1
00:00:00,420 --> 00:00:02,740
You know, no matter how much the English
language continues

2
00:00:02,740 --> 00:00:07,610
to evolve we have to maintain a grasp on
basic grammar.

3
00:00:07,610 --> 00:00:09,542
So right now I wanna share a number

4
00:00:09,542 --> 00:00:12,940
of common grammatical mistakes that lots
of people make.

5
00:00:12,940 --> 00:00:14,803
Sometimes on a daily basis, and

6
00:00:14,803 --> 00:00:18,598
more importantly they happen in
professional communications,

7
00:00:18,598 --> 00:00:20,806
marketing text, signs on the front of

8
00:00:20,806 --> 00:00:24,370
stores, even job applications and cover
letters.

9
00:00:24,370 --> 00:00:29,800
So, if you're aware of these problems, you
can anticipate them, you can find them.

10
00:00:29,800 --> 00:00:34,730
And you can solve them before you ever hit
Send or Publish on anything you write.

11
00:00:34,730 --> 00:00:35,930
So, let's begin.

12
00:00:35,930 --> 00:00:38,860
First, apostrophes.

13
00:00:38,860 --> 00:00:41,440
Apostrophes, they have multiple functions.

14
00:00:41,440 --> 00:00:45,590
Now, first, it can show possession, like
Nick's iPhone, for example.

15
00:00:45,590 --> 00:00:46,660
Nick apostrophe s.

16
00:00:47,760 --> 00:00:49,470
That belongs to Nick, all right?

17
00:00:49,470 --> 00:00:52,968
Secondly, it can also show that a word is
a contraction or a

18
00:00:52,968 --> 00:00:55,080
combination of two words, like is not

19
00:00:55,080 --> 00:00:58,620
becomes isn't or should have becomes
should've.

20
00:00:58,620 --> 00:01:03,520
But what apostrophes should not be used
for, is to make something plural.

21
00:01:03,520 --> 00:01:08,080
For example, in this example, I took some
picture's of my new car.

22
00:01:08,080 --> 00:01:10,650
Well we're talking about multiple pictures
here, so the correct

23
00:01:10,650 --> 00:01:13,490
way to pluralize the word is just to add
an s.

24
00:01:13,490 --> 00:01:16,240
In no way does this refer to any type

25
00:01:16,240 --> 00:01:19,470
of possession, or like something belonging
to the pictures.

26
00:01:19,470 --> 00:01:23,430
This is just a simple plural word so just
add s.

27
00:01:23,430 --> 00:01:27,940
The correct way to pluralize it is, I took
some pictures of my new car.

28
00:01:27,940 --> 00:01:30,240
Picture with an s on the end.

29
00:01:30,240 --> 00:01:33,360
Now the only exception for using an
apostrophe

30
00:01:33,360 --> 00:01:37,520
for making something plural is when you're
referring to

31
00:01:37,520 --> 00:01:40,720
say, a single character, like replace all
the

32
00:01:40,720 --> 00:01:44,145
lower case p's in the code with uppercase
P's.

33
00:01:44,145 --> 00:01:47,499
So you could do like a P apostrophe s,
just so it

34
00:01:47,499 --> 00:01:52,590
doesn't look like PS and it looks like
[SOUND] what does that mean?

35
00:01:52,590 --> 00:01:54,280
I don't know, P apostrophe S, that's fine.

36
00:01:55,290 --> 00:01:57,240
But, you know, if the apostrophes weren't
there, it would look a

37
00:01:57,240 --> 00:02:00,220
little weird, so that's the only exception
really I can think of.

38
00:02:01,540 --> 00:02:02,830
Contractions.

39
00:02:02,830 --> 00:02:06,330
On the related subject of contractions,
most people don't have problems

40
00:02:06,330 --> 00:02:08,270
using them, but there's sometimes

41
00:02:08,270 --> 00:02:11,220
confusion about what the contractions
mean.

42
00:02:11,220 --> 00:02:15,890
For example, when someone says, oh, you
should of seen the fireworks tonight.

43
00:02:15,890 --> 00:02:19,620
They are saying, you should have seen the
fireworks tonight.

44
00:02:19,620 --> 00:02:21,980
They're not saying you should of.

45
00:02:21,980 --> 00:02:23,690
I know it sounds like that.

46
00:02:23,690 --> 00:02:26,850
Should've, would've, could've, all the
others like that.

47
00:02:26,850 --> 00:02:29,010
It sound perhaps like people are saying
the

48
00:02:29,010 --> 00:02:31,390
word of, but it is a contraction, all
right.

49
00:02:31,390 --> 00:02:37,280
So keep in mind that where the apostrophe
is in a contraction.

50
00:02:37,280 --> 00:02:42,230
That's where, generally, the missing
letters are when you combine two words.

