By Segun Omolayo
The last statement in the last edition, which was supposed to correct an error earlier highlighted, happened, as published, to be a repetition of the defect selected for refinement. To avoid any doubt, we re-present both the defective sentence and the intended correction thus: “One wagers that it will be nigh impossible for Crystal Palace to win Chelsea in the FA final”/Correction: “ One wagers that it will be nigh impossible for Crystal Palace to beat Chelsea in the FA final.”
The message is that you beat an opponent and win a contest; you do not win an opponent. We sincerely regret any confusion our careless proofreading and editing might have caused our esteemed readers. But there is a lesson in this: The editor himself will always need an editor.
This is one admonition writers must be mindful of, just like many other things usually taken for granted which we feel compelled to continue highlighting to urge correct usage, a key hallmark of good writing.
Words not pluralized
Usually, when many a writer needs the plural form of a word, he simply adds an s, with no recourse to the rules of correct usage. This is why you would continue to see sentences like this:
Mrs. Grace informed the section chief that the trainings were intended to empower rural women.
The error here is the word trainings, as this is alien to the English language. This error assumes a worrisome significance when you note that even training experts, organizers and professionals commonly commit it. The “Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary” (as cited in “Pop” Errors) “enters training as an uncountable noun; it should, therefore, not be pluralized.” Our writers’ companion suggests that: “However, you could indicate a plurality of training in other ways, for example, you could talk of training programmes and training courses.” So, we could express the same message as follows:
Mrs. Grace informed the section chief that the series of training was intended to empower rural women (The phrase the series of training indicates that the exercise took place several times.)
OR
Mrs. Grace informed the section chief that the training programmes were intended to empower rural women.
Following is a bungled usage of another word that is not normally pluralized:
He visited the camp and reported that works were progressing.
Assessing this statement, “Pop Errors posits that: “The noun work is not normally pluralized, except in strict officialese or when used to refer to writings and other creative works, for example, the works of Wole Soyinka (Nobel Laureate in Literature) or Shakespeare (famous English writer), and the works of Pablo Picasso (legendary artist) or Fela Anikulapo-Kuti (Nigerian music icon). And, in official circles, it is usual to see public works or road works. Work is also an uncountable noun entry in the dictionary.” The book then provides a correction, thus:
“He visited the camp and reported that work was progressing.”
But we should also note some special uses of the word works, albeit not in the sense of the usage in the defective sentence in consideration. Such other senses include: the works, meaning “everything that you might want or expect to find in a particular situation;” works, as in reference to “an industrial building, especially one where a lot of people are employed, such as a steel or car works; and works used to refer to “the parts of a machine, especially those that move” (CALD). Kindly note that not one of these stands as the plural of the singular noun work.
We will take one more specimen of the misuse of the word work. It goes thus:
The post-modern state is a work in progress that reflects the task of constructing a new international human order based on universal moral truths . . . .
This is from a book this columnist edited for publication in the US. But if you read the shakers and movers of society often, you would be very familiar with the misusage in the last specimen on work. Because work is uncountable and therefore not normally pluralized, as emphasized above, it is incorrect to write a work in progress. So, let us correct this elite fluff once and for all – this way:
The post-modern state is work in progress that reflects the task of constructing a new international human order based on universal moral truths . . . .
Worse/Worst
You must wonder why and how any one should run into difficulties handling the simple matter of comparisons and superlatives. Wait until you encounter the statement below:
The roads are in a worst state than what existed during the colonial days.
“Simple comparison of adjec6ives is the matter in this example. Of the three degrees of comparison (positive, comparative and superlative), the degree required here is the comparative degree. Applied to bad, the adjective involved here, its three degrees are: bad, worse, worst. So, to compare the condition of roads in two eras, the applicable degree is worse, not worst. Quite often, you read expressions like “things have gone from bad to worst.” That is jumping over the second degree of comparison as done in the statement being considered. Correct usage in the instance is thus:
“The roads are in a worse state than what existed during the colonial days” (“Pop” Errors).
Importantly, “Pop” Errors, citing Murphy and the OALD, enjoins us to note that than is used with the comparative degree only “to introduce the second part of a comparison.”