Grammar is a writer's worst enemy.

Who's is who is right? So this:

“Why don’t you write stories?”

“Because reading them is more fun than writing them, now who’s taking you to school today?”

is correct isn't it. Word says it should be whose, but that possessive isn't it?

Your version is correct. Word's grammar checker should not be relied upon, although it can be a good guide.
 
As Mirannan says, you were right and the grammar-checker was wrong, fishii.

How you can quickly check is to write it out in full. In your case it's "... now, who is taking you to school today?" which is correct -- all you've done with "who's" is drop the gap between the two words and the "i" and put in an " ' " to show the contraction.

If it was "Who's coat is that?" -- written out in full it would read "Who is coat is that?" which is plainly wrong, so in that case it would have to be "Whose".
 
The Judge - Never thought of that particular way of checking. (makes notes) :)
 
“Because reading them is more fun than writing them, now who’s taking you to school today?”

Of course, the sentence itself isn't grammatical. It's a fragment with an independent clause. The fun thing about grammar in writing fiction is all the ways in which you get to break the rules. The only rule you cannot break is that every rule broken must be done intentionally. A rule broken unintentionally is called a mistake. :)

 
If everybody looked at what’s the same instead of always looking at what’s different well then maybe just maybe the world would be a better place.

Should 'just maybe' be separated somehow? Something seems just a little off about the sentence to me.
 
You need to put commas where you pause.

If everybody looked at what’s the same instead of always looking at what’s different, well then maybe, just maybe, the world would be a better place.

That's what I'd do. (Except I'd drop the 'well').
 
I agree. Grammar can be a writer's worst enemy...but only while it's being learned.

Once a writer has mastered most of the basics and standard usages, grammar can become the writer's best friend. That knowledge gives a writer the ability to produce stories in a precise and powerful manner.

If the language is indecipherable, how can the author expect a reader to enjoy their story? Language needs to flow like music to the ear. If a piece of music is choppy and filled with unnatural notes and grating transitions that make a music-lover wince, there can be no pleasure in the experience. Likewise, when a reader has to stop and try to make sense of what is written, the author has lost the chance of making that person a devoted fan.

Make your writing smooth. Your readers will thank you.

The trick is to learn basic grammar, learn it well, and never stop learning.
 
Am I the only one who thinks that?

I have three characters and they were having a conversation.

“I have confidence in this girl.”

Glinda looked at Elphaba who had just finished her bacon. “Hunter, do you want to learn how to read and write?”

“If I do, can I help you with your homework?” Elphaba asked.

“Yeah. If you let me and Fiyero-“

“Fiyero and I,” Fiyero said, “If we are going to teach her, it might as well be with proper grammar.”

“Fiyero and I,” Glinda said, “If you let Fiyero and I teach you how to read and write and do math, the things you need to know to pass the tests to get into school. I’ll let you help me with my homework.”


But I am pretty sure 'Fiyero and I' wouldn't be correct in this situation. Am I wrong? I feel like I've had this conversation with every English teacher I've ever had and never really learned the answer well enough to remember it. I think this is going to end up like my AP English 3 teacher telling my class about 'neither is'.

You're absolutely right, fishii. The correct usage is "me".

Simply take the essence of the sentence and examine it. "If you let me and Fiyero teach you...", it's saying, "If you let 'me' teach you..."

You would never say -- "If you let 'I' teach you..."

So, problem solved. It simply involves breaking it down in the right way. Years ago, it took me a while to understand this issue. But it comes easily now.

I just wish all my troublesome writing issue were as far behind me as this one. The problem is, I'm still climbing that mountain of unresolved issues. But it I don't give up, I just might reach the peak someday.
 
“Because reading them is more fun than writing them, now who’s taking you to school today?”

Grammar checkers have limitations; however sometimes it doesn't hurt to analyze why it doesn't work on this sentence.

It can see the whole as a sentence; but has an issue with how-now who's taking you to school today?-fits the rest.
Without it it makes the first half a fragment yet it belongs in a separate sentence because the two thoughts seem quite distanced from each other.
But it's dialogue and sometimes we talk like that.
However.
Because reading them is more fun than writing them. Now who’s taking you to school today?
Seems to make a little more sense.
Fixing the fragment that makes-in word-is difficult, because the word because is a problem here. It needs to be separated but a comma or a semi-colon doesn't work for word and the only thing that does is a colon.

Because:reading them is more fun than writing them. Now who's taking you to school today?

I think that that pause created by the colon helps clarify what the sentence says.
In fact with that you can go back to the original.

Because:reading them is more fun than writing them, now who's taking you to school today?

This works now in word.

But I think the second half which is another sentence needs clarity.

Because:reading them is more fun than writing them, now, who's taking you to school today?

Unless you do mean that to be a rhetorical question of 'Now who's taking you to school today?

And as separate sentences they look like this.

Because:reading them is more fun than writing them. Now, who's taking you to school today?

So that little mistake of trying to replace whose for who's is tagging you asking you to take time to think about what you mean, in the sentence.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top