"Dears, " instead of "Dear sir, " or "Dear madam, "?
Andy
When we are writing letters, we will write "Dear sir, ", "Dear madam, " or
"Dear John, ". I am just wondering if it is grammatically correct to write
"Dears, ", as I have seen that quite a few times in formal business letters.
Can anyone kindly advice please?
Thanks very much!
Andy
Polar
It sounds grotesque to me. I wouldn't use it. Surprised that you
say you have seen it in "formal business letters". Are you sure?
If I don't want to say "Dear [whoever]", perhaps because I hate
the bastards, I just use a memo form:
TO:
FROM;
or simply skip the salutation completely and go straight to the
body of the letter.
--
Polar
Eric Walker
>When we are writing letters, we will write "Dear sir, ", "Dear
>madam, " or "Dear John, ". I am just wondering if it is
>grammatically correct to write "Dears, ", as I have seen that
>quite a few times in formal business letters. Can anyone
>kindly advice please?
I am assuming that the salutation you cite has no following
names and sites bare, as in--
Dears,
I am writing to . . . .
If so, the question is not one of grammar but of social custom.
Where once letter salutations were a simple matter of purely
conventional form, they now participate in the seemingly
universal trend of hyperanalysis, presumably in efforts to root
out anything that might offend some one obscure person somewhere
on the face of this earth.
In a highly personal letter between close friends, such a
salutation is unexceptionable--we get letters from a couple, of
many years' friendship, that open "Dear Ones"--but in anything
even a touch less intimate, such an opening is terribly out of
place.
The usual forms are, or were:
Dear Mr. Smith: pure business tone, male, name known
Dear John: personal and cordial, not necessarily
intimate
Dear Sir: male, name unknown
Dear Mrs. Smith: pure business tone, married female, name
known--now avoided because the woman
addressed might well prefer "Ms. Smith"
Dear Miss Smith: pure business tone, unmarried female, name
known--now avoided because the woman
addressed might well prefer "Ms. Smith"
Dear Ms. Smith: pure business tone, female, name known--now
preferred unless it is _surely_ known that
the woman addressed prefers Mrs./Miss Smith
Dear Mary: personal and cordial, not necessarily
intimate
Dear Madam: to a female, name unknown
Dear Messrs. Smith and Jones: pure business, two males
(need for this form is rare)
Dear Mmes. Smith and Jones: pure business, two married females
(need for this form is rare, and it suffers
the same disabilities as "Mrs. Jones")
Gentlemen: pure business tone, one or more males, name
or names unknown
(The phrase "pure business" does not imply stiffness or high
formality, only a neutral politeness normal between relative
strangers.)
Now come the trouble spots. Of old, "Gentlemen" was used with
no regard to the possible sex of the recipients--it was totally
generic, the polite form for which the school-childish "To whom
it may concern" was sometimes used. (That means the letter was
going to some person unknown from within some collection of
persons, such as a given department or section within a
business.) Today, one cannot in good conscience use such a form
unless writing with reasonable certainty that the recipient
really will be male. When there is significant doubt, as is
often the case, there is no one form yet accepted as both
suitable to the need and businesslike; the neutered "Gentles" is
sometimes found, and is, I suppose, no worse than anything else
yet offered.
The next problem, especially acute in the modern era, is
addressing a person whose name you know but whose sex you do not
when that sex is unclear from the given name. "Cameron Jones,"
for example is about as likely to be male as female. What I
have seen used, though it strikes me as unduly stiff, is
Dear Cameron Jones:
and you've probably seen the form on "customized" mass mailings.
I know of no common form used to address two women each
preferring the "Ms." form; if I were ever faced with such an
unlikely need, I would probably write "Dear Ms. Jones and Ms.
Smith"--ungainly, but functional.
Finally, a little touch that now seems almost lost is the method
once commonly used to indicate that the writer is angry, upset,
or for any reason in want of a term of the frostiest remote
politeness: the use of "My" in front of any "Dear"-form
salutation. The letter writer who opens with "My Dear Mr.
Smith" is showing the exact opposite of "dearness": he is
saying, in effect (and with perfect social correctness), "Smith,
you bastard:" It is curious how hyperpoliteness often serves to
indicate an obverse meaning.
--
Cordially,
Eric Walker, Owlcroft House
Scott
Polar <sme...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> If I don't want to say "Dear [whoever]", perhaps because I hate
> the bastards, I just use a memo form:
>
> TO:
Or you can be formal,
Sir,
or
Mr. Smith,
Ray Heindl
C0AD1F.235...@news2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net:
I've seen "Dear Sir/Madam" used when the name and gender of the
addressee (salutee?) were unknown. Personally, in that case I'd prefer
to skip the salutation entirely. Or there's the ever-popular "To whom
it may concern".
--
Ray Heindl
George Hardy
>
> It sounds grotesque to me. I wouldn't use it.
Nor would I! How about "Dearies"? A little more
PC and a lot more sickening. And, with luck, insulting
to boot.
GFH
John W Hall
wrote:
>... How about "Dearies"? ...
