I like it. I’m the first to defend its well-deserved place in the English language. I’ve even written an article about it. But you’ll have to admit there’s something guttural – almost Neanderthal – about the word. If I had opened the door to my office this morning to find a horde of hairy sub-humans running around inside beating each other with clubs and smearing my books with bananas, I can easily image them grunting “Got! Got! Got!” as if that pretty much summed it all up. It is just that kind of a word.

Don’t abandon it, however. It’s sturdy and useful. Just don’t use it after “has” or “have.” As the headline says, “has got” has got to go.

Special Note: Send Me Your Problems!

Some of you have asked if I could help you with specific writing issues. My answer is yes. Send me a comment with a piece of text you have written (nothing too long, please) and tell me what has you stumped or doesn’t seem right. I’ll do my best to get to the bottom of it and we’ll invite others to comment with their ideas or suggestions. Let’s make this a valuable, interactive learning experience. To contact me, click here.

6 responses so far

Jan 01 2008

Commas Can Be Crucial

Published by Steve Osborne under Writing Rules

When writing, pay attention to commas. They’re tiny, but they can turn the meaning of a sentence on its head. For example, the only difference between the following two sentences is a seemingly insignificant comma. Read them and decide if the comma is, indeed, insignificant.

  1. Janet screamed in shock when Brad cut off his finger and fainted.
  2. Janet screamed in shock when Brad cut off his finger, and fainted.

Both sentences make it clear that Janet screamed in shock because Brad cut off his finger. But who fainted? Janet or Brad? In the first sentence, the implication is that Brad fainted. In the second sentence – the one with the comma – it appears that Janet was the one who fainted.

The story of an obscure 19th century religious sect offers another example of the sometimes crucial importance of the humble comma. Members of the sect followed the written precepts of a clairvoyant named Orville Winch, who had lived during the previous century. Winch’s writings had been adopted as the doctrine of the sect, and one of his directives read …

Don’t indulge in sex, only to procreate.

This meant that the Winchites could only have sex for the purpose of making babies. While such a restriction was welcomed by most of the female members of the sect, it did not sit well with the men. During the Men’s Council in the spring of 1841, they devised a daring plan. Swearing oaths of secrecy to ensure the women would never discover their deception, they altered Winch’s original manuscript so it appeared that the cursed comma in the sentence was actually only an imperfection in the paper. The directive then read …

Don’t indulge in sex only to procreate.

Simply by taking the comma out of the sentence, the male Winchites had turned the meaning of the sentence 180 degrees. Without the comma, the commandment now said, in effect: “Procreation is not the only reason to indulge in the delights of the flesh.”

Hallelujah!

PS. Take your writing skills to a new level. Check out the real-world writing e-books now available for immediate download. Only $7. Click here.

No responses yet

« Prev