(A proofreader's note regarding “staff” and “staffs”)

When “staff” refers to a group, the word for more than one such group—the plural—is “staffs.” However, each staff may have multiple members, and those members are called “staff”—the plural—rather than “staffs.” Just as curious, perhaps, is the British tendency to not have the verb agree with the singular subject “staff” when it signifies a group. In the following, the American perspective comes first:

While staffing here, across the pond,

The staff was clearly seen as one.

But back at home, they'd lost their bond;

The sense of one had somewhat gone.

The staff were welcomed home with cheer,

Reception steeped in ale and rum.

Where’er such staffs may find their fare,

Their worth is greater than their sum.



(A proofreader's note regarding “into” and “onto”)

“Onto” and “into” of prepositions are, 

Pointing us forward while standing before;

Signs at the crossroads of grammar, they star,

Granted the basics of “on,” “in,” at core.

Both tell of movement toward a result,

Signifying motion when simply they're used.

“Into” is shifting from outside to in;

“Onto” is reaching a surface to roost.

“Into” brings more when in phrasal-type verbs—

Different in meaning they are from their parts.

One such example is “look into” this,

Which says “investigate” plying some smarts.

Best then to know what these phrasal verbs are,

Whether or not actual movement applies.

Phrasal verbs ending with “on” or an “in”

Conversely show where a “to” has no ties;

“Drop in” and “check in” and “give in,” alike,

Stand without “to” as appendage to “in.”

With such verbs phrasal, the “to” is apart,

Coming as separate if needed as kin.

“‘Drop in to see all the pastries galore

Moved into displays to capture the eye.'”

"Driven by purpose, you strode into store;

Eyes bright and shining, you latched onto pie.”

(A proofreader's note regarding “then”)

Since “later,” “after," “then,” and “next”

Are one-word adverbs of time, 

Like “subsequently,” “afterward,”

They live by rules sublime.

Conjunctive adverbs joining thoughts

Expressed as clauses, more,

Must bow with every entrance made,

Give clue to function sure.

The comma brought along is clue

Of clause-wide role ahead,

To modify the thought to come

While linking that which led.

A sentence here may illustrate

This role so commonly seen: 

“We'll have to let the fruit get ripe;

Indeed, it's still too green.”

But “then” is special like its peers,

The one-word temporal ones:

“They pranced and danced and lost their pants;

Then all fell down at once.”

Among conjunctive adverbs all,

These words when functioning thus

Do not require the comma's arm

But strut with status plus.

The regular adverbs similar are,

For different reason though:

No comma cometh in between

Such adverb and its bro'.

(A proofreader's note regarding “who” and “whom”)

Words “who” and “whom” are pronouns both

That dress alike apart from hem.

Yet clothing fails to tell us who

Hath right of place when phrases aim.

One serves as subject, acting out,

The other, object—acted on.

Think “who” might shout and dash about

Regardless “whom” imposed upon.

To know if subject pronoun is,

Try “he” or “she” to substitute.

Its nature true may object be

If “him” or “her” doth  better suit.

Thus relative pronouns “who” and “whom”

Are subject/object in a clause.

At times the clause itself is subject;

Analysis then is cause for pause.

But “whom” is choice for after “to,”

As is with prepositions most,

Which lead to object in the phrase

And hold that role to baldly boast.

Though language changes over time

And fashion cycles ever more,

The hem of “whom” remains the same,

While “who” advances to the fore.

“The man who came was one with whom

Most girls would flirt and, maybe, swoon.

And, yet, there were a few for whom

The day could never end too soon.”