![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.attorneyatwork.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/Grammar-Snob-Cartoon.png\" "\\"\\"")
\n
Hopefully, the Jury Understood the Expert.<\/h2>\n
Grammar puritans will caution that the jury isn\u2019t hoping anything at all. It is the person who put together this sentence who is doing the hoping. Therefore, they argue, sentences should never start this way.<\/p>\n
\u201cHopefully\u201d is an adverb. As kids, we learned that adverbs modify verbs, adjectives or other adverbs. But sometimes adverbs modify an entire sentence. When this happens, the word is called a sentence adverb. Common examples of sentence adverbs are: actually, unfortunately and presumably. Even grammar snobs have been known to use sentence adverbs this way.<\/p>\n
The Testator Gifted the House to the Maid.<\/h2>\n
Language changes with use in many ways, including nouns becoming verbs. The best example might be \u201cgoogle.\u201d There are a number of terms for this process, the most technical being denominalization. It could also be called conversion or verbing.<\/p>\n
Modern dictionaries recognize \u201cgift\u201d as a transitive verb, meaning it takes an object such as \u201cthe house.\u201d We have long used the passive verb form to say someone with exceptional talent is gifted.<\/p>\n
Certainly, \u201cgive\u201d continues to work perfectly well. But it\u2019s fine to use \u201cgift\u201d as a verb.<\/p>\n
The Collision Decimated the Plaintiff\u2019s Vehicle.<\/h2>\n
Dyed-in-the-wool grammarians wince when they hear or see this verb used as a synonym for \u201ccompletely destroy.\u201d They know the history. \u201cDecimate\u201d originally referred to the Roman military punishment<\/a> of killing 1 in 10 people for a communal infraction. Just as the prefix \u201cdeci\u201d refers to 10, to refer to total annihilation as decimation when it can only refer to the destruction of one-tenth just seems wrong.<\/p>\n And yet \u201cdecimate\u201d appeared as early as the 1660s to refer to destruction of a large part, unrelated to the one-tenth fraction. No less an authority than Bryan Garner, author of Black\u2019s Law Dictionary, has decreed that using \u201cdecimate\u201d to mean inflicting large-scale destruction is now universally accepted. He also notes that the only ones not accepting the transformation are pseudo-snoot eccentrics.<\/a><\/p>\n Conjunctions connect words, phrases and clauses. Clauses, which have a subject and verb, could be sentences on their own, but an advocate might want to show a connection by joining them with one of the coordinating conjunctions: for, and, nor, but, or, yet, so. Too many such jointures produce a run-on sentence \u2014 and bores the message recipient.<\/p>\n Yet there is nothing wrong with using one of those conjunctions to start a new sentence. F. Scott Fitzgerald did it in \u201cThe Great Gatsby\u201d: \u201cAnd so we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.\u201d Hans Christian Andersen did it in \u201cThe Emperor\u2019s New Clothes\u201d: \u201cBut the Emperor has nothing on at all!\u201d<\/p>\n English teachers traditionally forbade using a conjunction at the beginning of a sentence to prevent the creation of those run-on sentences. But your eloquent prosody may rely on that sentence structure. Go ahead.<\/p>\n Yes, the suspect is<\/strong> missing. But it\u2019s OK to use this form of the verb \u201cto go.\u201d<\/p>\n We use other versions of this construction, such as \u201cthe horse went astray.\u201d Examples of the past tense of \u201cgo\u201d to refer to passing into a certain condition are not unusual: The killer went mad. \u00a0<\/p>\n Missing is also a state or condition. So, yes, a person or thing can go missing.<\/p>\n These usages are actually OK, but that doesn\u2019t mean you have to adopt them. Hearing or reading these words can hurt a grammar snob\u2019s brain. \u00a0<\/p>\n Let\u2019s draw the line between your inner thoughts and spoken condescension. When you witness one of these usages, grind your teeth and, unless you are signing off on an offending document, keep your corrections to yourself.<\/p>\n Though the phrases may be accepted now, grammar snobs may still disdain them. How many judges are closet grammar snobs? No one knows, but certainly they\u2019re here on YouTube<\/a>. Why take a chance with a usage that could distract from getting across your point?<\/p>\nAnd There\u2019s Another Thing.<\/h2>\n
The Suspect Went Missing.<\/h2>\n
Grammar Snobs Are Everywhere<\/h2>\n
\n
![\"Order](\"https:\/\/www.attorneyatwork.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/Get-to-the-Point-Order-of-Adjectives.jpg\" "\\"\\"")