Amos Kwok

If I were vs If I was

I often see these following errors:

• If he was
• If I was
• If she was

The correct forms should be:

• If he were
• If I were
• If she were

Why is this so? This is because these phrases are in the subjunctive mood. The subjunctive mood is used to express a state of affairs that is contrary to the facts. It can also states a wish or desire that is not true.

For example, I could say, "I wish I were a millionaire" (I'm not); "If she were pretty" (she's not); "It this were true" (it's not); "If it were sunny we could go out" (but it's actually raining); "She spoke as if I were deaf" (but I can hear perfectly well).

In the above examples, we're imagining a state of affairs that isn't true. This is the subjunctive mood. Grammar rules dictate that the plural form "were" should be used with a singular subject. Therefore the correct form is "If I were" and not "If I was".

Bonus: remember that the personal pronoun you is always paired with were. Thus it is always "You were" and never "You was".

Extra credit section: "If I was him" contains two errors. The first of course is that since this is the subjunctive mood, it should be were and not was. Secondly, it should be he and not him. In other words, it should be "If I were he". We use he in this case because were is a form of the verb to be and when using to be the nominative case pronoun I must be matched in type and so we have to use he. (I, she, he, we, they, who are nominative case pronouns while me, her, him, them, whom are objective case pronouns.)

Sneaked vs Snuck

In my entry on "Awhile vs A While", my example sentence used the word snuck. Two readers have pointed out that no such word exists and that the proper past tense of sneak is sneaked.

Well, yes and no. Snuck is an acceptable past tense of sneaked but it has fallen into disfavour. When this happened, I'm not sure. But it's still a legitimate word found on the Merriam-Webster and the Oxford dictionary. However, its usage is in rapid decline and sneaked is now the preferred past tense form.

AskOxford.com provides an interesting note on snuck:

From the beginning, and still in standard British English, the past tense and past participle forms are 

sneaked. Just as mysteriously, in a little more than a century, a new past tense form, snuck, has crept and then rushed out of dialectal use in America, first into the areas of use that lexicographers label jocular or uneducated, and more recently, has reached the point where it is a virtual rival of sneaked in many parts of the English-speaking world. But not in Britain, where it is unmistakably taken to be a jocular or non-standard form.

I think therefore, the best bet is avoid using snuck if it causes confusion in communication.

Please revert

Here’s one of those annoying solecisms that drive me batty. You’ve probably seen it in an email:

Please revert to me. Or Please revert.

What the person means is "please respond to me" or "please get back to me". Unfortunately, revert does not carry the meaning of "please give me an answer". Revert means "to return to a previous state or condition". Or "to go back to a former period or subject". In legal terms, revert means "to return a property to its original owner". It has no connection with responding to an email or asking someone to come back to you with an answer.

In fact, by saying "please revert to me", you actually asking someone to transform back into you! Now who wants to do that. So when you're tempted to write "please revert" in an email, use "Please get back to me" instead.

Weighting vs weightage

In the Singapore press recently, there was much reporting on the furore surrounding the Ministry of Education's study of whether or not to reduce the weighting of the second language exam in the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE). While I'm all in favour of reducing the emphasis on the second language, what I found fascinating was the word weightage. A friend pointed out to me that there is no such word as weightage.

I checked my trusty Merriam-Webster and sure enough, there was no such word listed. I checked for weighting instead and also found no such word. However, the Oxford had weighting. It listed the primary definition of weighting as: allowance or adjustment made to take account of special circumstances or compensate for a distorting factor.

I did a search and had pages and pages of results on weightage, which proves nothing except that very few people check the dictionary on a daily basis. So, weighting it is.

Titillating vs Tantalizing

I saw a print ad on the side of a taxi for barbecued pork. It featured Sharon Au saying that the meat was "titillating". I nearly choked. That's because I had always associated titillating with stimulating interest in the erotic sense. I thought a better word in this case would be tantalizing. So I did some research.

Turns out titillating is an adjective that means pleasantly stimulating or exciting. Yes, it does have connotations of erotism but that's a secondary meaning. It primarily means being able to arouse someone to mild excitement. Therefore, it's all right to say that good food titillates the senses.

