5 Grammar Myths Your English Teacher Got Wrong
English teachers mean well, but some “rules” they teach aren’t actually rules at all. These grammar myths started as style preferences from old textbooks and became widespread misconceptions. Professional writers, editors, and linguists have debunked these myths for decades, yet they persist in classrooms worldwide.
Many ESL learners follow these false rules religiously, making their English sound stiff and unnatural. Native speakers break these “rules” constantly in professional writing, published books, and respected journalism. Understanding which grammar rules are real and which are myths helps learners write more naturally and confidently.
Myth #1: Never Start a Sentence with “And” or “But”
The Myth: Starting sentences with coordinating conjunctions (and, but, or, so) is grammatically incorrect.
The Truth: This has never been a grammar rule. It’s a style suggestion often taught to young students to prevent them from writing choppy, fragmented sentences.
Professional writers start sentences with “and” or “but” constantly. These conjunctions create emphasis, rhythm, and natural flow.
Examples from published writing:
- “But we must act quickly.” (Common in news articles)
- “And that’s when everything changed.” (Frequent in storytelling)
- “Or consider this alternative approach.” (Standard in academic writing)
Why teachers say this: Elementary school students often write simple sentences: “I went to the store. And I bought milk. And I came home.” Teachers discourage this choppy style by creating a blanket “rule” against starting with conjunctions.
What ESL learners should know: Starting with “and” or “but” is perfectly acceptable in formal and informal writing. Use it when it creates the right emphasis or connects ideas smoothly. Just don’t overuse it or create sentence fragments.
Correct usage:
- “The project faced many challenges. But the team succeeded anyway.” ✓
- “We tried three different approaches. And none of them worked.” ✓
Myth #2: Never End a Sentence with a Preposition
The Myth: Sentences must not end with prepositions (in, on, at, with, for, to).
The Truth: This “rule” comes from Latin grammar, where ending sentences with prepositions is impossible due to language structure. English works differently and has always allowed final prepositions.
Avoiding final prepositions often creates awkward, unnatural sentences that sound pretentious.
Awkward (following the “rule”):
- “With whom are you going?” (Sounds overly formal)
- “That is something up with which I will not put.” (Winston Churchill mocked this construction)
Natural (ending with preposition):
- “Who are you going with?” ✓
- “That’s something I won’t put up with.” ✓
Why teachers say this: This myth originated from 17th-century grammarians who tried to force English to follow Latin rules. It stuck because it sounds “educated” and sophisticated.
What ESL learners should know: Ending sentences with prepositions is grammatically correct and often more natural. Forced rearrangements to avoid final prepositions usually sound awkward and overly formal.
When it matters: In extremely formal writing (legal documents, diplomatic correspondence), some writers still avoid final prepositions. In all other contexts, write naturally.
Myth #3: “They” Cannot Refer to a Single Person
The Myth: “They” is strictly plural and cannot refer to one person.
The Truth: Singular “they” has existed in English for over 600 years. Shakespeare, Jane Austen, and countless classic writers used it. Modern dictionaries and style guides now officially recognize singular “they.”
Historical examples:
- “Everyone should do their best.” (Using “they/their” for an indefinite singular person)
- “Someone left their phone here.” (Standard usage for centuries)
Modern usage: Singular “they” serves two purposes:
- Gender-neutral reference when gender is unknown or irrelevant
- Preferred pronoun for non-binary individuals
Correct examples:
- “The doctor said they would call back.” (Gender unknown) ✓
- “Each student must submit their assignment.” (Gender-neutral) ✓
- “Alex said they prefer this approach.” (Personal preference) ✓
Why teachers resist this: Older grammar books listed “they” as plural only. Teachers educated before the 2010s often learned this as a firm rule. However, major dictionaries (Oxford, Merriam-Webster) and style guides (AP, Chicago) now endorse singular “they.”
What ESL learners should know: Using singular “they” is correct, modern, and increasingly expected in professional English. It’s more natural than awkward alternatives like “he or she” or “s/he.”
Myth #4: Never Split Infinitives
The Myth: Never place words between “to” and the verb (to boldly go, to quickly run).
The Truth: Split infinitives have never been grammatically wrong in English. This is another Latin-based myth that doesn’t apply to English grammar.
In Latin, infinitives are single words that cannot be split. English infinitives are two-word phrases (“to” + verb) that can be split naturally.
Famous split infinitive: “To boldly go where no one has gone before.” (Star Trek)
Forcing this to follow the “rule” creates: “To go boldly where no one has gone before” or “Boldly to go where no one has gone before.” Both sound worse.
