Bryson's Dictionary of Troublesome Words - Bill Bryson [11]
besiege. Not -ei-.
between, among. A few authorities continue to insist that between applies to two things only and among to more than two, so that we should speak of dividing some money between the two of us but among the four of us. That is useful advice as far as it goes, but it doesn’t always go very far. It would be absurd, for instance, to say that Chicago is among New York, Los Angeles, and Houston. More logically, between should be applied to reciprocal arrangements (a treaty between the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada) and among to collective arrangements (trade talks among the members of the European Union).
A separate common problem with between is seen here: “He said the new salaries were between 30 to 40 percent more than the average paid by other retailers” (Independent). Something can only be between one thing and another. Thus you should say either “between 30 and 40 percent” or “from 30 to 40 percent.”
between you and I. John Simon called this “a grammatical error of unsurpassable grossness.” It is perhaps enough to say that it is very common and it is always wrong. The rule is that the object of a preposition should always be in the accusative. More simply, we don’t say “between you and I” for the same reason that we don’t say “give that book to I” or “as Tom was saying to she only yesterday.” A similar gaffe is seen here: “He leaves behind 79 astronauts, many young enough to be the children of he and the others” (Daily Mail). Make it “of him.”
Big Ben, strictly speaking, is not the famous clock on the Houses of Parliament in London but just the great hour bell, so a passing visitor will hear Big Ben but never see it. The formal name of the clock, for what it is worth, is the clock on St. Stephen’s Tower on the Palace of Westminster.
bimonthly, biweekly, and similar designations are almost always ambiguous. It is far better to say “every two months,” “twice a month,” etc., as appropriate.
blatant, flagrant. The words are not quite synonymous. Something that is blatant is glaringly obvious and contrived (“a blatant lie”) or willfully obnoxious (“blatant commercialization”) or both. Something that is flagrant is shocking and reprehensible (“a flagrant miscarriage of justice”). If I tell you that I regularly travel to the moon, that is a blatant lie, not a flagrant one. If you set fire to my house, that is a flagrant act, not a blatant one.
blazon. “[She] blazoned a trail in the fashion world which others were quick to follow” (Sunday Times). Trails are blazed. To blazon means to display or proclaim in an ostentatious manner.
blueprint as a metaphor for a design or plan is much overworked. If the temptation to use it is overwhelming, at least remember that a blueprint is a completed plan, not a preliminary one.
bon vivant, bon viveur. The first is a person who enjoys good food, the second a person who lives well.
born, borne. Both are past participles of the verb bear, but by convention they are used in slightly different ways. Born is limited to the idea of birth (“He was born in December”). Borne is used for the sense of supporting or tolerating (“She has borne the burden with dignity”), but is also used to refer to giving birth in active constructions (“She has borne three children”) and in passive constructions followed by by (“The three children borne by her . . .”).
both. Three small problems to note:
1. Both should not be used to describe more than two things. Partridge cites a passage in which a woman is said to have “a shrewd common sense . . . both in speech, deed, and dress.” Delete both.
2. Sometimes it appears superfluously: “. . . and they both went to the same school, Charterhouse” (Observer). Either delete both or make it “they both went to Charterhouse.”
3. Sometimes it is misused for each. To say that there is a supermarket on both sides of the street suggests that the supermarket is somehow straddling the road. Say either that there is a supermarket on each side of the street or that there are supermarkets