Five grammar rules that are safe to ignore

If you’ve ever felt bewildered by the English language with its seemingly never ending list of do’s and don’ts, great news —you can blissfully ignore some of the rules.

Of course, some die hard grammarians will still stand by the following rules for all eternity, but there’s no reason you need to. If you can mute your primary school teacher’s voice telling you under no circumstance should a sentence start with ‘and’, ‘but’ or ‘or’, we present you with five ‘rules’ that are up for debate.?

Don’t end a sentence with a proposition?

Many of us were taught to never end a sentence with a proposition (on, off, with, about etc.), but this one can be put to bed. You shouldn’t finish a sentence with a proposition when the sentence would still mean the same thing if you didn’t use the proposition. For example, “Where is she going to?” is incorrect because “Where is she going?” has the same meaning.?

But modern style guides see no problem with sentences where the final proposition prevents awkward, overly formal sentences like “What did you step on?”, “She’s going to throw up” and “What are you waiting for?”.? After all, how often do you hear someone ask “On what did you step?”. We just don’t talk like that. Consider this your tick of approval to go forth and end sentences with a proposition, as long as it makes sense. It’s also endorsed by the great Winston Churchill who reportedly retorted to an editor who changed one of his sentences to end with a proposition, ‘This is the sort of nonsense up with which I will not put!”

Don’t begin a sentence with a conjunction?

A rule drummed into us so well, it can be hard to shake a lifetime of resolve never to use “and”, “but,” or “or” to start a sentence. But today you can let go of this one because almost all the modern style guides and grammar books give us the go ahead. In fact, the Chicago Manual of Style states as many as 10 percent of sentences in first-rate writing begin with conjunctions.?

However, it’s certainly a rule that has been followed for centuries and according to the Oxford Dictionary Myth Debunkers, the argument against using a conjunction to begin a sentence is that the sentence will express an incomplete thought and is therefore wrong. But if it has a subject and predicate; “And then she fell into a deep sleep” it is still a sentence. If it doesn’t; “And then deep sleep” it is not.?

No passive voice, ever

Does anyone remember being assigned to write an entire story in an active voice during their primary school days? Passive verbs such as been, was, has or am, were not to be seen, thank you very much. Sure, your writing will often be stronger, sparklier, and more sprightly if you make your passive sentences active, but if you don’t know, or don’t want to disclose the agent of the action, sometimes passive voice is the way to go. Some examples of passive voice we often hear in the news are “the car was stolen”,? “shots were fired” or “mistakes were made”. Businesses often use passive voice too. If you’ve ever cut it fine on paying a water bill you may have received a notice that read “Your water supply will be turned off”, rather than “We, the water company, will be turning off your power.” It sounds less harsh, doesn’t it? Keeping your writing active is sound advice, but this one is more to do with style than grammar, and the mood you’re trying to convey in your work.?

Don’t split infinitives?

This is a remarkably stubborn rule but one we can shake our hands of, according to almost all style guides. The rule states nothing should sit between the to and its verb in the infinitive. For example:

1. To eat?
2. To paint
3. To cook

When you split an infinitive, you generally put an adverb between the two words:

1. To quickly eat?
2. To quietly paint
3. To happily cook?

Think of Star Trek’s mission statement, “to boldly go where no man has gone before”.? According to the rule it should have been “to go boldly” instead. Just doesn’t hit the same though, does it? Place adverbs where they sound right, generally straight after the to.

Don’t use over when it should be more than?

There’s some grammar rules that even when they’re officially declared fired, even we find hard to break. This is one of them. Before 2014 most writers, journalists and media presenters followed the Associated Press style: don’t write “under” or “over” when referring to numbers. Instead, you were meant to use “less than” or “more than”. But this all changed in 2014 when the AP Stylebook no longer found a grammatical reason to enforce the rule; it was just an editorial preference. Now you can write it either way, depending on what sounds the best. Which is correct?

1. Her rent went up more than $40 a fortnight.?
2. Her rent went up over $40 a fortnight.?
3. Cattle prices dropped to less than $1000 a head.?
4. Cattle prices dropped to under $1000 a head.?
5. All are fine now (Hint, pick me)