|
November 28, 2000
BUSINESS LETTERS--PART V
-------------------------------------------------
This week we continue our study of business letters by looking at a fifth area, the closing.
The closing helps readers understand that the letter has come to an end. Like the greeting (or salutation), closings follow a conventional format. Beginning at the left margin two lines below the body, closings usually include one to three words. Only the first word is capitalized, and the closing is followed by a comma:
Sincerely,
Sincerely yours,
Very truly yours,
Respectfully,
- - - - - - -
Informal business letters or personal correspondence may use closings like the following:
Best regards,
Best wishes,
All the best,
See you soon,
- - - - - - -
Note that outdated expressions should be avoided:
Faithfully yours,
Your servant,
- - - - - - -
Next week we will look at the signature area.
-------------------------------------------------
NEW WORD OF THE WEEK:
SAGE (saj) adjective: judicious, wise.
Mrs. Turner is appreciated for her sage contributions to the community discussions.
-------------------------------------------------
YOUR GRAMMAR AND WRITING QUESTIONS
QUESTION: I read with interest your rebuttal to my criticism of the construction "comprised of." It seems to me that your service should be aimed at keeping grammar usage correct, not in keeping it up to date. Yes, certain things have become accepted because they are in common usage. That doesn't mean they are correct.
I stand by my "whole comprises the parts." I also will never use "snuck" as the past tense of "sneak," though it's now acceptable through common usage. Next we will be told that it's okay to say something just "lays there." That's certainly common enough! I know I'm a stubborn pain in the you-know-where, but I will continue to fight for good English in my own small way.
By the way, if your library includes Bill Bryson's Facts on File Dictionary of Troublesome Words, look on page 39, where he says, "If you remember nothing else from this book, remember at least that 'comprised of' is always wrong. . . . The whole comprises the parts and not vice versa."
GRAMMARCHECK: You raise a couple of good points regarding grammar usage. One is whether a grammar service should offer "prescriptive" vs. "descriptive" language use. Our goal is to clarify the everyday use of grammar for most speakers. We acknowledge the fact that not everyone will agree with our interpretations. But as we mentioned last week, language is dynamic, not static, reflecting the human condition. While we aim mostly to present prescriptive forms of grammar, we often include descriptive uses as well, especially those that are in the process of evolving into common or widespread usage. This leads to the second point.
If no one ever challenged standard grammar, language would become static. Who knows--maybe that's what happened to Latin! In Shakespeare's time (1600 A.D.), the use of the informal second person was beginning to fade out of use. If language authorities had challenged and rejected that movement, English speakers today might refer to their equals as "thee" or to their possessions as "thine," to name one example.
While we tip our collective hat to Bryson, we will more closely follow contemporary dictionaries, etc., as our sources. Thanks for writing; we applaud your efforts to uphold high grammar standards. If more English speakers were like you, there would be no need for a column like ours.
- - - - - - -
QUESTION: Please do not edit my grammar in this note. :)
You used the phrase "rule of thumb" in your last newsletter. My mother is an attorney and she says "Rule of Thumb" is a legal term still on the books. It means the width of the rod a man can use to beat his wife and children. If it is bigger than his thumb, he may not beat his family with it. Could you clarify? If that is true, I would think you would not want to use it anymore!
I just started getting your newsletter and I love it. I had a horrible education, so I learn a lot from your newsletter. Thanks, Jennifer
GRAMMARCHECK: Yes, Jen, we've heard of the explanation cited by your mother. However, "rule of thumb" has become such a common expression that most folks are unfamiliar with its origin. Consequently, its derivation has little impact on today's usage.
The same type of questionable derivation is true of many English words. For example, the word "genuine" derives from the custom of a father placing on his knees (or on his lap) only the children (legitimate or otherwise) he would choose to claim as heirs. (The stem "genu" is an Old English word meaning "knee.")
Isn't language fascinating? That's why we enjoy the study of linguistics so much!
- - - - - - -
QUESTION: Hi Grammarcheck! Here's a question from Down Under:
Is the word "feral" commonly understood in the U.S.? If so, what meanings, formal and/or colloquial, are ascribed to it?
Kind regards, Euan, Melbourne (Australia)
GRAMMARCHECK: Hello down there, Euan!
While some Americans are familiar with the term, "feral" is not frequently used in everyday speech.
NOT GENERALLY HEARD:
My, that's a feral dog you have there!
What type of feral beast is attacking our chickens?
Instead, "feral" often is used to describe a particularly savage creature, or even one of supernatural distinction--such as a werewolf! Here's a typical dictionary treatment:
FERAL: 1. Existing in a wild or untamed state; especially, having referred to such a state from domestication. (2) Of or characteristic of a wild animal; savage.
- - - - - - -
QUESTION: In regards to your answer concerning Air Force personnel, it is correct to refer to all Air Force military personnel as "airmen." When people in the Air Force use this term, they are not categorically excluding females. It is a little quirk of military terminology to refer to all members with the same terms (i.e., Army = soldiers, Navy = sailors, Marine Corps = Marines). There is no other term I can think of in the Air Force for active duty military members; we gladly call each other "airmen."
A SSgt. in the USAF
GRAMMARCHECK: While we understand that the use of "airmen" is not intended to discriminate against women, we respectfully point out that any term emphasizing one sex over the other (despite inclusion of opposite sex members within the referenced group) is sexist language. Here are more examples:
policeman
businessman
chairman
mankind
waitress or waiter
stewardess or steward
housewife
girl Friday
All of these groups may include both sexes, yet the terms denote membership of one sex only. Such words should be replaced by non-sexist terms like these:
police officer
businessperson
chairperson or chair
humanity
server
flight attendant
domestic engineer or household manager or housekeeper (be creative!)
staff person
Referring to our first question in this issue, language is dynamic--always changing. And so it should, especially when describing humans and their actions.
- - - - - - -
QUESTION: I have never heard the verb phrase "to call off" used to describe calling in sick to work or school, or to beg off an invitation. In my experience, you can call off the hounds and you can call off a party.
Have you checked your grammar usage books on this? I would be interested to know if it is really standard English or one of the regional usages. I have lived in California, Utah, and the South, and have never heard this one before.
Love your newsletter, Lisa.
GRAMMARCHECK: "To call off" means to postpone or cancel--many dictionaries carry this meaning so it appears to enjoy standard usage.
"Call me off today" means asking someone to telephone the speaker's employer to say the speaker won't be coming into work (or school, or wherever one is routinely expected).
|
Copyright
©1998-2008 GrammarCheck
All Rights Reserved
|
|