51
00:02:42,230 --> 00:02:45,494
You know, so when you combine isn't or I'm
sorry, when you

52
00:02:45,494 --> 00:02:49,830
combine is not, the apostrophe takes the
place of that missing O.

53
00:02:49,830 --> 00:02:51,270
It becomes isn't.

54
00:02:51,270 --> 00:02:54,789
So when we say should've, we're actually
eliminating the

55
00:02:54,789 --> 00:02:57,800
H and the A from have and we're making
should've.

56
00:02:59,060 --> 00:03:00,780
So that's how contractions work.

57
00:03:01,990 --> 00:03:05,790
Quotation marks, this is something I see a
lot in marketing.

58
00:03:05,790 --> 00:03:06,490
It's really bad.

59
00:03:07,960 --> 00:03:10,470
Apostrophes have been misused to make
words plural.

60
00:03:10,470 --> 00:03:14,560
A lot of people misuse quotation marks to
add emphasis.

61
00:03:14,560 --> 00:03:19,030
You know, for a lot of reasons but a lot
of people think to add emphasis,

62
00:03:19,030 --> 00:03:22,080
they'll put something in quotation marks
because it

63
00:03:22,080 --> 00:03:25,210
helps for some reason, but it actually
doesn't.

64
00:03:25,210 --> 00:03:28,370
Quotation marks are used to quote someone

65
00:03:28,370 --> 00:03:31,820
or something, like describing exactly what
someone said.

66
00:03:31,820 --> 00:03:33,720
You know, hello, he said.

67
00:03:33,720 --> 00:03:37,392
Well, he said hello, so the hello is in
quotation marks.

68
00:03:37,392 --> 00:03:41,560
but, you know, for example, we provide
responsive web design.

69
00:03:41,560 --> 00:03:46,880
Well, surely nothing special about
responsive in this, this case.

70
00:03:46,880 --> 00:03:48,000
You know, why is it in quotes?

71
00:03:48,000 --> 00:03:50,340
Is it really not responsive?

72
00:03:50,340 --> 00:03:53,950
Is it some sort of imitation responsive
framework we should know about?

73
00:03:53,950 --> 00:03:57,910
Now, actually, in this case, you don't use
quotation marks at all.

74
00:03:57,910 --> 00:04:02,018
If you wanted to add emphasis and you're
talking about text on

75
00:04:02,018 --> 00:04:06,640
a website, well, make it bold or, you
know, add the emphasis tag.

76
00:04:06,640 --> 00:04:08,320
That's actually what it's there for.

77
00:04:08,320 --> 00:04:09,905
And then make it stand out for a good
reason.

78
00:04:09,905 --> 00:04:12,450
Subject/verb agreement.

79
00:04:12,450 --> 00:04:17,080
Each sentence is generally made up of a
noun or a, and a verb.

80
00:04:17,080 --> 00:04:20,080
And the two should be in agreement when
you use both.

81
00:04:20,080 --> 00:04:21,420
So, here's the example here.

82
00:04:21,420 --> 00:04:23,840
There's many mistakes on the page.

83
00:04:23,840 --> 00:04:25,470
Well, this happens a lot in conversation,

84
00:04:25,470 --> 00:04:27,500
because they're trying to say something
very quickly.

85
00:04:27,500 --> 00:04:31,110
But if you write there's many mistakes on
this page, you're gonna be wrong.

86
00:04:32,460 --> 00:04:35,830
There's is a contraction that means there
is.

87
00:04:35,830 --> 00:04:40,540
And so if you uncontractualize that, it
would

88
00:04:40,540 --> 00:04:42,710
read, there is many mistakes on the page.

89
00:04:42,710 --> 00:04:44,600
And that is absolutely wrong.

90
00:04:44,600 --> 00:04:48,660
There is, always refers to something
singular, whereas in

91
00:04:48,660 --> 00:04:53,250
this sentence, we're talking about a
plural, many mistakes.

92
00:04:53,250 --> 00:04:57,616
And so, in this sentence, we're referring
to many mistakes and so we

93
00:04:57,616 --> 00:05:02,000
want to say there are many mistakes on the
page, and not there's.

94
00:05:02,000 --> 00:05:08,100
So we need to try to avoid that mistake,
one of many, in the future.

95
00:05:09,990 --> 00:05:11,390
Consistent tense.

96
00:05:11,390 --> 00:05:13,934
All right, so, when you're writing, you
wanna try and

97
00:05:13,934 --> 00:05:16,510
select a tense for your writing and keep
it consistent.

98
00:05:18,332 --> 00:05:23,130
Now tense usually refers either the past,
present or the future, you know.

