Grammar Errors
Grammar Errors
While the majority of grammatical errors should be taken care of by the time the proofreader gets hold of a document, there are a few things that should still be on a proofreader's radar. And if a document still has a whole host of complicated errors, it needs to be sent back to the editor for another pass. After all, if a proofreader is forced to make a wide range of structural changes, the document will require another pass by another proofreader, which sort of defeats the purpose of the initial "proofread."
In this lesson, we'll briefly outline the types of grammatical errors you are most likely to see as a proofreader.
One of the easiest things to look for is faulty agreement between subjects and verbs and nouns and pronouns. These types of errors are often missed by editors who have been making extensive structural changes to paragraphs and sentences. It can be easy to overlook instances of faulty agreement, especially when they are relatively subtle. Look at the following example.
An examination of the contents were done in order to assess the accuracy of the experiment.
This error was most likely missed because of the word contents. Because the word contents is plural, the verb were, without close inspection, seems to make sense. However, the subject of the sentence is examination, not contents. Here is the corrected version of the sentence.
An examination of the contents was done in order to assess the accuracy of the experiment.
Many writers misuse pronouns that have collective nouns as their antecedents. Consider the word class. While multiple students do indeed constitute a class, the noun class, like other collective nouns, is treated as singular.
Incorrect: The class was unanimously distraught; they did poorly on the final.
Correct: The class was unanimously distraught; it did poorly on the final.
Words that don't follow traditional pluralization patterns, such as media, often cause similar problems.
Incorrect: The media often filters their content.
Correct: The media often filters its content.
Another common problem occurs with references to human beings that are gender neutral. Consider the word individual or the word person.
Incorrect: When an individual critically analyzes primary documents, they will begin to understand history more accurately.
Correct: When an individual critically analyzes primary documents, he or she will begin to understand history more accurately.
Incorrect: A person should never write an essay without a dictionary handy. They are more likely to develop a better vocabulary if they are diligent about looking up words they don't understand.
Correct: A person should never write an essay without a dictionary handy. He or she is more likely to develop a better vocabulary if he or she is diligent about looking up words he or she doesn't understand.
Take notice that in the example involving the word person, the misuse of the pronoun they also led to a misconjugated verb. The word person is singular, but the verb are is only used with plural nouns. Correcting it to say he or she requires the writer to use the singular verb, thus eliminating the problem.
Some writers still refer to nouns that have traditionally been considered feminine as she. Although it is not popular anymore in the West, you may find that writers from other parts of the world assign a feminine gender to neutral nouns like countries or ships. This should be corrected.
It should also be noted that, while we've indicated here that their is an incorrect stand-in for he or she, its use as a singular gender-neutral pronoun is becoming more accepted. For now, we'll stick with the traditional use of their as a plural pronoun. Just be aware that this usage exists and that some writers may intentionally make use of their as singular.
Whenever you come across phrases or clauses listed in succession, be on the lookout for faulty parallelism. Let's look at an example.
Last night, the sky was so clear I saw stars, a glimpse of Saturn, and a constellation.
This sentence is correct. First, focus on the verb that precedes the nouns stars, Saturn, and constellation—saw.
I saw stars, (I saw) a glimpse of Saturn, and (I saw) a constellation.
Everything is consistent here. It is clear that the verb saw refers to three noun phrases. Look at this next example:
She is witty, refined, and a scholar.
At first glance, nothing seems wrong with this sentence; however, upon closer examination, you should notice that witty and refined are both adjectives, and scholar is a complement that modifies (or tells us more about) the subject, she. Scholar is not an adjective. We might suggest revising the sentence like so:
She is witty, refined, and scholarly.
We've made the subject complement (scholar) into an adjective (scholarly). Now the constructions are parallel; they are all adjectives.
He told me not to speed and warned me that I should not park by fire hydrants.
In the above sentence, we have a negative infinitive phrase—not to speed— followed by a that clause. These are not parallel constructions. It would be easier (and less wordy) for us to make the that clause a negative infinitive phrase to match the first one.
He told me not to speed and warned me not to park by fire hydrants.
You should also be on the lookout for lists of verbs in different tenses. Look at this example.