Tantalizing (or tantalising if you use British spelling) is an adjective which means possessing a quality that arouses or stimulates desire or interest. For example:

The tantalising details of the iPad rumours fuel the imaginations of Apple fans.  

The origins of tantalize are in Greek mythology where Tantalus stole ambrosia and nectar from the gods (plus he practised cannibalism and other atrocities). As his punishment, he was made to stand in a pool of water in Hades over which the branches of a fruit tree hung. Whenever he tried to reach up for the fruit, the branches would bend out of this reach. Whenever he bent down to get a drink, the water receded from him so he could not get any. From his sorry tale, we now take his name to refer to food that is desirable.

Advise vs Advice

Lots of people get confused over these two but this is fairly simple. Advice, with the -ice, is the noun. It is the recommendation, counsel or opinion that someone offers you to help you make a good decision or to decide on a course of action.

Advise, with the -ise, is the verb. The person giving you the opinion is advising you.

In general, -ise is usually the verb while -ice is the noun. For example, devise (-ise) would be the verb meaning to forming a plan or build something. Device (-ice) is a noun that would be a gadget or object.

Humility vs Humbleness

When someone demonstrates the quality of not being proud or haughty, we say that person has humility. Or is that humbleness? Both words are legitimate and both have the same meaning. They are interchangable.

Example: Instead of arguing, he showed humility when he apologised for his mistake and took responsibility.

It also works if you use humbleness instead of humility.

Example: Instead of arguing, he showed humbleness when he apologised for his mistake and took responsibility.

But to my ear, the word humbleness doesn't sound as good as humility. Try reading out loud the two variations of the above sentence and you'll see what I mean. So I'd rather use humility over humbleness any day. That's my humble opinion.

Plural of genius

[Corrected 21 Sep 2010.] Here's another odd plural. The plural of genius is... geniuses. I originally thought that since the word had Latin roots, it would take the common Latin plural of genii. But it's one of those words whose evolution has led the use of genii (pronounced gee-nee-i) to be restricted solely as the plural of mythical spirits.

Incidentally, the word etymology of genius is fascinating. It used to refer to the attendant spirit present at one's birth, then it evolved to mean a person's characteristic or disposition and that led to the sense of a person's natural ability. And that evolved so that it now referred to someone's exceptional natural ability. So there's the link between the spirit and brain power.  See OxfordDictionaries.com.

The plural of cannon is...

At dinner with colleagues while on a business trip in Manila, one of them asks, "Do you know what the plural of mongoose is?"

I know the answer. It's mongeese. But I try to be modest about it. "It's mongeese I think," I tell him.

"Really? They're not related to geese you know," he says. "The plural of a moose isn't meese," he adds.

"I'm pretty sure it's mongeese," I say, now not so sure. (Later I check. The plural is either mongoose or mongeese.)

Another colleague pipes up. "Do you know what the plural of cannon is?"

The folks at the table look around at each other. "I don't suppose it's cannons?" someone suggests.

The knowing colleague shakes his head. "This one I know for sure. I got it wrong at a spelling contest. I'll never forget it. The plural of cannon is cannon."

I didn't know that. And Iater I check. He's right. Of course, dictionaries will say the plural can be cannons but really, the plural of cannon is cannon. Wow, the things you learn at the dinner table.

Just now

Funny how simple English phrases can meaning totally different things to different people. Take the phrase just now. The definition is "a short time ago".

Example: I had lunch just now and bumped into an old classmate.

Seems straightforward enough. But when my family lived in Japan, my father had Japanese colleagues and I remember he related a hilarious incident concerning the phrase just now. He had asked someone if a task had been completed, and the man replied, "Yes, just now!"

Great, thought my dad. He went to inspect the work but found the task not done. "I thought you said it was done," he said to the man.

"Yes, just now!" came the reply and the man proceeded to start the task. My father was bewildered for a moment, and then realised that the other man had used just now to mean, "starting in a short time." I always laugh at this memory. It reminds me that English isn't straightforward and its shades of meanings can trip up even the best of us.