An angrily written hall pass (see image) is spreading across the internet. Parents say they would be appalled to learn that their children had such a mean teacher, and wouldn’t want them in her classroom. I wouldn’t want any kids of mine in her class either—but that sentiment wouldn’t just be due to her meanness; her grammar is equally alarming.
I’m a linguist. This means that (contrary to the expectations of many who are unaware of what linguistics is) I’m a descriptivist rather than a prescriptivist. I don’t want to hear how you hate when people use “was like” to mean “said”, that “irregardless” is the end of the world, or that there’s one logically correct camp to be in regarding the Oxford comma. That said, I do have a lot of experience teaching writing and I do know my stuff when it comes to grammar. I care more about clarity and succinctness than anything else, but I can play the role of a full-blown grammar nazi if need be. And (yep, I started a sentence with and) if anyone deserves to have her writing checked in petty grammar nazi style, it is this teacher. After all, she proudly self-identifies as petty…
(It’s not even entirely petty of me, because I truly am appalled to learn that a teacher is setting such an awful example for her middle school students, and cannot resist speaking up in the name of good writing. The hall pass looks like it was written hastily on facebook or twitter—by a middle schooler. The only good thing I can say about it is that I was able to use it as the basis of a mini-lesson in my grammar course last week.)
There are so many things going on here that I will separate them into categories, starting with the biggest problems and ending with things that are potentially just matters of style. Here we go!
Grammar Errors
Tense-aspect: In standard/academic English, the present perfect form of to go would be have gone (auxiliary have + the past participle form of the verb), yet she writes have went (auxiliary have + the past simple form of the verb).
Capitalization: The first letters of random nouns are capitalized. While some of the instances of this are potentially justifiable (e.g., perhaps she considers things like Automatic Detention proper names), there is no reason to capitalize Bathroom (para. 3), Nurse (para. 3), or Doctor (para. 5), which she has used as regular nouns. Moreover, she is inconsistent; she uses nurse (para. 4) in addition to Nurse.
For is unnecessary in it indicates how many times I have gone for the ENTIRE month.
For is unnecessary in I need Mrs. Whiteâs signature for every time I leaveâŠ
Lack of parallel syntax in a list: The syntax is mismatched in the list EVERY TIME I leave to go to the Bathroom, Nurse, speak with Admin or to get water (para. 3). Non-parallel syntax in a list may not in itself constitute a grammatical error; in some cases, it is a matter of style only. For example, I like hunting and to fish is awkward but grammatical. (After all, I like hunting and I like to fish are both acceptable.) This teacher’s list, though, is both awkward and ungrammatical. At the very least, she needs to add an or and a to (i.e., change it to leave to go to the bathroom or nurse, to speak with admin, or to get water). Alternatively, she could add an or and remove a to (i.e. change it to leave to go to the bathroom or nurse, speak with admin, or get water). Other options would be leave to go to the bathroom, nurse, or drinking fountain, or visit admin or, perhaps the most ideal of all, leave to go to the bathroom, nurse, drinking fountain, or main office. This last option is the most ideal because go (and the accompanying to) works syntactically with all four items in the list, which means that no other verbs (like speak) need to be added. At any rate, the list needs to be revised; in its original incarnation, it is a train wreck.
Incorrect word placement: The only in I understand that only special accommodations will be made if my [d]octor writes a note regarding a medical condition (para. 5)Â is in the wrong place. As it is, the sentence means something other than what M(r)s. White presumably intended it to mean. Rather than restricting the type of accommodations that will be made (she will make special ones and no other types), she presumably meant to restrict the set of situations in which accommodations would be made. She should have placed the only after will or made (i.e., it should be will only be made if or will be made only if).Â
While it’s true that people commonly put only in the supposedly incorrect place and it doesn’t bother anyone (and here I am referring to people saying things like I’m only taking three classes this semester when what is meant is I’m taking only three classes this semester), her sentence truly sounds weird because she’s put the only before an adjective + noun sequence. Consider a phrase like only polite children. You wouldn’t take that to mean anything other than “polite children and not other children”, would you?
Verb complement error: She uses denied incorrectly in I can be denied going to the bathroom (para. 7). While it’s possible to say things that, superficially, are similar to this, like I denied eating the cake, that denied V-ing construction means something different from what she needs to express in the hall pass. She means that she is refusing to give someone something, refusing to grant them permission to do something, etc. When it has that meaning, denied must be followed by a noun or other nominal, e.g., denied permission to go to the bathroom.
A second non-parallel set of items: She writes go to the restroom/water/nurse (para. 7), but the items separated by slashes here do not all combine, grammatically, with what comes before them. One can say go to the restroom and go to the nurse, but go to the water (if water means drinking fountain) is a little funky. A good revision would be denied permission to go the restroom/drinking fountain/nurse. Alternatively—given how many times she has already mentioned restrooms, water, and nurses!—she could be more succinct and simply say denied permission to leave.
