All of a Sudden She's Right by Rob Kyff on Creators.com

Recently

Blasted by a 'Trope'-ical Storm Q: I've been hearing a word more and more frequently, mostly during movie or book reviews on NPR — "trope." My dictionary defines "trope" as the figurative use of a word or expression, a figure of speech. But the meaning …Read more. 'Overstate' Creates State of Confusion Have you noticed that pundits and politicians sometimes use "understate" when they mean "overstate"? Derel Schrock of Colorado Springs, Colo., sent me this example from comments by Congressman Allen West on Fox News: "I can'…Read more. Plurality Presents a 'Pair'adox Q: What is the plural of "pair"? I always thought it was "two pairs," but I often see "two pair of socks." —Geri Chmil via email A: If you've seen two pair of socks, you're doing better than I am. I have enough …Read more. Mastering the Peri'god'ic Table In ancient Rome, Mercury (the messenger of the gods) was constantly zipping around from deity to deity. So when the Romans needed a word for the poisonous metallic element that flowed quickly at room temperature, they named it "Mercury" …Read more.

All of a Sudden She's Right

Q: I thought it was "all of a sudden," not "all of the sudden." Am I right? —Margery Mosher, Putnam, Conn.

A: Indeed you are. Though people often say "all of the sudden" or "all the sudden," usage authorities agree that "all of a sudden" is the correct phrase. In "Modern American Usage," for instance, Bryan Garner categorizes "all of the sudden" as "unacceptable in standard usage."

So "all of a sudden" takes its place among set phrases such as "all of a kind" or "all of a piece."

Wait a minute. "Kind" and "piece" are nouns, but "sudden" is an adjective. Was "sudden" once a noun?

Indeed it was. The noun "sudden," now obsolete, once meant "an unexpected occurrence, an emergency, a suddenness." Proper Victorians would say, "Her tranquil tea party was interrupted by the most startling sudden."

The noun form of "sudden" still survives in "all of a sudden" and the much less common phrase "on a sudden." Both expressions are linguistic fossils, remnants of the long-dead noun "sudden."

Q: Is it wrong to say, "I'm scared" instead of "I'm afraid," as in, "I'm scared to go outside in the dark," instead of "I'm afraid to go outside in the dark"? —An Avid Reader in Bordentown, N.J.

A: When it comes to correct usage, avid readers of my column are never in the dark!

No one objects to using the past participle "scared" when it's followed by "to" and an infinitive, ("I'm scared to go outside"), or when it's followed by the prepositions "by" or "about" ("I'm scared by lightning/I'm scared about rising prices").

But some commentators do frown on the use of "scared" followed by the preposition "of" ("I'm scared of lightning"). They suggest using "afraid of" instead.

Their hesitation about "scared of" may have arisen because "scared" is a past participle, implying that someone or something has "scared" the person.

Boo! "Afraid," on the other hand, is a straightforward adjective, implying no action by an outside agent.

"Scared of" may have been further tainted by the non-standard usage "ascared," a combination of "afraid" and "scared" commonly heard in the Southern and Midland U.S.

Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of English Usage, while acknowledging that "scared of" occurs more often in speech and casual prose than in formal writing, declares that "scared of" is standard English.

So unless you're writing a fancy proclamation or legal document, don't be scared of using "scared of."

Rob Kyff, a teacher and writer in West Hartford, Conn., invites your language sightings. Send your reports of misuse and abuse, as well as examples of good writing, via email to Wordguy@aol.com or by regular mail to Rob Kyff, Creators Syndicate, 737 3rd Street, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254