Being different from other word columnists

“Dear June: While your column, ‘The Business Of Language,’ is

generally useful, I feel obliged to point out a continuing

grammatical error that seems to pop up every week. Specifically, it

is your use of the word ‘than,’ in place of the word ‘from.’ The most

recent example is as follows: ‘Writing marketing materials is a

different process than creative writing or even journalism -- a

different mindset.’ Something cannot be different ‘than’ something,

it is different ‘from’ something. Hope this helps.”

-- Gordon Davis

In trying times like these, I find great comfort in falling back

on the spiritual wisdom of the ages, asking myself the one question

that always cuts to the heart of any moral or philosophical

conundrum: What would Homer Simpson do? And of course, the answer

comes. The wise words he would chant I speak now as my own.

“D’oh!”

This, ladies and gentlemen, is the reason why my little idea to

write a grammar column wasn’t thought up and overdone decades ago.

Nobody wants to stick her neck out, act like she be knowin’ a bunch

of stuff, and then done be made a fool of.

I, on the other hand, having experienced more than my fair share

of cosmic lessons in humility, still don’t regret taking the risk.

This is how I learn.

So as I promised Mr. Davis, I’ll look this stuff up right now.

My editor, Tony Dodero, has some handy-dandy little reference

guides in his office that he lets me peruse, including “When Words

Collide -- A Media Writer’s Guide to Grammar and Style,” by Lauren

Kessler and Duncan McDonald.

In this useful little guide, I found an entry called “different

from/different than.”

It says, basically, that “different from” is always right.

“Different than,” however, is not always wrong -- though it certainly

was when I used it.

In Keller and McDonald’s words: “If this leaves you wondering why

‘different than’ exists, join the ranks of contentious grammarians

who have been arguing this point for years.”

For practical purposes, they say, “consider using ‘different than’

only when it introduces a condensed clause (a clause that omits

certain words without loss of clarity). Open-meeting laws are

different in Illinois than (they are) in Oregon. In general, however,

play it safe with ‘different from.’ So the previous example would

read: Open-meeting laws in Oregon are different from those in

Illinois.”

Come to think of it, this explanation is kind of goofy. Inversely,

they’re saying that in a non-condensed form, that is, when you leave

in “they are,” it should be “from.” So, to follow the letter of their

instructions, you should say “Open-meeting laws are different in

Illinois from they are in Oregon.”

Surely, that’s not what they meant.

All right. Let’s recap here: I was wrong. Gordon Davis, in

correcting me, overstated his point and thus, technically, was a

little bit wrong. And the authors of a book on the subject explained

it in a way that was arguably, well, wrong. See how hard this stuff

is?

For those of you who just want to be sure to get it right, always

use “from.” Me, I’ll probably spend the remaining years of my life

picking apart my own sentences, asking whether I mean “different than

they are” or just plain old “different from.”

That’s what makes me different from normal people.

* JUNE CASAGRANDE covers Newport Beach and John Wayne Airport. She

may be reached at (949) 574-4232 or by e-mail at

june.casagrande@latimes.com.