Well, "wing by" is a pretty bit of nonsense certainly, but the only other error I see is more a case of awkward phrasing than a true error.
The ending phrase in the second sentence is supposed to be wing by wing. The second wing got accidentally deleted when I chopped the sentence down, removing redundancy. The last sentence is structurally fine, I think, but convoluted. This was written quickly and I didn't have the time to refine.
I thought the second error was a problem with my verb case in the third sentence, but I'm fairly certain now that the case is correct. 'Is' relates to 'One of these changes' which is singular even though it seems to be plural.
But again, I could be wrong. I don't have my Funk and Wagnall's at hand.
I would agree with you. "Is" would be the correct verb tense. The verb should agree with the subject, which is "One" and not "changes" or "side effects." Besides, saying "One of the side effects of these changes are..." sounds ridiculous.
You are correct. The tense of the verb IS based on the subject ONE, not based on the object of the prepositional phrases OF THE SIDE EFFECTS or OF THE CHANGES.
"Conjunction Junction, what's your function?"
'Cause saying all those nouns over and over can really wear you down!
One thing, as my momma said... it's easier to look for a job when you have a job. So, that being said... you can change, you don't have to quit first, so Randal deserves a little icecream. Or homemade lasagna.
As for the error.... Yeah. I see the "wing by", but the second one is more grammar related then anything as obvious as a loose wing.
Missing a comma?
What is the second one? What element are you looking at?
One of the side effects of these changes is if you use a network printer as your default printer, that printer will have to be set as the default again.
One side effects of these changes, if you use a network printer as your default printer, that printer will have to be set as the default again.
*ponders* Hmmm... not sure if that's better or not. I'm better at fiction then techie manual stuff like this.
I should have just dropped the side effect element and have been more direct:
If you use a network printer as your default, you will need to make it your default again after the change.
That sounds good.
You have to be clear cut with End Users.
Otherwise they get confuzzled.
I might have written the third sentence as: As a side-effect of these changes, if you are using a network printer as your default printer, you will be required to reset that printer as default.
I might also have added contact information in case the user is completely clueless. Also, if you're trying to print without a default printer, I think Windows will ask you for your default preference automatically. I may be wrong here, and you may be using Macs, about which I know nothing.
This wasn't the full email, this was just the opening paragraph that got my boss all riled up. Below was a bunch more information including the steps on how to set the default printer and the schedule for the changes.
I was trying to keep the focus on the area for which I got criticized.
You got beat up for that TRIFLING error? Good gods, the managers around here make more typos than a Lolcat addict, they'd've been fired aeons ago if that were a serious issue. Seriously, if you're taken to task for sending a message with a single basic typographical error in it, you should be taking that to HR. Seriously, that is harassment.
I don't consider it harassment because it wasn't a constant berating, it was just the subject of a group email to the Help Desk about why we don't write up these communications since we can't be responsible for the errors.
The great irony of criticizing someone's grammar is in the criticism you are bound to make a grammatical error yourself, such as her response to me after the email went out.
"Who gave this to you? They did not proof read. There is two mistakes in the first three sentences."
Oh, I suppose that's okay. Too bad you can't reply with a snarky e-mail pointing out the two mistakes in her first three sentences....
Although, reading that, I wonder if this person is either not familiar with subject-verb agreement or has it backwards?
Oh and within our system, since we have PDF creation software installed, it becomes the default after the printers are changed, so if you try to print without a default printer it asks for a filename.
I can't just up and quit and maintain the lifestyle I've grown accustomed to
Of course you can't. Who can? It's about incremental change and movement, not precipitous.
Are you talking about a grammatical error?
One of the side effects of these changes is THAT if you use a network printer as your default printer, (then) that printer will have to be REset as the default again.
???
That's the grammar I'd have used.
If someone said that IS should be ARE, then they are incorrect.
I think it is a stronger sentence without the 'One of the side effects of these changes is that' but when I write first drafts I tend to be wordy.
I tend to avoid the word 'reset' unless I am using it in a technical way such as resetting the defaults in an application. I didn't want people thinking they needed to power cycle the printers or rebooting the computer would do the job.
As has been pointed out, the last sentence could have been written better, but it's not wrong.
Other than the "wing" thing, I don't see anything that is slam dunk a grammar error. There might be style issues, but frankly, I don't really understand why your boss wants to be snipey about that. | 
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
luminousx's journal
