Let it never be said that I don’t read Practical Horseman from cover to cover. That is, from front to back, just the opposite of the way we’re supposed to ride.
There it is, in tiny print, on the bottom left corner of the back cover of PH’s December 2012 issue.
Heritage Gloves is the Official Riding Glove of The United States Equestrian Federation.
I’m sorry, you can’t say “gloves is glove.” Official or otherwise. Heritage or otherwise. USEF or otherwise.
Why not say, “Heritage Gloves are the Official Riding Gloves of The United States Equestrian Federation?”
Or “Heritage is the Official Riding Glove of the United States Equestrian Federation?”
You just can’t say “Heritage Gloves is the Official Riding Glove of the United States Equestrian Federation.” You can’t. Unless you want to sound illiterate. And that are my final word on the subject.
Almost. Because I want to give a thumbs up to Heritage for making the best winter work glove I’ve found. It’s their Extreme Winter Glove, with a Thinsulate lining and advertised as waterproof. They are (note: not “they is”) truly waterproof.
Since I’ve had frostnip on several of my fingertips, this is a welcome addition to my night check wardrobe, since night check often involves getting my fingers wet while filling and hanging water buckets. With these gloves on, even if my gloves get wet, my hands stay dry. And the sticky palm makes it easy to grip my tools for late night poop-picking.
These gloves are too bulky for me to ride in, and I always manage to get warm enough riding that my unlined gloves are fine, but there’s enough room in the palm for those instant hand warmers, a staple for me on days and nights when it gets well below freezing. Don’t ask me why, but my hands don’t sweat in these gloves. They’re expensive for work gloves and this is their first winter, so I don’t know how they’ll wear, but so far, I have to say, I love these gloves.
Notice that I did not say, “I love these glove.” Or “I love this gloves.”
Okay, I’m done with that now. But not with this month’s PH. If you’re not a subscriber, this month’s issue is worth buying if only for the article by Kip Rosenthal and Steven D. Price. In addition to sensible schooling advice for the hunters, there’s some refreshingly old-fashioned wisdom: “All it takes to train a horse is to have more time than the horse does.”
Elaine L. said:
Ok, but if “Heritage Gloves” is the name of the business and that being singular than isn’t it correct? LOVE THE SNOW FLAKES!
Calm, Forward, Straight said:
I’m with Elaine… it’s just awkward that the business name happened to use the plural form of glove. Glad you found warm hand solutions – we’re peeling off the layers down here at the moment. 😀
I understand your points of view, but the actual name of the business is Heritage Performance Riding Gloves. So saying “Heritage Gloves are” or “Heritage is” would have served the purpose while using proper English grammar.
Not to beat a torn glove, but had the endorsement language been formulated slightly differently, any company name would work. Grammar breaks down with the template they chose, when a company name is the plural form of a noun and is said to equal the singular form of the same noun. Something along the lines of “Heritage Gloves (or other company) is the official glove (or other item) supplier to…” or “Heritage Gloves (or other company) is endorsed by…” would solve the problem.
Copy-editing is a dying craft.
Elaine L. said:
So is correct grammar …………………………….