This reminds me of the greeting from the last tea-lady in captivity,
whom I encountered at IBM Hursley about 1969. Those afternoon sticky
buns were wonderful.
--
John W Hall, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Helping People Prosper in the Information Age.
Tanguero
>Now come the trouble spots. Of old, "Gentlemen" was used with
>no regard to the possible sex of the recipients--it was totally
>generic, the polite form for which the school-childish "To whom
>it may concern" was sometimes used. (That means the letter was
>going to some person unknown from within some collection of
>persons, such as a given department or section within a
>business.) Today, one cannot in good conscience use such a form
>unless writing with reasonable certainty that the recipient
>really will be male. When there is significant doubt, as is
>often the case, there is no one form yet accepted as both
>suitable to the need and businesslike; the neutered "Gentles" is
>sometimes found, and is, I suppose, no worse than anything else
>yet offered.
I find myself using "Dear Sirs and Madames" as a replacement for
"Dear Sirs" and "Gentlemen". It seems like the best solution,
but still seems a bit awkward. I'm wondering whether anyone
can supply a better alternative.
Polar
There have been quite a few supplied earlier in this thread;
whether they're "better" is in the eye of the beholder.
When I'm being cute and informal, I've been known to use "Dear
Folks", but that's obviously very limited.
My contributions, IIRC, were to abandon the salutation and use a
memo form:
To:
Subject:
Or simply to skip the salutation and go straight to the body of
the letter.
--
Polar
Eric Walker
[...]
>My contributions, IIRC, were to abandon the salutation and use
>a memo form . . . .
That is, I fear, a solution with limited applicability. A
letter that is--or, by content and form, indubitably ought to
be--a letter cannot rightly be replaced by a memorandum.
meirman
(Tanguero) posted:
>In <rjnyxrebjypebsgpb...@news.cis.dfn.de> "Eric Walker" <ewa...@owlcroft.com> writes:
>
>>Now come the trouble spots. Of old, "Gentlemen" was used with
>>no regard to the possible sex of the recipients--it was totally
>>generic, the polite form for which the school-childish "To whom
>>it may concern" was sometimes used. (That means the letter was
>>going to some person unknown from within some collection of
>>persons, such as a given department or section within a
>>business.)
I always took "to whom it may concern" as the lead-in to a letter
which did not require a response, in some cases but certainly not all
for a letter of introduction that party B could bring to R and others,
from S, saying that S thought B was reliable.
R would not need to respond to S in such a situation, and in the
broader sense, recipients of a "twimc" letter would not have to
respond to the sender. And they might not *be* concerned so it
wouldn't even apply.
On the other hand "Dear xxxx" is meant to get the recipient's
attention. It is a request that he read the letter and answer it in
some way, regardless of whether R was originally interested in the
topic or not.
Born west of Pittsburgh Pa. 10 years
Indianapolis, 7 years
Chicago, 6 years
Brooklyn NY 12 years
Baltimore 17 years
Roberta Davies
I've occasionally used the Esperanto: "Estimata", literally meaning
"esteemed one", which is a standard fairly formal way to begin a letter
and makes no assumptions about the sex of the reader. You could
pluralise it to "Estimataj" if you like. No-one has ever questioned it.
Robbie
frank green
If I don't, since the manner in which you address people is the first impression you give, and since
people do not like to be misaddressed, a courteous phone call to clear up the gender or title would save
face and reap dividends in goodwill--so what if it's a long-distance call?. Peoplewill not think ill of
you if you ask what their name or title is, even if you should know it well. Remembering a title or name
becomes much easier if you ask the person to spell it out for you.
Eric Walker
>Perhaps I misunderstand the original question.
>If I don't, since the manner in which you address people is the
>first impression you give, and since people do not like to be
>misaddressed, a courteous phone call to clear up the gender or
>title would save face and reap dividends in goodwill--so what
>if it's a long-distance call?. Peoplewill not think ill of
>you if you ask what their name or title is, even if you should
>know it well. Remembering a title or name becomes much easier
>if you ask the person to spell it out for you.
The principle is sound, but applicable even in theory only to
cases in which the letter is going to an identifiable particular
person, rarely the case when writing to a department (such as
the commonly ill-named "customer service"). Even in practice,
it is wise only for instances in which time is not critical and
the addressee of some importance to the sender (I speak of time
because, at least in the U.S.), very often the addressee will be
in another time zone and, near day end, incommunicado until the
next business day).
But for letters of importance, yes, it's a wise idea (and long-
distance calling is now almost risibly cheap).
Alex
In the US we commonly say, "Dear Sir or Madam",
.......
Eric Walker
[...]
>In the US we commonly say, "Dear Sir or Madam",
>........
That suits admirably when the addressee is, or is likely to be,
a particular person whose name we just don't know.
It can, I guess, substitute for "Gentlemen," but the sense of
the letter being directed _collectively_ to a body or group--
such as a corporation or a given department thereof--is lost.
The loss may not be great, but nonetheless the "Gentlemen" form
was (and, I supose, still is) common, so someone must have felt
the difference.