Tag Archives: errors

Yours or your’s?  Here’s a clue. It’s never one of them.

Yours, theirs and its don’t take an apostrophe when they’re describing something that belongs to someone. Just like hers and his don’t.  So, it’s George’s book; the book is his. It’s your book; the book is yours. It’s their book; the book is theirs. It’s the book belonging to the club; it’s its book. No apostrophes.  The only apostrophe that comes along with yours, theirs, his, hers or its, is when it’s stands for “it is”.

So it’s never your’s – it’s always yours. If it belongs to you, it’s yours. Not your’s.  Not their’s.  Not it’s.

You’re means “you are”, like they’re means “they are” – your means “belonging to you”.

If the widget belongs to you, it’s your widget. No apostrophe.

“You’re improving your health, running regularly. Is that your sweatband? Are those trainers yours?”

Short but sweet. Now you won’t forget, will you?

More on apostrophes here.

You can find more troublesome pairs here and the index to them all so far is here.

I think I’ve seen “just bare with us” while we fix this site, reprint our menus, etc., etc., one too many times – but of course it is a troublesome pair, and not really one you’d want to mix up!  If the company or person asking you to bare with them knew that they were asking you to get naked alongside them, would they be so keen to say it?

As well as being a large, dangerous mammal in its noun form, to bear means to carry, to convey, to support (a weight) and, in the form in which we are encountering it here, to bear means to manage to tolerate (with the negative: “I can’t bear that colour!”) and to bear with someone or something means to be patient or tolerant with. “Please bear with us while we fix this website; in the meantime, here’s a picture of a puppy to look at.”

To bare means, in the language of the dictionary, to uncover a part of the body and expose it to view. We’re bare when we’re unclothed, we might bare our legs in the summer, and we can bare our teeth, which means to show one’s teeth, typically when one is angry. Like when one reads “please bare with us”.

Well, actually, we all know by now that I try to bear with people who make these mistakes, understanding that not everyone’s good at English, or can write well, or spell, or has English as their first language. I don’t ever mean to mock. And I certainly won’t start taking my clothes off next time I read “please bare with us”. Not unless the person behind the sign does it first, of course!

You can find more troublesome pairs here and the index to them all so far is here.

Another suggestion from Sorcha this morning – I really appreciate when people come up with ideas for these, so please keep them coming … (and watch out for Ron Usage and his Wrong Usage, coming soon with those troublesome single words!).

So today, we’re going to look at lose vs. loose. I do see this one a fair bit, although the two words are not really that similar or connected.

To lose something means to mislay it, to forget where you put it down, or to end up without it. “He tends to lose his gloves when they fall out of his pocket”; “I always lose the keys somewhere in the house and I can’t come out until I’ve found them”; “she would go on to lose her fiance in the First World War”.  The past tense of lose is lost. Something can’t be lose, it can only be lost.

To loose something (as a verb) means to set it free, but it isn’t often used. “She loosed the horses into the paddock”. More often, it’s used as an adjective: wobbly, not secure, not firm, not tight. A loose tooth; “This printer cable is working loose and that’s why you can’t print”; “She wore a loose and flowing dress”. The past tense of the verb loose is loosed, but again, this isn’t used much. The more common verb is to loosen – “He loosened his tie as the evening got hotter” and this means to make less tight, rather than to set free, although you can also loosen the horses into the paddock.

“His loose tooth fell out, and he managed to lose it somewhere around the house.”

You can find more troublesome pairs here and the index to them all so far is here.

Another troublesome pair suggested by Gill – the list she and her husband generated on their trip away is still going strong but I’ll get to the end one day!

So: regretfully or regrettably?  These two look quite similar, but as usual have quite different meanings.

Regretfully means in a regretful manner. Regretful? Full of regret. So you are full of regret: “She walked away regretfully, upset that she had left him sinking into the mud, but with no other choice” (sometimes I do wonder where I get my examples from. All are made up out of my head).

Regrettably means unfortunately. “The mud was regrettably sticky”.

Now … apparently regretfully gets used where regrettably should be used “Regretfully, this branch is now closed” and the dictionary says that “despite objections from traditionalists, this use is now well established” but I think we now know which one to use when, don’t we!

You can find more troublesome pairs here and the index to them all so far is here.

I thought of this one yesterday, as I was at my part-time job and we were discussing the disappointment involved when you get a new piece of office equipment and it doesn’t quite come up to expectations (I’ll miss that office … ).  Were we dissatisfied or unsatisfied? Well, in this case, probably both, but there is a difference!

To dissatisfy (yes, that’s a word!) is to fail to satisfy, and if you’re dissatisfied then you are not content or happy; you are experiencing a lack of satisfaction. “I was dissatisfied with England’s performance in the test match”.

