﻿<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <copyright>Macmillan Holdings, LLC. Grammar Girl, Grammar Girl's, QDnow, and Quick and Dirty Tips are all trademarks of Macmillan Holdings, LLC.</copyright>
    <description>Prepositions can be confusing.</description>
    <item>
      <author>betty</author>
      <category>grammar</category>
      <description>My question is still not answered!  I agree the word "of" is overused, but my question is, "Do you use of when stating a month and a year only"?  I have a doctor who always dictates, "The patient was last seen in January of 2009."  Something in the back of my head says this is incorrect, but it has been many, many years since I went to school.  I am looking for an answer to this specific question.

Thanks for any help.</description>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/when-to-use-of.aspx?commentid=17540#Comments</guid>
      <link>http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/when-to-use-of.aspx?commentid=17540#Comments</link>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2009 10:12:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>betty</title>
    </item>
    <item>
      <author>Rob</author>
      <category>grammar</category>
      <description>I have a question - one I have been beating my brain over.  Is the proper usage "made of or constructed of", or is it "made from or contstructed from"?  I've thought it "of" but cannot find anything that clearly say this is correct.  Help!</description>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/when-to-use-of.aspx?commentid=15518#Comments</guid>
      <link>http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/when-to-use-of.aspx?commentid=15518#Comments</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2009 17:54:30 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Rob</title>
    </item>
    <item>
      <author>Isabella</author>
      <category>grammar</category>
      <description>Thank you, John from Lorain. And how do you know Seoul? Seoul is Korea's capital. I am very surprised that you know Seoul. I've heard many of other country's people doesn't know Korea.</description>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/when-to-use-of.aspx?commentid=15514#Comments</guid>
      <link>http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/when-to-use-of.aspx?commentid=15514#Comments</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2009 10:53:52 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Isabella</title>
    </item>
    <item>
      <author>Zeeshan Parvez</author>
      <category>grammar</category>
      <description>Actually, the phrase I mentioned in my previous comment, which reads ""the length of the string which remains can be used to calculate the distance a snail has traveled" may not work because it causes confusion as to whether the verb "remains" refers to the "length" or the "string." I think using two sentences instead of one would work best as I have shown below:

"When a snail travels, it leaves behind a string. A person can use the length of the string to calculate the distance the snail has traveled."

If one tries to combine the idea these two stentences contain into one sentence, he/she will produce a sentence which will confuse the reader and/or sound awkward. 

Thanks.</description>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/when-to-use-of.aspx?commentid=15512#Comments</guid>
      <link>http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/when-to-use-of.aspx?commentid=15512#Comments</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2009 02:56:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Zeeshan Parvez</title>
    </item>
    <item>
      <author>Zeeshan Parvez</author>
      <category>grammar</category>
      <description>Nice article. I, however, disagree with the example of "remaining string length." Perhaphs, a better way to reword that phrase would be "the length of the string which remains can be used to calculate the distance a snail has traveled."

Just my two cents.</description>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/when-to-use-of.aspx?commentid=15511#Comments</guid>
      <link>http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/when-to-use-of.aspx?commentid=15511#Comments</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2009 02:44:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Zeeshan Parvez</title>
    </item>
    <item>
      <author>NeilP</author>
      <category>grammar</category>
      <description>The bad use of 'of' that Grammar Girl merely touches on but is a cardinal sin as far as I am concerned is when it follows 'off', as in her example 'I jumped off the pier'.  So many people say 'off of', but as far as I am concerned this isn't just unnecessary, it is wrong.  To my horror there's a song on the latest Jackson Browne album called Off Of Wonderland.  He's one of my heroes but I'll never be able to like this song because of the awful grammar!!! Sorry Jackson!</description>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/when-to-use-of.aspx?commentid=15494#Comments</guid>
      <link>http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/when-to-use-of.aspx?commentid=15494#Comments</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 26 Jan 2009 12:45:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>NeilP</title>
    </item>
    <item>
      <author>Diane</author>
      <category>grammar</category>
      <description>Maybe the length of string wasn't a great example, but I definitely know what Grammar Girl is getting at here. I used to be an "of" abuser, but I've learned to check myself. I can actually catch myself in the act and rewriter on the fly. Letting go of my "of's" has made my writing more clear and direct. Thanks!</description>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/when-to-use-of.aspx?commentid=15453#Comments</guid>
      <link>http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/when-to-use-of.aspx?commentid=15453#Comments</link>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2009 22:18:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Diane</title>
    </item>
    <item>
      <author>Shawn</author>
      <category>grammar</category>
      <description>I dunno. "The remaining string length" sounds really awkward to me...</description>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/when-to-use-of.aspx?commentid=15441#Comments</guid>
      <link>http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/when-to-use-of.aspx?commentid=15441#Comments</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Jan 2009 21:34:37 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Shawn</title>
    </item>
    <item>
      <author>arensb</author>
      <category>grammar</category>
      <description>I find it easier to follow something like "He's the cousin of my neighbor's brother" than "He's my neighbor's brother's cousin."

I understand there's research supporting this. Specifically, sentences that require a stack to parse them are harder to understand than those that don't.

In the second sentence, your mind has to scribble "he's related to someone" on a note, and put that aside for later. Then it has to scribble "the neighbor has a brother who's related somehow" and put that on top of the first note (this is the stack) and then return to the previous notes once the relationships have been sussed out. The problem is that storing things away for later (the notes) means putting things in memory, which takes effort and time.

In the first sentence, there are more fragments that can simply be added to whichever note your mind happens to have in front of it at the time. This involves a lot less shuffling things around in short-term memory, so it's an easier task.</description>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/when-to-use-of.aspx?commentid=15437#Comments</guid>
      <link>http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/when-to-use-of.aspx?commentid=15437#Comments</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Jan 2009 20:13:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>arensb</title>
    </item>
    <item>
      <author>John from Lorain</author>
      <category>grammar</category>
      <description>I meant to add my belief that "wait in line" is correct, while "wait on line" is not.  I say this because "in line" is short for "in (the midst of a) line (of people)."  Saying "on line" makes no sense, because no one is "on" a line.  My bringing up the idea of "waiting" (in line) just made me remember another misuse of words.  Most speakers of American English correctly say, "I will wait FOR you outside."  A persistent minority,  however, make the mistake of saying, "I will wait ON you outside."  The proper phrase for this kind of waiting is "to wait FOR."  The phrase, "to wait ON," is reserved for descriptions of service, such as these words of a maitre d':  "Good evening, sir.  Williams will be waiting on you today."</description>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/when-to-use-of.aspx?commentid=15433#Comments</guid>
      <link>http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/when-to-use-of.aspx?commentid=15433#Comments</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Jan 2009 15:08:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>John from Lorain</title>
    </item>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2009 10:12:27 GMT</lastBuildDate>
    <link>http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/when-to-use-of.aspx</link>
    <managingEditor>feedback@quickanddirtytips.com (Managing Editor)</managingEditor>
    <title>Do You Overuse "Of"?</title>
    <webMaster>feedback@quickanddirtytips.com (Webmaster)</webMaster>
    <language>en-us</language>
  </channel>
</rss>