This is a word that is a pitfall to the most of us whether learned or unlearned. Probably it is the most indiscriminately used word in the language. From the different positions it is made to occupy in a sentence it can relatively change the meaning. For instance in the sentence--"I _only_ struck him that time," the meaning to be inferred is, that the only thing I did to him was to _strike_ him, not kick or otherwise abuse him. But if the _only_ is shifted, so as to make the sentence read-"I struck him _only_ that time" the meaning conveyed is, that only on that occasion and at no other time did I strike him. If another shift is made to-"I struck _only_ him that time," the meaning is again altered so that it signifies he was the only person I struck.

In speaking we can by emphasis impress our meaning on our hearers, but in writing we have nothing to depend upon but the position of the word in the sentence. The best rule in regard to _only_ is to place it _immediately before_ the word or phrase it modifies or limits.

ALONE

is another word which creates ambiguity and alters meaning. If we subst.i.tute it for only in the preceding example the meaning of the sentence will depend upon the arrangement. Thus "I _alone_ struck him at that time" signifies that I and no other struck him. When the sentence reads "I struck him _alone_ at that time" it must be interpreted that he was the only person that received a blow. Again if it is made to read "I struck him at that time _alone_" the sense conveyed is that that was the only occasion on which I struck him. The rule which governs the correct use of _only_ is also applicable to _alone_.

OTHER AND ANOTHER

These are words which often give to expressions a meaning far from that intended. Thus, "I have _nothing_ to do with that _other_ rascal across the street," certainly means that I am a rascal myself. "I sent the despatch to my friend, but another villain intercepted it," clearly signifies that my friend is a villain.

A good plan is to omit these words when they can be readily done without, as in the above examples, but when it is necessary to use them make your meaning clear. You can do this by making each sentence or phrase in which they occur independent of contextual aid.

AND WITH THE RELATIVE

Never use _and_ with the _relative_ in this manner: "That is the dog I meant _and which_ I know is of pure breed." This is an error quite common. The use of _and_ is permissible when there is a parallel relative in the preceding sentence or clause. Thus: "There is the dog which I meant and which I know is of pure breed" is quite correct.

LOOSE PARTICIPLES

A participle or participial phrase is naturally referred to the nearest nominative. If only one nominative is expressed it claims all the participles that are not by the construction of the sentence otherwise fixed. "John, working in the field all day and getting thirsty, drank from the running stream." Here the participles _working_ and _getting_ clearly refer to John. But in the sentence,--"Swept along by the mob I could not save him," the participle as it were is lying around loose and may be taken to refer to either the person speaking or to the person spoken about. It may mean that I was swept along by the mob or the individual whom I tried to save was swept along.

"Going into the store the roof fell" can be taken that it was the roof which was going into the store when it fell. Of course the meaning intended is that some person or persons were going into the store just as the roof fell.

In all sentence construction with participles there should be such clearness as to preclude all possibility of ambiguity. The participle should be so placed that there can be no doubt as to the noun to which it refers. Often it is advisable to supply such words as will make the meaning obvious.

BROKEN CONSTRUCTION

Sometimes the beginning of a sentence presents quite a different grammatical construction from its end. This arises from the fact probably, that the beginning is lost sight of before the end is reached.

This occurs frequently in long sentences. Thus: "Honesty, integrity and square-dealing will bring anybody much better through life than the absence of either." Here the construction is broken at _than_. The use of _either_, only used in referring to one of two, shows that the fact is forgotten that three qualities and not two are under consideration. Any one of the three meanings might be intended in the sentence, viz., absence of any one quality, absence of any two of the qualities or absence of the whole three qualities. Either denotes one or the other of two and should never be applied to any one of more than two. When we fall into the error of constructing such sentences as above, we should take them apart and reconstruct them in a different grammatical form.

Thus,--"Honesty, integrity and square-dealing will bring a man much better through life than a lack of these qualities which are almost essential to success."

DOUBLE NEGATIVE

It must be remembered that two negatives in the English language destroy each other and are equivalent to an affirmative. Thus "I _don't_ know _nothing_ about it" is intended to convey, that I am ignorant of the matter under consideration, but it defeats its own purpose, inasmuch as the use of nothing implies that I know something about it. The sentence should read--"I don't know anything about it."