More examples:
- “The goal is to quickly improve customer service.” (Natural) ✓
- “The goal is to improve quickly customer service.” (Awkward) ✗
- “The goal is quickly to improve customer service.” (Unnatural) ✗
Why teachers say this: Like the preposition myth, this comes from applying Latin grammar rules to English, where they don’t belong.
What ESL learners should know: Split infinitives often create the clearest, most natural phrasing. Avoid them only when the unsplit version sounds equally good. Never twist sentences awkwardly just to keep infinitives together.
Myth #5: “Could Of” is Wrong, Must Use “Could Have”
The Myth: The correct form is “could have,” and “could of” is always wrong.
The Truth: This is partially correct, but the explanation is often wrong, and the distinction is more complex than teachers present.
“Could of” is indeed incorrect in writing. However, people say “could of” because they’re actually saying “could’ve” (the contraction of “could have”). In spoken English, “could’ve” sounds exactly like “could of.”
Why this matters differently:
- In writing: Always use “could have” or “could’ve” ✓
- In speech: “Could of” reflects natural pronunciation of “could’ve”
- The real issue: This is about understanding contractions and how speech translates to writing
Correct written forms:
- “I could have helped.” ✓
- “I could’ve helped.” ✓
- “I could of helped.” ✗
Similar cases:
- “should have” / “should’ve” (not “should of”)
- “would have” / “would’ve” (not “would of”)
- “might have” / “might’ve” (not “might of”)
Why teachers oversimplify this: It’s easier to say “could of is wrong” than to explain the phonetic relationship between contractions and spelling.
What ESL learners should know: Understand that “could of” is a spelling mistake based on how “could’ve” sounds. Focus on the correct written forms, but don’t be confused when native speakers’ pronunciation sounds like “of.”
Grammar Myths Quiz
Test your knowledge: Is it a real rule or just a myth?
Why These Myths Matter for English Learners
Following false grammar rules can make English sound unnatural and overly formal. ESL learners who strictly follow these myths often produce technically “correct” sentences that native speakers would never actually write.
The advantages of knowing the truth:
Natural communication: Writing becomes more conversational and authentic when learners aren’t constrained by fake rules.
Confidence: Understanding that professional writers “break” these rules regularly gives learners permission to write more freely.
Better reading comprehension: Recognizing these constructions in published writing helps learners understand that they’re seeing correct English, not mistakes.
Appropriate formality: Knowing when to follow style preferences versus actual rules helps learners adjust their English to different contexts.
The Real Grammar Rules That Matter
While these five myths aren’t real rules, actual grammar rules do exist and should be followed:
Subject-verb agreement: “She walks” (not “she walk”) ✓ Proper article usage: “A book” vs. “the book” ✓ Correct verb tenses: Consistent and logical time sequences ✓ Complete sentences: Avoiding fragments in formal writing ✓ Clear pronoun references: Making sure readers know what pronouns refer to ✓
How to Know What’s Really a Rule
When encountering a “grammar rule,” ask these questions:
Do professional writers follow it? Read published books, respected newspapers, and academic journals. If professional writers regularly “break” the rule, it’s probably a myth.
Do modern style guides support it? Check current editions of style guides like AP, Chicago Manual of Style, or Oxford. Grammar rules change as language evolves.
Does breaking it create confusion? Real grammar rules prevent ambiguity. If “breaking” a rule doesn’t confuse readers, it’s probably not a real rule.
Is it about Latin or English? Many myths come from forcing English to follow Latin grammar patterns. English has its own rules.
The Bottom Line for ESL Learners
Grammar myths persist because they’re easier to teach than explaining nuanced style choices. Teachers create simple rules for young students, and these oversimplifications stick.
The five myths debunked here:
- Starting sentences with “and” or “but” is perfectly acceptable ✓
- Ending sentences with prepositions is grammatically correct ✓
- Singular “they” is standard and correct ✓
- Split infinitives are not grammatically wrong ✓
- “Could of” is wrong in writing, but represents natural speech ✓
ESL learners should focus on real grammar rules that prevent confusion and ensure clarity. Style preferences matter in specific contexts, but they’re not universal grammar laws. Professional writers, editors, and linguists “break” these myths constantly because they were never real rules to begin with.
Learning English means understanding both the actual rules and the myths. This knowledge helps learners write more naturally, read more confidently, and communicate more effectively in real-world English.
