The Grammar Troll

Unless you have the senses of Tommy, the Pinball Wizard, you have likely noticed that I’ve been writing a lot more lately.  There have been many grammatical trials and tribulations that I have faced along the way.  Naturally, I intend to pass that migraine-inducing wisdom along to you, my faithful reader.

1.    How to determine which is appropriate in the battle of “was” vs. “were”.

The rule to determine which is appropriate is based on something called the “subjunctive mood”, which sounds like it should be added to the list of curable symptoms in the jingle for Pepto Bismol.  “Subjunctive mood” is a “verb mood” used in order to express a wish, emotion, possibility, judgment, opinion, necessity, or action that has not yet occurred.  So, now that you know your verbs are bi-polar freaks and refuse to take their lithium, here’s what you need to know:

“Was” should be used when talking about an event that had actually occurred to a singular object:  

ex: I was a big fan of Tomagatchi in the late 1990’s.

“Were” should be used when talking about an event that actually occurred to a plural group of objects: 

ex: We were going to the movies, but would rather kill ourselves than see Gnomeo and Juliet.

 “Were” should also be used based on the likelihood of an events occurrence.  Therefore, the following usage would be correct:   

ex: If I were to go fly to the moon, I would make sure that it wasn’t while my wife was having her skull sewn back together. 

2.  “I am laying on the couch.”  No, wait.  “I am lying on the couch.”  Nevermind.  “I’m taking a fucking nap.”

In researching this insanity, I learned that “lay” is appropriate when referring to the action of a direct object while “lie” is appropriate when referring to the action of an indirect object.  Obviously, this would make a lot more sense if I knew the difference between a direct and indirect object.   Here’s what I learned: to over-simplify, if the subject of your sentence has genitals, like people or pets, you’re talking about a direct object.  If the subject of your sentence does not have genitals, like a lamp (unless you have some seriously perverted lamps), then you are talking about an indirect object.

With that being somewhat understood, it applies to the rule thusly: direct objects “lie” while indirect objects “lay”, but only in the present tense and when referring to a singular object.  Seriously?  Okay, let me try to think of examples for this. 

ex: I am going to lie down on the sofa so I can eat Cheetos and self-loathe.

OR 

ex:  Look at that sexy lamp just lay there while it is being sodomized by the cat.

To complicate matters, the past tense of “lie” is “lay”.  So, if I’m talking about my self-loatihing from yesterday (and trust me, there was plenty of it), the example would be as follows: 

ex: Yesterday, Jeremy lay on the sofa while he cried into a pile of french fries.

Also, the past participle of “lie” is “lain” and the past participle of  “lay” is… “laid”.  

ex:  Jeremy has lain down on the train tracks, because he’s tired of trying to explain this.  

AND 

ex:  Dolly Levi has laid half of Yonkers.

I guess the rules of grammar also determine that when you die, your corpse magically transitions from a direct object to an indirect object so your loved ones can “lay you down to rest”.

I hate to admit it, but the Grammar Troll totally wins this round.  It’s almost impossible to remember the difference between these; even Maya Angelou would have to look this shit up.  It's enough to make your eyes bleed, so my honest suggestion is to just pick one at random and say it.  Chances are, no one in America is going to know the difference.  And it’s a known rule that if they call your bluff, you earn the right to slap them viciously with a white glove, thus challenging them to a duel.  And after you’ve slaughtered them, feel to peel an orange on their grave as they lay in the ground.

3.  “Go towards the light, Carol Anne.” vs. “Go toward the light, Carol Anne.” 

Good news here; either example is correct and neither one of them sounds weird when you say it.  Suck on that, Grammar Troll!  Yet another victory for Zelda Rubinstein, now operating from the great beyond.   

4.  Grammar, like AC Slater, is a sexist pig. 

The rules of “pronoun agreement”, like that of the clientele of a gay leather bar, prefer the masculine form.  If you do not know the sex of the subject to which you refer, “he” and “his” are  more correct than “it”, “they” or “their”.

ex: Omigod.  Did you see that disfigured baby?  He had a leg growing out of his neck!

NOT

ex:  What a beautiful baby!  Do you think its mother gives it botox? 

Also, to further infuriate college-aged women of the 1970’s, it is incorrect to use “she” or “her” unless you are entirely sure that the group to which you refer is comprised solely of females.  This could be expressly problematic should you be discussing the clientele of any lesbian bar.

-----

There are a ton of these stupid rules that I have to research every time my cursor moves.  I would be happy if all of them would go climb a stick and shout “fire”, but I’ll continue to do the homework and post them as they slowly burrow a hole in my brain.