Chastising a Mutual Fund Manager upon the Subject of Grammar
An essay by [an error occurred while processing this directive]


As of November 11th, 2002, Northeast Investors Trust, a mutual fund, controlled assets worth U.S. $1,471,469,994 and had 23,552 shareholders.  They have been in business since 1950.  Their performance, disappointing though it may be, is not the subject of this essay.  Instead I am using the latest letter to Fellow Shareholders written by the Chairman of the Trustees as an example of poor grammar.  Admittedly, their performance probably influenced my decision.  I am an investor.  There.  Now that my disclosure is out of the way, I can proceed with a clear conscience.

The thesis of the Chairman's Letter is that he has chosen to invest in low-risk Treasury notes rather than purchasing riskier high-yield bonds.  This may be difficult to understand unless you are an investor.  In case you are not an investor, it is enough to understand what a bond is, and that Treasury notes are bonds backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government and are therefore considered safe investments, but they pay a low rate of interest.  High yield bonds on the other hand pay a high rate of interest, but are backed by private corporations with uncertain prospects.  There is the risk that a high yield issuer may default, or not pay the interest or the principal, resulting in loss to an investor.

His Letter is fine until the fourth paragraph when this odd sentence rears its head like an unexpected hobgoblin:

Although we believe we see some favorable investment opportunities in the high yield market, we are trying to be mindful of the risk that yields in Treasuries will someday return to historical levels.

Can anyone tell me what is wrong with that sentence?

First of all, and I think this should be obvious, the sentence is just too long and complicated.  But that alone does not constitute a grammatical transgression.  The problem is that the word "although" must always, always state a fact that is then logically contradicted by a second fact.  Such as, Although I detest sugar, I sometimes sweeten my tea.  In the Chairman's sentence, however, each part agrees.  He sees opportunities in high yield corporate bonds, and fears yield may drop in U.S. Treasuries.  A better way of expressing these complimentary thoughts would have been,

We see favorable investment opportunities in the high yield market. We are also mindful of the risk that yields in Treasuries will someday return to historical levels.

We now have a logical and grammatical expression of these two complimentary thoughts.  Note that I discarded the rather useless "we believe."  If you see something, then of course you believe in it.  Any atheist can tell you that.  I also discarded the useless word "some."  There is no need to qualify an expression with "some" unless previously the writer has used "all" and prejudiced the reader's mind in that direction.


Northeast's Grammatical Goof has been observed 6604  times since November, 2002.