Punctuation error: She writes feel free to speak with Ms. White before or after-school. It is incorrect to include a hyphen in after-school in that context. While this might be justifiable if the phrase were being used as an adjectival before a noun (e.g., after-school programs), it cannot be used in a situation like this one, in which it is a prepositional phrase is acting as an adverbial. Her error here is analogous to the error people make when they say things like I swim everyday. (The compound word everyday can only be used before a noun, e.g., everyday occurrences = things that happen every day).
Sentence structure: The final sentence, If you lose your pass, IâM SORRY, TRY AGAIN NEXT MONTH is ungrammatical. You cannot begin the sentence as an if/then statement and then switch into an imperative halfway through. It should be revised to If you lose your pass, then I am sorry but you will need to try again next month. Alternatively, she could omit the then and/or the sarcastic I am sorry and simply write If you lose your pass, you will need to try again next month.
(I think she should retain them, though, for functional reasons. Removing the then makes the sentence sound less formal, and I get the sense that she wants to sound highfalutin’ because she thinks it will intimidate the students and/or because it makes her feel superior. Likewise, I get the sense that she wants to sound rude, and the sarcastic apology helps her achieve that goal.)
Mistakes/Sloppiness
She is inconsistent in the use of her own title. She uses Mrs. White and Ms. White twice each.
She is inconsistent in her use of the Oxford comma. In one list (para. 3), she appears to use it, but in another list (para. 4), she omits it. (I say âappears toâ because the grammar errors in the list in question make it hard to tell what, exactly, is happening there.)
Missing word: Her phrase go the nurse should be go to the nurse.
Petty Complaints &/or Matters of Style
Capitalization: She capitalizes entire words for emphasis. This is best avoided in professional contexts. Skilled writers are able to convey emphasis through wording alone.
Numerals: She uses numerals for very small numbers within the text (e.g., in only have 2 passes). Style guides tend to advise people to write these out fully (e.g., only have two passes).
Another misplaced only: Technically, the only in only have 2 passes is also misplaced. Rather than going before the entire verb phrase (have two passes), it should be placed before two.
I’m including this in the “petty complaints” section because, honestly, I know that this would never cause a person to be genuinely confused and that (as I say earlier) we regularly write and say things like this. It is not like the misplaced only (para. 5), which truly quite weird.
It would be more “professional” to write out the full word administration rather than use the clipping admin.
Could be more succinct: Her list will not be able to go to the restroom, get water, or go [to] the nurse (para. 4) would sound better if she condensed it into will not be able to go to the restroom, drinking fountain, or nurse.
Redundancy: I spent a long time discussing her list (para. 3) with non-parallel items in it, and suggesting revisions that fixed the problem while keeping the wording as similar to hers as possible. There’s room for further improvement, though. Namely, she should delete leave to. People can’t go to new locations without leaving their current ones, so leave to go is redundant.
Inconsistency regarding a lexical choice: She uses both restroom and bathroom. It would sound better if she chose one of the two options and used it consistently throughout the hall pass. This is a matter of style.
Who knew it could take that long to check the grammar of a single page of writing that a teacher regularly passes out to her students?
On a more important note…
Why is this person so angry? And why is she handling her anger in the way that she is? Giving her the benefit of the doubt, we can assume that she takes pride in her profession and is striving to teach well, but she has to deal with rampant ditching and/or absences and is at the end of her rope. She doesn’t know how to solve the problem. (And I can’t get on board with those who say “It’s their grade, isn’t it? Just let them fail and don’t worry about it.” In my experience, (1) excessive absences have the potential to drag down the quality of the entire class’s experience, so they hurt more than just the students who miss class, and (2) good teachers can’t just decide not to care about their students!) I’ve struggled with the attendance conundrum myself, and after a decade of teaching I still am not 100% settled on how to approach it. And I, too, sometimes get frustrated when students don’t take attendance seriously.
An instructor who says that they have never gotten angry at their students is a liar. We’re human. It isn’t wrong to get angry–especially if that anger is fueled by your (thwarted) goal of doing an excellent job in the classroom. Getting angry is fine as long as your response is to quickly get over it and come up with a caring and constructive way of handling the problem. If your response is to spew vitriol at the human beings you are tasked with caring for intellectually (and otherwise, as is the case when you teach minors like M(r)s. White does), then something has gone terribly wrong.
I don’t think we should continue to shame M(r)s. White. Internet shaming is cruel and unusual punishment that destroys lives in a flash. Hopefully (yep, I used “hopefully” to modify an entire sentence rather than to mean “full of hope”; it works like “frankly,” “fortunately,” and “unfortunately”), she will take this as a wake-up call and channel her passion into finding a way to keep those students happily in their seats.
jori lindley 