99
00:05:23,130 --> 00:05:25,960
If you're telling a story about a favorite
project at your last job,

100
00:05:25,960 --> 00:05:29,970
you would tell us in the past tense
because it happened in the past.

101
00:05:29,970 --> 00:05:32,994
But whatever tense you write in, it's
important

102
00:05:32,994 --> 00:05:35,442
to be consistent and not skip from past to

103
00:05:35,442 --> 00:05:38,178
present to future because it can get very

104
00:05:38,178 --> 00:05:41,790
confusing but also it can just be
completely wrong.

105
00:05:42,860 --> 00:05:46,380
In the, our example here, I found broken
code and correct it.

106
00:05:46,380 --> 00:05:49,857
Well, that's clearly wrong because I found
broken code is talking

107
00:05:49,857 --> 00:05:53,320
about the past but correct it, is in the
present tense.

108
00:05:53,320 --> 00:05:55,031
You need to make sure that the tense

109
00:05:55,031 --> 00:05:58,530
for everything that you're talking about
is consistent.

110
00:05:58,530 --> 00:06:04,000
And so we would wanna rewrite that to say
I found broken code and corrected it.

111
00:06:04,000 --> 00:06:07,100
Both of those verbs are now past tense.

112
00:06:07,100 --> 00:06:07,920
So that's a good sentence.

113
00:06:08,970 --> 00:06:10,640
Double negatives.

114
00:06:10,640 --> 00:06:12,500
This is another case where a lot of times
people

115
00:06:12,500 --> 00:06:16,640
are adding something when they shouldn't
because they are emphasizing something.

116
00:06:16,640 --> 00:06:17,960
They wanna add emphasis.

117
00:06:17,960 --> 00:06:22,700
For example, Nick would never use no
version of Internet Explorer.

118
00:06:22,700 --> 00:06:25,352
Well, that is a double negative because of
the

119
00:06:25,352 --> 00:06:29,210
never and the no, you don't need that
second negative.

120
00:06:29,210 --> 00:06:33,970
You simply say, Nick would never use any
version of internet explorer.

121
00:06:33,970 --> 00:06:35,320
Actually you could probably even shorten
it

122
00:06:35,320 --> 00:06:37,390
and say Nick would never use Internet
Explorer.

123
00:06:37,390 --> 00:06:38,230
That's probably true.

124
00:06:39,660 --> 00:06:43,680
But you know, keep this in mind if you
ever start a sentence with I would never,

125
00:06:43,680 --> 00:06:46,080
or I don't, or something like that with a

126
00:06:46,080 --> 00:06:50,070
negative, just be careful about not adding
another one.

127
00:06:51,170 --> 00:06:52,810
Hope that wasn't a double negative or a
triple.

128
00:06:53,950 --> 00:06:56,300
All right [LAUGH] dangling participles.

129
00:06:56,300 --> 00:06:58,920
All right, it sounds funny, but it's very
serious.

130
00:06:58,920 --> 00:07:02,190
This is an issue where if you're trying

131
00:07:02,190 --> 00:07:05,270
to connect two sentence fragments
together, it can

132
00:07:05,270 --> 00:07:09,630
sometimes sound very confusing and one,
one part

133
00:07:09,630 --> 00:07:12,190
doesn't really refer to the other one
correctly.

134
00:07:12,190 --> 00:07:13,910
So here's an example.

135
00:07:13,910 --> 00:07:18,730
Running late again, Nick called Jason to
find out where he was.

136
00:07:18,730 --> 00:07:20,660
Well, actually, you know, the, the point
of

137
00:07:20,660 --> 00:07:23,620
this sentence is that Jason was running
late.

138
00:07:23,620 --> 00:07:28,470
You know, Nick was on time, but he called
Jason to find out where Jason was.

139
00:07:28,470 --> 00:07:30,800
So, when we say it this way, running late
again,

140
00:07:30,800 --> 00:07:34,070
Nick called Jason, it kinda sounds like
Nick was running late.

141
00:07:34,070 --> 00:07:34,740
But it's not true.

142
00:07:35,990 --> 00:07:39,990
What we have to do sometimes is rewrite

143
00:07:39,990 --> 00:07:42,300
or restructure a sentence when we have
something

144
00:07:42,300 --> 00:07:45,800
like this to make sure that each fragment

145
00:07:45,800 --> 00:07:48,650
agrees with and refers correctly to the
other.

146
00:07:48,650 --> 00:07:53,460
So, in this case we'd wanna rewrite this
sentence for it to make the most sense.

147
00:07:53,460 --> 00:07:57,670
Since Jason was running late again, Nick
called him to find out where he was.

148
00:07:59,130 --> 00:08:03,099
Misplaced modifiers, you know sometimes
the placement of an adjective or

149
00:08:03,099 --> 00:08:06,690
an adverb, can change the meaning of what
you're talking about.

