Dear S N, Production Coordinator:

You wrote:
> Please let me know if we must have the apostrophe and s after Group or if
> either version of the sentences below is grammatically correct. In the
> sentence with no apostrophe and s, we’re thinking of the name as an
> entity, which is why we wondered if we need the punctuation. Thank you!
>
> If you look below at Sky Lending Group interest rates you can clearly see
> that you are currently above market rates.
>
> If you look below at Sky Lending Group’s interest rates you can clearly
> see that you are currently above market rates.
>

The second would be correct since “Sky Lending Group” is modifying “interest rates.” In modern English we do often turn nouns into adjectives, but if you did that without using the possessive, you would need to begin with “the,” as in “the Sky Lending Group interest rates.” In context, it appears that you did not want to use the article “the,” so the possessive “Sky Lending Group’s interest rates” is the way to go.

Dear A Z:

You wrote:
> a. Eating nothing will cure you.
> b. Eating none of these fruits will cure you.
> c. Eating no fruit will cure you.
> d. The eating of no fruit will cure you.
>
>
> Which of the above correspond to which of the below:
>
> 1. Don’t eat anything/any fruit, and you’ll be cured.
> 2. There is nothing/no fruit that will cure you.
>
The only ones that make sense in English are a and c. A means fasting will cure you. C means that if you eat no fruit you will be cured. D is awkward and no native speaker would ever say it that way. B turns on itself and, again, would never be spoken by a native speaker.

Dear A D:
>
> You wrote:
> a. Freud uses unconscious drives to explain our behaviour.
> b. Marx bases his vision of history on class struggle.
> c. Heisengberg employs subatomic mechanisms to explain the strange
> phenomena we observe.
>
> Are the above sentences logical? Freud doesn’t use unconscious drives, but
> “the idea of unconscious drives”; Marx bases his theories on “the concept
> of class struggle” and Heisenberg employs “the idea or a theory of
> subatomic mechanisms”. Can the words “the concept of…” etc. be
> considered to be implied by the sentences?
>
> Instead of the first sentence can one say: Freud uses the idea of
> unconscious driveS to explain our behaviour?
>
You point is well taken. In conversation and in context, listeners would probably understand what you meant. However, a and c should be made clearer if written. B is probably OK as it is because of the word “vision,” so we understand that we are talking about a theory or idea.

Dear David:

You wrote:
> Please end an argument I have with a friend.
>
> “No military leader would say that it is not difficult”
>
> Is this a double negative???
>
> Thank you
>
No, it is not. The two negatives modify two different words: “leader” and “difficult.” It is only a double negative if they modify the same word or one negative modifies another negative.

This style is commonly used for understatement. You could say “Any military leader would say that it is difficult,” but it does not have same understated effect.

Dear BD, English teacher:

You wrote:
> Is this the proper use of the word that?
>
> A typical noir plot revolves around a female character THAT hires
> a detective.
>
In this sentence with two possible antecedents (“plot” and “character”) “who” would be more precise. “That” normally refers to people only as groups or types. Usually it refers to things. See “That/Which/Who” in Grammar Slammer or https://www.englishplus.com/grammar/00000255.htm.

Dear Mr DA:

You wrote:
> Which is correct?
>
> “A hotel” or “An hotel”
>
> “A hedgehog” or “An hedgehog”
>
> I would be most grateful for your advice.
>
> Kind regards
>
>DA
>
This depends a lot on local pronunciation. There are a few words that can go either way–“historical” is probably the most common example. In most dialects of English, one would say “a hotel” or “a hedgehog”; in most writing you would find that standard. The “H” is pronounced. However, some dialects in English do drop the “H” in pronunciation and would be inclined to say “an hedgehog” or sometimes even “an hotel.” If you were showing this in dialogue, you might spell it “an ‘edgehog” or “an ‘otel” with the apostrophe to show that the “H” is not pronounced. In the case of “hotel” like
“historical” the word comes from the French Norman which did not pronounce the “H” and with some of that still influencing the pronunciation of English in England, you might be more likely to hear “an hotel” in England than in
North America. (The Norman aristocrats were less likely emigrate…)

Dear Mr GW:

You wrote:
> Hello,
>
> When ending a sentence with a web or email address, is it okay to
> leave off the full stop?
>
> Best Regards,
> Graeme Walshe
>
Good question. It might be confusing to the reader, especially in e-mails and online postings because the reader might think something has been left out or dropped.

We recommend skipping a space before entering the period. That way, the period will not be read as part of the URL or e-mail address. However, we understand that in formal writing one should place the period in its normal position.

For example:
Find helpful online English grammar information at https://www.englishplus.com/grammar/ . (Informal)

Dear BB:

You wrote:
> Soap opera is two words – when one says soap opera-like does it use two
> hyphens, or one – or is it never appropriate? soap-opera-like??? soap
> opera-like??? Help!
>
Good question. Hyphenated words in English are not as common as they used to be. Normally, “soap opera” is two words. You were probably correct, though strictly colloquial, by adding a hyphen with “like” (your last choice above).

If you are using formal English–e.g., this is a business letter and not a personal memo–then avoid any construction with “-like” unless you find it in the dictionary. It is theoretically possible to add “-like” to just about any noun to make it an adjective, but that is not a standard construction. If this is formal writing, then say something like “the plot was like a soap opera” or “the situation reminded us of a soap opera” to avoid the awkward expression altogether.

Dear CN:

You wrote:
> How would I address a Judge and her husband. Should it be Mr. Adam & The Honorable Anna Mae Smith or Mr. & The Honorable Anna Mae Smith or The Honorable Anna Mae Smith and Mr. Smith. Thank you very much.
>
Good question. This really more of an etiquette question than a grammar question, but it is still standard for the husband’s name to come first, so “Mr. Adam and the Honorable Anna Mae Smith” is the most standard in a formal
presentation. Occasionally there may be office practice or specific situations which call for something different.