Just before I start World War III,
I'm coming back to say that, yes, I
was kidding! Mostly.
I mean, I use Lois's and prefer it, and have seen more sources saying that it's the only correct form than that either is acceptable.
However... yes, the Archive grammar guide indeed says that, Kathy. I know that without looking at it.
How? Because I wrote a chunk of that guide, including the Lois'/Lois's part. So, when I'm GEing or BRing, my practice is exactly as yours: if it's used consistently, I don't question it. After all, regardless of numbers on either side of the argument, it seems that a lot of people have been taught, and have sources to support their belief, that Lois' is equally acceptable.
Now, if we're talking
alright or
everyday in the sense of 'each day', or
alot or
definately... let me at 'em! <g>
And, while I'm here, I agree with Marilyn, Laura! You definitely have a talent for humour. But, you know, as far as those grammar terms are concerned - intransitive, non-restrictive clause and so on - I haven't a clue what they mean either. I was never taught English grammar at school. It
is possible to learn correct grammar without knowing the technical language to 'explain' it, Laura, so don't give up.
You're doing great anyway! Once you begin to learn what's correct, your grammar will improve and it won't matter a cent if you can't explain the difference between a transitive and an intransitive verb anyway.
I've always explained the difference between 'lie' and 'lay' on the basis that the first is something you do to yourself and the second you do to someone or something else - and get your minds out of the gutter! <g> You don't need to understand transitive/intransitive to remember that.
For those who were taught grammar and diagramming sentences and so on, the technical language does help, but for the rest of us it just excludes us, shuts us out of the conversation and makes us feel stupid.
You don't need to know lots of technical jargon to use a computer correctly, so why is the technical lingo essential to using correct grammar? IMO, it's not... and there are plenty of people around who can explain or demonstrate correct usage without resorting to the 'techie-speak' of grammar textbooks, including GEs. And including, we hope, the examples shown in the Archive grammar guide. This is
not to disparage those among us who are 'fluent' in 'grammar-speak'! - I envy you your knowledge. But when someone is blinded by jargon, as this website does have a tendency to indulge in, it doesn't teach them anything. And, much as I enjoyed the author's rant, I too started to feel my eyes blurring when she got too technical.
Wendy
(all for making correct grammar simple <g> )
