Search options (Page 19 of 47)

I was composing an email to someone yesterday… you’ll know who you are… when I wrote “… I’ve been wracking my brain for days…” when I screeched to a halt. That simply does not look right! So, I replaced “wracking” with “racking”. It still didn’t look right. OK. So… which is it???

                                                          Is It “Racking Your Brain” Or “Wracking Your Brain”?

There are some language guides, generally the ones that pay a lot of attention to the etymology of “rack” and “wrack”, that will still say it is “racking your brain” not “wracking your brain”, but these are becoming few and far between.  In fact, people have been confusing “rack” and “wrack” almost as long as the two words have existed. For instance, some of the earliest known uses of the expression “wrack and ruin” (circa 15th-16th century) were using the technically incorrect “rack and ruin”.  The first known instance of this was from Thomas Fowler’s History of Corpus Christi College (1599).

In order to see why it technically should be “rack your brain”, we have to look back at where these two words come from.  The word “rack” probably comes from the Middle Dutch “rec”, meaning “framework”, and is a cognate of  the Old English “recken”, meaning “to stretch out”.  This lent itself to the Middle English word for a frame that you put things on to dry or to stretch something out on (as with leather working).  Shortly thereafter, the word also came to mean a frame for putting people on to torture them.  This in turn gave rise to the even more expanded meaning of causing mental or physical harm or suffering.  Over this same span, several other distinct definitions of “rack” sprung up, including the most pertinent one for this discussion, “to stretch or strain”.

“Wrack” probably came from the Middle Dutch “wrak”, meaning “wreck”, which eventually gave rise to “wrack” as in “shipwreck” and “wrack” as in “damage, destroy”.  This soon extended to meaning any flotsam, jetsam, seaweed, etc. washed up on the beach, which in turn gave rise to the definition “state of disrepair or decay”, hence the expression “wrack and ruin”.  As with “rack”, several other definitions have popped up, often synonymous with “rack”.

You can see from this why linguists who put a lot of stock into the etymology of a word over current accepted definitions would say that “wrack your brain” would be incorrect as you aren’t meaning “to bring your brain into a state of decay or disrepair” or to “wreck your brain”.  You’re meaning to strain yourself mentally in order to remember something.  You can also see from these two etymologies why the first known instance of racking brains uses “rack” instead of “wrack”:

They rack their brains… they hazard their lives for it. ---William Beveridge’s Sermons (1680)

However, given that people have been writing this expression (and many others that use “wrack” and “rack”) both ways nearly as long as the expression has commonly existed, the bottom line is that you aren’t going to go afoul of many English language guides if you write “wracking your brain” instead of “racking your brain”. But if you really want to make sure you’re toeing the line (and avoid the wrath of internet Grammar Nazis), use “rack your brain” not “wrack your brain”, particularly if you are writing for British English readers.

On that note, as a general rule, quite often when you aren’t sure whether you should put “wrack” or “rack”, “rack” probably includes a definition for what you mean, while “wrack” doesn’t necessarily do so.  Thus, as the New York Times Manual of Style recommends, consider eliminating “wrack” from your writing vocabulary and just always use “rack” unless you’re using “wrack” to mean “wreck” or “to inflict damage”. In the former case, just use “wreck”.  In the latter case, use “wreak”.

I posted 2 chapters of Pruned Violets today, but only chapter 3 shows up on the new posting list. Not chapter 2. Anybody know why?

http://gcwriters.org/taylor_perry.html

When To Use “That” and When To Use “Which”

Here are two examples of the same sentence, one using “that” and the other using “which.”

·       “To our knowledge, it is the only body in the solar system which currently sustains life, although several other bodies are under investigation.”
·       “To our knowledge, it is the only body in the solar system that currently sustains life, although several other bodies are under investigation.”

Which is the correct sentence, and what is the general rule of thumb?

Before I give you the “that”/”which” rule, just a reminder that “who” should always be used when referring to people.
The boy who threw the ball.
This is the woman who always wears a black shawl.

When referring to objects, though, the rule for using “that” and “which” correctly is simple:
THAT should be used to introduce a restrictive clause.
WHICH should be used to introduce a non-restrictive or parenthetical clause.
If that leaves you more confused than when you began this article, read on…

A restrictive clause is one which is essential to the meaning of a sentence – if it’s removed, the meaning of the sentence will change. For example:
Chairs that don’t have cushions are uncomfortable to sit on.
Card games that involve betting money should not be played in school.
To our knowledge, it is the only body in the solar system that currently sustains life…

A non-restrictive clause can be left out without changing the meaning of a sentence. Non-restrictive clauses are either in brackets or have a comma before and after them (or only before them if they come at the end of a sentence):

Chairs, which are found in many places of work, are often uncomfortable to sit on.
I sat on an uncomfortable chair, which was in my office.

Why You Need to Use “That” or “Which” Correctly

Changing that to which or vice versa can completely change the meaning of a sentence. Consider the following examples:
My car that is blue goes very fast.
My car, which is blue, goes very fast.
The first sentence uses that – suggesting I own more than one car (and even implying my other cars might not be so fast). This is what happens if we leave out the clause and write:
My car that is blue goes very fast.
My car goes very fast.
The sentence’s meaning has changed: the reader does not know which one of my cars goes very fast.

However, the sentence using which simple informs the reader that my car is blue. We can take the clause out without losing any essential information:
My car, which is blue, goes very fast.
My car goes very fast.

“That” and “Which” in Common Usage

It is common today for which to be used with both non-restrictive and restrictive clauses, especially in informal contexts:
Who ate the cake that I bought this morning?
Who ate the cake which I bought this morning?
The clause “that I bought this morning” is essential to the meaning – I’m not asking about a cake which I bought yesterday, or this afternoon. Therefore, the first example using “that” is the correct one, but many people would not consider the second ungrammatical.

It is, however, incorrect even in informal contexts to use that for a non-restrictive or parenthical clause. For example, these sentences would be considered incorrect:
This computer, that I have never liked, is very slow.
The blue desk, that my father gave me.
An easy way to watch out for these is to look for instances where you have a comma followed by the word that. If I’d known this years ago, it would have saved me a lot of frustration with Microsoft Word!

Even though the usage of which has been relaxed to some extent, it is still better to keep your writing as clear as possible by using which for only non-restrictive clauses, and that for restrictive ones.

So, to return to the original example:
“To our knowledge, it is the only body in the solar system which currently sustains life, although several other bodies are under investigation.”
“To our knowledge, it is the only body in the solar system that currently sustains life, although several other bodies are under investigation.”
The second sentence, using that is correct, but many people would consider the first sentence permissible too. In a formal context such as a scientific paper, it is better to use that for total clarity.

http://gcwriters.org/mq_winning_entries.htm