150
00:08:07,690 --> 00:08:11,590
For example, if you wanted to say that
you're mobile app had a

151
00:08:11,590 --> 00:08:17,180
new logo, you wouldn't say, our new app's
logo appeared on the home screen.

152
00:08:17,180 --> 00:08:20,790
Well suddenly it sounds like you're
talking about a new app, not a new logo.

153
00:08:21,900 --> 00:08:24,370
The modifier here is in the wrong place.

154
00:08:24,370 --> 00:08:28,066
But if you just change it slightly, just
change those two

155
00:08:28,066 --> 00:08:32,060
words, our app's new logo look so much
better than before.

156
00:08:33,060 --> 00:08:36,620
Now it makes sense because the app is not
new, the logo is new.

157
00:08:37,890 --> 00:08:41,420
Oh, yes, misuse of the word literally.

158
00:08:41,420 --> 00:08:44,770
You know, literally is an adverb, that
means

159
00:08:44,770 --> 00:08:48,560
exactly, or in a literal sense, or manner.

160
00:08:48,560 --> 00:08:50,450
Literally is another way that people

161
00:08:50,450 --> 00:08:52,670
like to add emphasis, especially in
conversation.

162
00:08:53,798 --> 00:08:58,534
But when you do it in writing, it sounds
pretty bad.

163
00:08:58,534 --> 00:09:01,954
When you say something that look, when you
say something literally

164
00:09:01,954 --> 00:09:05,730
happened, that means it actually happened,
exactly how you say it did.

165
00:09:07,034 --> 00:09:13,582
So you know common misuse is to use it in
the figurative or the metaphorical sense.

166
00:09:13,582 --> 00:09:15,013
You know, for example when I saw

167
00:09:15,013 --> 00:09:18,100
that hilarious video, I literally died
laughing.

168
00:09:18,100 --> 00:09:20,200
That is so incorrect, because if that was

169
00:09:20,200 --> 00:09:22,730
true, I would not be giving this
presentation.

170
00:09:22,730 --> 00:09:25,360
I would have deceased, or be deceased.

171
00:09:25,360 --> 00:09:26,830
I would be gone.

172
00:09:26,830 --> 00:09:30,350
Now, the emphasis here is a figurative
one.

173
00:09:30,350 --> 00:09:32,554
The more accurate meaning is that you
laughed

174
00:09:32,554 --> 00:09:34,642
a lot, or perhaps you laughed out loud, so

175
00:09:34,642 --> 00:09:36,846
if you were going to rewrite this, well,
you

176
00:09:36,846 --> 00:09:39,960
could actually do it a couple of different
ways.

177
00:09:39,960 --> 00:09:43,280
You could take out literally completely,
and I would kinda suggest that.

178
00:09:43,280 --> 00:09:46,510
You should probably avoid using it, unless
there's an appropriate need for it.

179
00:09:46,510 --> 00:09:48,575
But in this case I'd probably say, when I

180
00:09:48,575 --> 00:09:52,280
saw that hilarious video, I literally
laughed out loud.

181
00:09:52,280 --> 00:09:54,620
Whatever actually happened, that is what
literally happened.

182
00:09:55,824 --> 00:09:58,508
And the last one for this section here, I
versus me,

183
00:09:58,508 --> 00:10:00,970
this is kind of a tricky one that comes up
a lot.

184
00:10:02,284 --> 00:10:04,860
You know, confusion happens when you refer
to another

185
00:10:04,860 --> 00:10:07,100
person and me in the second part of a
sentence.

186
00:10:07,100 --> 00:10:13,490
How like, you know, give those cookies to
me and my friend.

187
00:10:13,490 --> 00:10:17,420
Well in this case, I have Jason made lunch
for Nick and I.

188
00:10:17,420 --> 00:10:19,760
The way to test this, is to actually
remove the

189
00:10:19,760 --> 00:10:22,780
other person from the sentence and then
see how it sounds.

190
00:10:22,780 --> 00:10:26,370
And you know you would be left with, Jason
made lunch for I.

191
00:10:26,370 --> 00:10:30,040
And that is, of course, wrong, sounds
completely wrong.

192
00:10:30,040 --> 00:10:35,672
It's just that Nick and I combination
there, or another person and I sounds

193
00:10:35,672 --> 00:10:41,697
correct, but in the second part of the
sentence, you do have to refer to me.

194
00:10:41,697 --> 00:10:47,600
So the correct way, to fix this would be
Jason made lunch for Nick and me.

195
00:10:48,930 --> 00:10:52,700
Anytime you're not sure, which, which to
use, try that test of

196
00:10:52,700 --> 00:10:55,980
removing the other person from the
sentence and you'll know for sure.