A Word Please
June Casagrande

June Casagrande

A listener of a Seattle radio station wants to know why so many people say "nauseous" when she believes they should be saying "nauseated." A book-store patron in Portland wants to know whether "over" can be used for "more than." A radio host in San Francisco wants to know where people get the nerve to tell her she can't say "Me and Bob will be there" in casual conversation. And I want to know how I ended up playing expert on a subject in which I often have to look things up myself.

But the good news about my West Coast tour for my book "Mortal Syntax" is that many of the same questions keep coming up over and over again. So if we can spread the word about answers to people's most common grammar questions, we can go a long toward eradicating an epidemic I call grammar phobia. So here are some of the grammar questions and complaints that seem to crop up most along the West Coast.

- "Literally": Why does it seem as though it can be used to mean "figuratively," as in, "I was so surprised by her gift. I was literally blown away!" My answer: Some dictionaries allow "literally" to be used as an "intensive" -- a word just to

add oomph. But a lot of people, present company included, prefer that the word "literally" be used to literally mean "literally." So unless the gift was a powerful weather machine, opt for "I was totally blown away" instead.

- "Nauseous": There was a time, back in Strunk and White's day, when "nauseous" meant only something that makes someone sick. If you felt ill, you were supposed to say "nauseous." Unfortunately, Strunk and White wrote that as if it were law in the only wellknown style guide not subject to regular updates. Dictionaries have long since changed their collective tune on this one, making "I feel nauseous" perfectly acceptable. Yet Strunk and White devotees often don't know this.

- Starting a sentence with "and": A lot of people think this is a no-no. "Chicago Manual of Style," the final authority for most book editors, calls this a "groundless notion," and most other experts agree. Ditto that for "but" and "so." As a newspaper person, I was taught that economy of words is important. And "and" at the beginning of sentences can usually be trimmed without hurting the sentence. But while this use is sometimes fatty, it's perfectly grammatical.

- "Between you and I": For me, this one's a heartbreaker. That's because, deep down, every native English speaker knows that the preposition "between" should be followed by an object form, "between us," instead of a subject form, "between we." Yet so many of us are so insecure in our grammar knowledge that we second guess ourselves. We let that "you and" throw us and thus cash in the correct "between you and me" for the incorrect "between you and I." This is doubly troubling when it takes the form of "Thanks for visiting Tom and I." We wouldn't say "thanks for visiting I." Yet that "Tom and" scares us into getting it wrong. To avoid this mistake, just try plugging in other pronouns in their subject and object forms: "Tom and I went to the movies" because I, not me, went to the movies. But "You can come with Tom and me" because "You can come with me," not I.

"Over" for "more than": Most newspaper style books forbid this. But that doesn't mean it's wrong. Yes, saying "More than 1,000 people attended" can be more precise than saying "Over 1,000." But most of my reference books say "over" for "more than" and "under" for "less than" are perfectly acceptable, and most dictionaries agree.

-- June Casagrande is the author of "Mortal Syntax" and "Grammar Snobs Are Great Big Meanies." She can be reached at word@grammarsnobs.com.