On Friday, I need to go to the store, do my laundry, and I will meet with a friend for lunch.
The final item in the list needs to be changed to match the other items in the list. The verb will meet is in the future tense. It should be reworded to say ". . . and meet with a friend for lunch."
Always remind your clients in these scenarios that consistency is the key to good, clear writing.
Hopefully, you won't run into many fragments or run-ons at the proofreading stage. But nobody's perfect, and even editors miss things like this sometimes. First, let's have a look at sentence fragments.
Chances are the sentence fragments you see at this stage will be the result of additions made to the text, such as clarifying statements. Take a look at the following example.
There wasn't a lot that Fred could do at this stage in the development process. As most of the work had already been done.
The second "sentence" is actually a dependent clause. It depends upon the first sentence to give it meaning. The sentence should be written like this:
There wasn't a lot that Fred could do at this stage in the development process as most of the work had already been done.
We've combined the dependent clause with the first sentence (an independent clause) and created a complex sentence (a sentence with both a dependent clause and an independent clause). Related to this problem structurally (though not in terms of grammar) are participial fragments. Look at the following example.
Carlos and Wilhelmina eventually had a falling out. Arguing about whether they should build a new doghouse after the old one was destroyed in the fire.
Here the writer clearly wanted to clarify why the two had a falling out, but adding a participial phrase as a complete sentence isn't the way to solve this problem. Here's one way to fix this sentence.
Carlos and Wilhelmina eventually had a falling out after arguing about whether they should build a new doghouse after the old one was destroyed in the fire.
Or . . .
After arguing about whether they should build a new doghouse after the old one was destroyed in the fire, Carlos and Wilhelmina eventually had a falling out.
Unlike sentence fragments, which cannot stand on their own, run-on sentences (also called comma splices) are made up of too many independent clauses. They can either string multiple standalone sentences together or they may be instances where the writer or editor left out punctuation by mistake. Luckily there are three ways to fix this problem: with a comma, with a semicolon, or with a comma and a coordinating conjunction (e.g., and, but, or, etc.).
Consider the following example of a run-on sentence. Can you spot the comma splices?
Today, weather reports were calling for a "Snowpocalypse," instead, it's been raining and the river is rising, which isn't normal weather for February in Canada, usually, there is a lot of snow.
To fix this run-on sentence, a period or a semicolon can be used to separate the independent clauses:
Today, weather reports were calling for a "Snowpocalypse." Instead, it's been raining, and the river is rising, which isn't normal weather for February in Canada. Usually, there is a lot of snow.
Or a comma and coordinating conjunction:
Today, weather reports were calling for a "Snowpocalypse," but instead, it's been raining, and the river is rising, which isn't normal weather for February in Canada. Usually, there is a lot of snow.
Misplaced and dangling modifiers can have disastrous effects on a person's writing. Look at the following examples.
The scientists watch the bacteria multiply with a microscope.
Obviously, the bacteria were not using a microscope to multiply, but the sentence certainly makes it seem that way! Instead, try moving that modifier closer to the beginning of the sentence.
The scientists used a microscope to watch the bacteria multiply.
Let's look at another one.
The F1 driver for Lotus indicated that he would retire from racing after he lost the Grand Prix in Montreal.
The driver didn't plan on losing the race in Montreal (at least we hope he didn't). Let's see how that sentence would look without that modifier at the end.
After he lost the Grand Prix in Montreal, the F1 driver for Lotus indicated that he would retire from racing.
These are all misplaced modifiers. Dangling modifiers can be just as disorienting. Take a look at this example.
Born in the deserts of southern Idaho, it is easy to understand why people move to more temperate climates.
The glaring problem here is that there is no referent for the phrase in bold. Who was born in Idaho? And the main part of the sentence begins with "it is easy to understand," a rather awkward construction. Let's see if we can fix that.
Because I was born in the deserts of southern Idaho, it is easy for me to understand why people move to more temperate climates.
Grammar errors shouldn't necessarily be at the top of a proofreader's list. As we stated before, most grammar errors should be taken care of by the time the proofreader gets hold of a document. Nonetheless, proofreaders need to be able to identify these errors, if only to point them out to an editor or author for correction.
Last Updated: 09/09/2022