Was the "Jane Austen Book Club" Well-Reviewed or Reviewed Well?

Which is proper to say? "The movie was reviewed well? Or, The movie was well-reviewed."

The answer: It depends on your intentions. What do you mean to convey? A friend was puzzled because she thought the answer to be either/or. "

"reviewed well" as in: The Jane Austin Book Club was reviewed well tells us that the reviewer's work was accomplished according to a high standard, "satisfactory in accordance with conduct or action." Oxford English Dictionary. The reviewer may have liked, disliked, or remained neutral to the film, but the subsequent review, good, bad, or neutral was well-written, honest, deliberate. "Well" serves as a simple adverb modifying the verb "reviewed." How was the movie reviewed? Well, accomplished according to a high standard.

"well-reviewed" as in: "The Jane Austen Book Club was well-reviewed" conveys two possible thoughts: Many people reviewed the film, or a reviewer or several liked the movie and are encouraging you to go see it. Well-reviewed, well-received, well-thought, all serve as versions of well-done. All are past participles of the verb serving as adjectives. In the sentence above, "well-reviewed" is a predicate adjective being linked back to the movie, The Jane Austen Book Club. "What kind of Movie" was it? It was a well-reviewed movie. "Well" says it all, or does it. "Well" never means bad; however, is it possible that a controversial movie would cause many subsequent reviews, yes. And that may mean good or bad.

Redundancy Found, Even Among the Best of Us

Ward Chamberlain, a veteran of the Second World War of the last century, was being interviewed in Ken Burns' epic production surveying the great tragedy. Mr. Chamberlain was recounting the terrible Allied losses as they pushed back toward Rome Benito Mussolini's Italian army and the Germans.

"We lost an awful lot of casualties," he said. A "loss" or a soldier "lost" in this context means the same thing as a "casualty," which means "a person killed or injured."

Workable options include: "We suffered a lot of casualties," "We sustained a lot of casualties," "We lost an awful lot of men." A verb substitute would have worked in which the verb means something different from "casualty" but nevertheless works together with it as an unambiguous transitive verb transferring a notion logically consistent with its object. If you "lose a casualty," the redundancy results in an ambiguity, a "lost loss." Losing bodies probably had occurred, but this is not what Mr. Chamberlain had intended to convey.

The purpose here is not to distract from a dramatic moment or from a decent, educated man talking solemnly of a most tragic time in history, but to take the opportunity to point out that a missed point of grammar could result in unintended confusion.

More Pronoun Problems: This Time, Blame it on Gerunds

A young commentator on one of the many television shows currently surrounding the personal lives of entertainers was heard saying of a certain male performer and his social plans: "It's about him going to the party." She possibly intended to correctly say:

It's about his going to the party.

The sentence breaks down as: It (subject) is (verb) about (preposition) his going to the party (object of preposition).

Another way of expressing the sentence: His going to the party (subject) is (verb) [what "it" is about.]

"...going to the party" acts as a gerund phrase. A gerund, or gerund phrase has noun characteristics and therefore can be modified by an adjective. This explains the reason for using "his" not "him in the pronoun position. In this syntax, the function of the pronoun is as a possessive adjective not objective case pronoun used singularly as object of preposition. The whole gerund phrase with the possessive adjective functions as the object of the preposition.

Let's try to isolate the pronoun him used as object of preposition: It's about him going to the party. This expression does not work grammatically because it would force the use of "going to the party" as a verbal adjective modifying "him." Yet, what adjective question is it answering? Which him? What kind of him? How many of him? Doesn't make sense.

The intended expression must be: "It is about his going to the party. Will he attend the party, or not? The subject is clearly not about "him," the subject concerns "going to the party".

Testing your mettle: What if the commentator has been describing more than one celebrity? How should she have expressed the sentence? Those of you who responded: It's about their going to the party are correct.

Nebraska Cornhusker Must Beware of Errant Passes and Errant Sentences

Sam Keller, formerly a quarterback on Arizona State University's football team, and currently the starter with the University of Nebraska Cornhuskers football team, related the interesting story of his having faced the University of Southern California Trojans a few years back when Arizona State was ranked 14th in the nation. Although ahead of USC at halftime, Keller returned in the second half to mostly throw interceptions as his Sundevils lost to Matt Leinart and USC. Not long after, Keller lost his starting job and left Arizona State.

