Gervase Phinn: Breaking the rules

One man arrived at my house and his first words were: "I've read your book and did you know there was a mistake on page 69?" I felt like escorting him to the door but, it being a solemn occasion, I merely smiled (not a pleasant smile I might add) and thanked him so very much for pointing it out to me.

John Humphrys in his excellent book, Lost for Words, writes: "Pedants are the people who can't pick up a copy of The Times without wanting to write about some solecism they spotted on page 17. They think there is only one thing that matters: observing the rules. Every transgression is an outrage." He defines good English: "Clear, simple, plain and unambiguous. Those are the essentials. It should be easy to read and to listen to." The fact is, however, that English is a troublesome business and we can all come a cropper.

One reader of the Yorkshire Post took exception to my misuse of the word "aggravate". He informed the newspaper in his letter that the correct word I should have used was "irritate" since you can only "aggravate" a disease, condition or situation and not a person. The Collins dictionary states that "aggravate" is often used informally to mean "to annoy, exasperate, especially a persistent goading". The Oxford English Dictionary states that the word "aggravate", which dates back to the 17th century and comes from the Latin word aggravat – "to make heavy – is in widespread use in modern English to mean "annoy" but that it is still regarded as incorrect by some traditionalists.

Professor Lisa Jardine is one of the country's leading academics. Her writing is provocative and inspirational and she makes every subject she writes about interesting, informative and accessible. In Points of View, she states: "I want to use the moment as a springboard for some big ideas. I want to stimulate and challenge the reader and seduce them into thinking differently."

Does it really matter that she breaks the rule on agreement in a sentence? We all know what she means and, after all, some of the greatest users of English break the rules on occasions.

"Sweet Bassanio, my ships have all miscarried, my creditors grow cruel, my estate is very low, my bond to the Jew is forfeit; and since, in paying it, it is impossible I should live, all debts are clear'd between you and I". Wonderful writing but did Shakespeare really write "you and I"? And what about Dickens in the opening of Bleak House? "London. Michaelmas term lately over, and the Lord Chancellor sitting in Lincoln's Inn Hall. Implacable November weather". Was one of the world's greatest novelists not aware that sentences should contain proper main verbs?

My former English master, Ken Pike, quite rightly taught us the rules of spelling and grammar but he also pointed out that sometimes rules do not apply. This was illustrated when I observed a lesson in which the English teacher taught his class that a double negative equals a positive.

He wrote on the blackboard: "I can't not go to the dance." "This means," he said, "that you would be going to the dance." He

continued: "There is no occasion in the English language where a

double positive equals a negative." One bright spark at the back murmured "Yeah, right!"