Often we hear such expressions as "He was _not_ asked to give _no_ opinion," expressing the very opposite of what is intended. This sentence implies that he was asked to give his opinion. The double negative, therefore, should be carefully avoided, for it is insidious and is liable to slip in and the writer remain unconscious of its presence until the eye of the critic detects it.

FIRST PERSONAL p.r.o.nOUN

The use of the first personal p.r.o.noun should be avoided as much as possible in composition. Don't introduce it by way of apology and never use such expressions as "In my opinion," "As far as I can see," "It appears to me," "I believe," etc. In what you write, the whole composition is expressive of your views, since you are the author, therefore, there is no necessity for you to accentuate or emphasize yourself at certain portions of it.

Moreover, the big _I's_ savor of egotism! Steer clear of them as far as you can. The only place where the first person is permissible is in pa.s.sages where you are stating a view that is not generally held and which is likely to meet with opposition.

SEQUENCE OF TENSES

When two verbs depend on each other their tenses must have a definite relation to each other. "I shall have much pleasure in accepting your kind invitation" is wrong, unless you really mean that just now you decline though by-and-by you intend to accept; or unless you mean that you do accept now, though you have no pleasure in doing so, but look forward to be more pleased by-and-by. In fact the sequence of the compound tenses puzzle experienced writers. The best plan is to go back in thought to the time in question and use the tense you would _then_ naturally use. Now in the sentence "I should have liked to have gone to see the circus" the way to find out the proper sequence is to ask yourself the question--what is it I "should have liked" to do? and the plain answer is "to go to see the circus." I cannot answer--"To have gone to see the circus" for that would imply that at a certain moment I would have liked to be in the position of having gone to the circus. But I do not mean this; I mean that at the moment at which I am speaking I wish I had gone to see the circus. The verbal phrase _I should have liked_ carries me back to the time when there was a chance of seeing the circus and once back at the time, the going to the circus is a thing of the present. This whole explanation resolves itself into the simple question,--what should I have liked _at that time_, and the answer is "to go to see the circus," therefore this is the proper sequence, and the expression should be "I should have liked to go to see the circus."

If we wish to speak of something relating to a time _prior_ to that indicated in the past tense we must use the perfect tense of the infinitive; as, "He appeared to have seen better days." We should say "I expected to _meet him_," not "I expected _to have met him_." "We intended _to visit you_," not "_to have visited_ you." "I hoped they _would_ arrive," not "I hoped they _would have_ arrived." "I thought I should _catch_ the bird," not "I thought I should _have caught_ the bird." "I had intended _to go_ to the meeting," not "I had intended to _have gone_ to the meeting."

BETWEEN--AMONG

These prepositions are often carelessly interchanged. _Between_ has reference to two objects only, _among_ to more than two. "The money was equally divided between them" is right when there are only two, but if there are more than two it should be "the money was equally divided among them."

LESS--FEWER

_Less_ refers is quant.i.ty, _fewer_ to number. "No man has _less_ virtues"

should be "No man has _fewer_ virtues." "The farmer had some oats and a _fewer_ quant.i.ty of wheat" should be "the farmer had some oats and a _less_ quant.i.ty of wheat."

FURTHER--FARTHER

_Further_ is commonly used to denote quant.i.ty, _farther_ to denote distance. "I have walked _farther_ than you," "I need no _further_ supply" are correct.

EACH OTHER--ONE ANOTHER

_Each other_ refers to two, _one another_ to more than two. "Jones and Smith quarreled; they struck each other" is correct. "Jones, Smith and Brown quarreled; they struck one another" is also correct. Don't say, "The two boys teach one another" nor "The three girls love each other."

EACH, EVERY, EITHER, NEITHER

These words are continually misapplied. _Each_ can be applied to two or any higher number of objects to signify _every one_ of the number _independently_. Every requires _more than two_ to be spoken of and denotes all the _persons_ or _things_ taken _separately_. _Either_ denotes _one or the other of two_, and should not be used to include both. _Neither_ is the negative of either, denoting not the other, and not the one, and relating to _two persons_ or _things_ considered separately.

The following examples ill.u.s.trate the correct usage of these words:

_Each_ man of the crew received a reward.

_Every_ man in the regiment displayed bravery.

We can walk on _either_ side of the street.

_Neither_ of the two is to blame.

NEITHER-NOR

When two singular subjects are connected by _neither_, _nor_ use a singular verb; as, "_Neither_ John _nor_ James _was there_," not _were_ there.