Certain grammar rules are drilled into us from an early age. We learn from our parents or teachers to avoid using passive voice, starting sentences with because, and ending them with prepositions like to.

But many of these guidelines are misunderstood or misapplied, and none apply to every context and every situation. In fact, when we want to persuade – as in nonprofit fundraising – breaking the rules often makes for more effective copy.

Here are five grammar rules I hope you’ll start breaking more often in your fundraising copy.

Avoid Passive Voice

Let’s start with a definition: Passive voice is a sentence structure in which the object of a sentence (the thing being acted upon) is the subject of a sentence. For example:

Your letter was received.

In this sentence, your email is the subject and received is the verb. Reading it, we wonder who received the email. The active version of the sentence tells us:

My dog received your email.

Passive voice isn’t always bad though. It emphasizes the object and the verb, which is sometimes exactly what you want. One classic example is matching gift language:

Your gift will be matched dollar-for-dollar!

This makes sense if we want to emphasize the donor’s support (and the matching) rather than who will be doing the matching.

For a good example of passive voice, check out the first sentence of this post. I wanted to emphasize the grammatical rules (and us), not the ones doing the drilling – and passive voice lets me do that.

Never Start Sentences with And or But

Like many grammatical guidelines, this one may make sense in more formal contexts. But starting sentences with and or but makes writing feel more conversational and personal – like one person speaking to another. And when it comes to fundraising copy, that’s exactly the tone we’re looking for!

Using coordinating conjunctions like and or but to start sentences is actually a time-honored tradition. Take this example from J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Hobbit:

But after ages alone in the dark Gollum’s heart was black, and treachery was in it. (Source.)

I guess we could rewrite it this way:

However, after ages alone in the dark Gollum’s heart was black, and treachery was in it.

 But it doesn’t have quite the same ring, does it?

Avoid Dangling or Misplaced Modifiers

This one may be controversial, but I think dangling or misplaced modifiers are occasionally okay. If you’re a writer, please take a moment to collect yourself.

Here’s a classic example of a misplaced modifier that most people will immediately notice:

After years of being lost under a pile of dust, Walter P. Stanley, III, found all the old records of the Bangor Lions Club. (Source.)

Even if it doesn’t jump out to you, perhaps you stumbled a bit over the sentence. The modifying clause After years of being lost under a pile of dust is supposed to apply to the old records, but the sentence is structured such that Walter is the one lost under a pile of dust for years.

That one should definitely be rewritten. But how about this:

It’s all too easy to lose hope sometimes. But as a monthly donor, your commitment and generosity inspire us every day. Thank you for being a part of the team.

In this case, the modifying clause But as a monthly donor is supposed to apply to you – but there is no you in the sentence. Instead, it applies to your commitment and generosity, suggesting something weird and metaphysical is going on.

But I don’t think it reads too badly. And the rewrite isn’t really any better:

It’s all too easy to lose hope sometimes. But as a monthly donor, you inspire us every day with your commitment and generosity. Thank you for being a part of the team.

 Look, I still avoid dangling and misplaced modifiers for the most part, especially because some of my editors enjoy hunting them for sport. But when a sentence is perfectly comprehensible despite the messed-up modifier, my vote is to ditch the rule. Just don’t tell anyone I said that.

Don’t Use They as a Singular Pronoun

Use of they as a singular pronoun has become much more acceptable in the last few years, but many style guides still discourage it.

The thing is, writers in English have been using they in this way for hundreds of years. The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) has an example from 1375, in the romance William and the Werewolf (mildly and medieval-ly NSFW):

Each man hurried . . . till they drew near . . . where William and his darling were lying together. (Source.)

According to the OED, it wasn’t until the 1700s that grammarians started circling singular theys with their red quills. 300 years later, people are using weird constructions like  s(he) and s/he – or just repeating he or she until it loses all meaning – in devotion to that arbitrary rule.

Here’s a quick example of a technically correct sentence:

Every volunteer brings his or her unique skills to the cause, and we are so grateful for his or her dedication.

For me, the “his or her” sounds so formal that it’s almost robotic. I much prefer the singular they:

Every volunteer brings their unique skills to the cause, and we are so grateful for their dedication.

Beyond the world of grammar, avoiding they means excluding anyone who doesn’t identify as he or she. Why not keep things inclusive, simple, and concise with the singular they?

Never End a Sentence with a Preposition

Bending over backward to avoid ending a sentence with a preposition is a perfect example of “good” grammar leading to bad writing.

Take this example:

Your monthly gift provides resources we can rely on.

Some readers may bump up against that “on” at the end, suggesting that the sentence be rewritten this way:

Your monthly gift provides resources on which we can rely.

But we can all agree that this sounds awkward. Sure, you could rewrite – but why would you?

The idea that one shouldn’t end sentences with prepositions comes from the 1600s, when grammarian Joshua Poole wanted to align English with Latin, where prepositions really can’t come at the end. That’s not the case for English, though.

As with avoiding the singular they, this “rule” was never sound in the first place – and it makes even less sense now.

Strive for Understanding First

For me, the rules of grammar should serve only one purpose: clear and effective communication. They usually fulfill that purpose, working behind the scenes to help readers understand the parts of a sentence and how they relate to one another.

But when rules get in the way of understanding, they are no longer serving that purpose. In that case, I don’t hesitate to break them – and neither should you.