Keller will soon face the Trojans again, and once again his team is ranked 14th in the nation, except he will now start for Nebraska his transfer school. His performance may or may not be so fractured as his sentence in explaining the history described above, adding that were it not for the injury he suffered, history might have been different, so often proven true in other cases. Note: In Keller's sentence below, "That" refers to Keller's hypothetical, longer tenure as a successful quarterback with the Arizona State's football team:

"That could have happened if I didn't get hurt, or could have happened if I had beaten USC."

We may ague that Do and did may be substituted for action verbs (although why settle for less!). However, in this case, substituting do and its forms (did, don't, didn't) for action verbs is not the question. Keller's grammar infraction was that he violated the subjunctive mood. He used didn't, (a negative form of do in the past tense, which is otherwise fine, except not when the subjunctive mood is required. Keller used the indicative mood).

The rule is, you must not substitute a form of do for a form of be when expressing the subjunctive mood. When you see or hear an "if," you are often setting up a hypothetical situation, requiring a clause in the subjunctive mood and therefore a verb in the subjunctive mood. Keller was expressing not a fact but a conception; he was expressing a hypothetical event. He should have said: "That could have happened if I were not hurt. Other creative means of avoiding the mistake include: "That could have happened if I hadn't suffered an injury," or, clumsily, "That could have happened if I hadn't gotten injured," or, dramatically, "That could have happened if an injury hadn't struck me down."

"Impacted Global Market"? Stand Back Everyone!

Maria Bartiromo of CNBC was discussing the current pressure on credit markets, together with the collapse of housing prices and the possibility of "freeing up" capital if the Fed (Federal Reserve) were to lower interest rates. Bartiromo expanded the discussion to include other than domestic markets when putting a question to colleague Ron Insana:

"Ron, do you think we could see the global markets impacted"?

If Mr. Insana were to witness such a thing, he might prefer to stand back. Impact as a noun means: "collision, or the effect of such a force"; as a verb it means: "to press or wedge something firmly." (Oxford English Dictionary).

As a figure of speech, impact may carry the meaning: "the effective action of one person or thing upon another." (OED). Maria may be off the hook, if she were using the word figuratively, but let's see. She used the past participle form of impact, particularly as an adjective: impacted. Let's see what impacted means: "Pressed closely in, firmly fixed." A person might have an "impacted colon," ouch! or an "impacted tooth," ouch again! But even as a figure of speech, it would be difficult to imagine one market pressing in or wedging in another. In other words, by definition, we cannot suggest that America's credit crunch is an "action placed upon world markets."

Bartiromo possibly meant to say influenced. That is, America's credit crunch might influence world markets. If not "influenced," then other synonyms would work: sway, alter, bias, have an effect upon, or possibly even get away with: have an impact upon using "impact" as a noun, meaning "having a strong effect."

Articulate Athletes, More Adjective/Adverb Confusion

Lindsay Soto, a normally well-spoken sports journalist in Los Angeles, introduced an addition to her broadcasting team, Brandon Hancock, a brainy, former fullback on a University of Southern California football team that won a national championship. Soto introduced her new colleague as an academic All-American, graduating with a grade point average of 3.91. At that point Soto made her gaffe:

"He'll (Hancock) be able to articulate his thoughts perfect for us."

Soto meant to say perfectly. The word being modified is the verb articulate. "How will Hancock convey his thoughts?" Perfectly. The adverb is required.

However, because Hancock is so smart, he might be able to utter perfect thoughts. That would be demanding a lot, even of an academic All-American.

Lily Singer, Good Gardener, Good Grammarian

Lily Singer is known in California by many gardeners for her book: CARE AND MAINTENANCE OF THE CALIFORNIA GARDEN. Recently, while encouraging gardeners to envision a variety of end results in the look of a garden by choosing a variety of plants in order to achieve water conservation, she said to her television audience:

"You can do something different."

Singer correctly used the adjective, different, instead of the adverb, differently. Had she used differently, she would have been suggesting to the audience that some given garden task or ambition could be achieved in a variety of ways by taking different actions.

By using different, the adjective, instead of differently, the adverb, Singer suggested a variety of things that could be done, not a variety of actions that could be taken on any one thing. Brava, Lily! Cultivating good speaking as well as intelligent garden design.