The dictionary helpfully defines unsatisfied as not satisfied, but the definition for unsatisfactory does get across the sense of “not good enough”. So if there’s not enough of something, or it is lacking in itself, then you’re unsatisfied (if it’s perfectly good for purpose, but not liked by you, then I’d say that you’re dissatisfied). “The portion of cake was so small that she was left unsatisfied and wanting more”.

“I hate this printer. I don’t know if I’m dissatisfied because it isn’t what I expected from an office printer, or unsatisfied because it never finishes a print job.”

You can find more troublesome pairs here and the index to them all so far is here.

OK: confession time. I mixed these two up myself the other day, and used the wrong one.  I was so excited about thinking up examples for another troublesome pair that I didn’t stop and think. Well, nobody’s perfect! And my penance is to write this post.

Both slander and libel deal with telling lies about somebody. But it’s the medium used to spread these lies that makes the difference.

Slander is the crime, or action, of making a false spoken statement that is detrimental or damaging to a person’s reputation.

Libel is the publication in print of a false statement that is detrimental or damaging to a person’s reputation, or to defame by publishing a libel.

So if you say it, it’s slander: if you print it (or publish it in a form that counts as printing it, like on the internet), it’s libel.

Got that? I have!

You can find more troublesome pairs here and the index to them all so far is here.

This one is a request from Sorcha, and I do find I see this quite a lot, so it’s probably time to feature it. It’s one of those ones like their/they’re/there or its/it’s which people seem to know there’s something odd about, but then take a wild stab in the dark and go for the wrong one. It’s all because of the apostrophe, and that feeling that if something belongs to someone, it should have one, isn’t it. Anyway, there is a rule, and I’m going to explain it now. If you know someone who does this one on a regular basis, do point them towards this blog!

Who’s is a contraction for “who is” or “who has”. If you can use “who is/has” in a sentence, you can use “who’s”. “Who’s that girl?”; “Who’s sat on my hat?”; “Who’s going to volunteer to think up some more troublesome pairs?”; “he’s the one who’s always going on about knitting”.

Whose refers to something belonging to, or associated with, a person, or “of whom or which”: “The man whose hat it was became very angry”; “whose girl is that?”, “whose turn is it?” “The dog whose tail was wagging most was awarded the prize”.

So – who is = who’s. Who owns = whose.  “Who’s sat on that hat? The man whose hat it is will be really angry!”

You can find more troublesome pairs here and the index to them all so far is here.

Today we’re going to be a little bit cheeky, again, like we were when we were immoral … or was it amoral?  There’s been a lot of sad news this week and it’s nice to kick back and break the rules every now and again.  Oh, well, who am I kidding: it’s nearly midnight, I’ve worked a long day and then realised I didn’t have a Troublesome Pair to publish when one was due, so here I am, conforming to my own laws, let alone everyone else’s!  Without further ado, then: unlawful, illegal or illicit?

Something is illegal when it is actually against the law, for example selling drugs, going around killing people, that sort of thing. Sorry, I don’t mean to be flippant: like I said, it’s been a long day.  So illegal: against the law.

An unlawful action is also against the law … but it’s against the law – or, more properly, rules – within a specific context, rather than the actual laws of the land.  So if you’re watching Strictly Come Dancing, and the dancers perform a lift when the lady’s feet aren’t meant to leave the floor, that’s unlawful.  But not illegal.

An illicit action is more commonly used nowadays to describe something that is forbidden by custom or society – you can have an illicit love affair, or sneak an illicit cigarette when you say you’ve given up.

“Their illicit love affair turned illegal when she punished him for the unlawful act of not wearing white on the court at Wimbledon by libelling him in the papers.”

You can find more troublesome pairs here and the index to them all so far is here.

Here’s another one from Gill’s epic list, although I am over half way through this now, so please keep your suggestions coming! And I’m thinking of starting a new series of single words that often get used incorrectly, rather than being mixed up with another word.

These two, illegible and eligible, mean very different things, but their spellings and sounds are similar enough to cause confusion and mix-ups.

Illegible means not clear enough to be read – it usually seems to apply to handwriting, although it can be applied to anything that can be read. You do sometimes come across it being used to describe a particularly tortured or peculiar font. So “the doctor’s handwriting was illegible and no one knew what drugs to give me”; “Llama Font is really cute, but the results are pretty illegible”.

Something (or someone) is eligible if they fulfil or satisfy the appropriate conditions: “only those with an appropriate qualification are eligible to apply for this position”; “an eligible bachelor”.

Putting the two together: “The bachelor was eligible no longer to the neat handwriting obsessed bride, when his illegible handwriting was revealed”.

You can find more troublesome pairs here, and here’s the index to them all!