Notes on Writing: What's the at for?

Chuck Schultz

During a recent test writing session, a subject matter expert challenged my ending a sentence with a preposition. I told her that her school teacher had been mistaken about that practice and that there was no Santa Claus either.

Many rules about grammar and spelling expounded in elementary school are inaccurate. They are general pronouncements about specific situations. Sentences ending prepositions have their place. What would you with the prepositions in each of the following cases?

Where do the rules come in?
We counted the jars of peaches Aunt Martha had put up.
Let's see which rule this falls under.
It happened to me before.
So they went without
I will tell you what it is about.
Tell me where it's at.

Oops! That last example is the bad one, which gave rise to the rule. The spurious rule Never end a sentence with a preposition would be better stated Avoid prepositions that do not add to the meaning. In the first two sentences the preposition completes the verb and belongs. Sentence three could be reworded, "Let's see under which rule this falls," but that makes for a more awkward statement. Sentences four and five are elliptical clauses, that is, part of the thought is understood and unstated. In sentence six, leaving out the final preposition changes the meaning. However, "I will tell you what it concerns" is a more elegant statement. "Tell me where it is" suits me better than example seven. The first five examples I find completely acceptable demonstrations that the rule errs.

The prepositions at the end of the sentence often completes the verb. This is explicitly true in one of the closely related Indo-European languages. German verbs often contain what to us is a preposition. In these cases, the verb comes apart and the preposition-like part goes to the end of the phrase. Examples of the myriad cases in which the corresponding English phrase suitably ends with a preposition follow:

abkühlen - to cool off

andrehen - to turn on

aufsetzen - to sit up

ausfallen - to fall out

eingehen - to go in

umlegen - to lay down

Never split an infinitive is another example of and over-generalized rule. Quite often, the decision to incautiously split an infinitive weakens a sentence, as the split in this sentence demonstrates. An incautious decision to split an infinitive surely wakens the sentence. I want you to carefully consider whether a given infinitive should be split. You may want to forcefully state your position or you may want to state your position forcefully. The emphasis changes from the action to the result.

In general, I recommend: When in doubt follow a dumb rule unless disregarding it seems to make more sense. Of course, it is difficult to tell when we use language ineffectively because we use it the way that sounds right to us. When it is important that your message be clear, my advice is: When in doubt refer to a usage handbook or ask an effective writer.

My favorite spelling rule asserts: "i" goes before "e" except when it doesn't. It keeps me out of trouble when I want to spell yield, weird, foreign, or ancient.

Chuck Schultz may be reached at (360) 923-5340, 2941 B Firwood Loop SE, Olympia, WA 98501-4844.