CSotD: 59009, in case you’d forgotten the magic number

Mike Peterson Published: September 6, 2012 1 minute 8 comments

Wppic120906
Pickles nails one.

I like conversations about language, and there are some nails-on-chalk mistakes that bother me.

One thing I edit out of reporters' stories is use of the word "that" when it is referencing people. "John Smith is someone that …" becomes "John Smith is someone who …" under my pen.

Howsoever.

This does not make me smarter or more articulate or more accurate. It just means I'm the last person who gets to fuss with copy before it goes to press.

You could argue that it would be a sign of intelligence for a reporter to go along with the editor's preferences, but that would be the only defensible way in which adopting the usage would be of any significance.

It's not a rule. It's a preference.

I do — as I have probably mentioned here before — go a little ballistic over journalists who don't know the proper usage of "may have" and "might have," because that is a rule, not a preference, and it's one that can make a significant difference in the meaning of a sentence and, for a reporter, in what you are telling the public.

And — as a reporter — you are expected to know the proper use of the tools of your trade.

It's one thing for Joe Homeowner to twist and yank while attempting to cut a length of chain link fencing with the wirecutters on his pliers rather than using a proper pair of snips. If a professional fence installer does it, you've got to question his qualifications.

A reporter who writes "The governor may have signed the bill into law" instead of "the governor might have signed the bill into law" needs to be called over to the desk, sat down and taught the difference between the two phrases.

Having said that:

1. You shouldn't really feel all that superior for having mastered that particular distinction — given all the things you probably ought to know about your profession — nor should you feel aggrieved at having to explain it to a young reporter. You may also have to school them on "if I were" versus "if I was" and on the distinctions between "which" and "that." Coaching is part of your job. Taking yourself way too seriously is not.

2. Most people are not professional writers. Don't bring your work home.

3. You need to learn to pick your battles. Last night, the guys doing the Giants/Cowboys game were going off on the replacement refs and one of them said, of a non-call where there probably should have been a penalty, "one of the regular refs may have made that call."

Really? Did you see a flag come out of the stands? Yeah, I suppose if he's sitting at home watching the game on TV, it's possible that he shouted at his TV, "Well, that was obviously holding." But I don't think that's what you meant, there, bud. I think you meant "one of the regular refs might have made that call."

But, you know, sports guys not only mess up on "may have" and "might have," but they also slip in and out of the historical present as if they were 12-year-olds. "If he catches that ball, it's a touchdown," they say of a play that happened a year ago. No different than, "So she says, 'You weren't invited' and I yell at her, 'So what?' and then she goes …"

If you're going to flip out over every clumsy verbal miscue in NFL coverage, you're going to miss most of the game.

Not to mention the psychological toll you'll be inflicting on your pets. (I told you I over-identify with him.)

Ajtv

Relax. If you're so freaking perceptive, you'd know where "being correct" and "being a pain in the ass" intersect on the Venn diagram, and you'd do your best to avoid turning it into a three-way.

Meanwhile, over at Bug, Adam Huber offers this gem (It's still there as I write this. You may have thought I was using the historical present, but I am the kind of writer who wouldn't do that.)

2012-09-06-Getting-Attached
He has a way of making completely accurate observations in a way that completely cracks me up.

Also, I wanted to reference breasts here two days in a row. And I'm willing to admit that the choice was based on pure personal preference and not on any actual rule.

Mike Peterson has posted his "Comic Strip of the Day" column every day since 2010. His opinions are his own, but we welcome comments either agreeing or in opposition.

Comments ⁸

jb

28008 – Yep, we might and/or may need a calculator for this one.

Mat

Speaking to language. I absolutely loathe when people say “I would of” instead of “I would have” or “I would’ve”.
Plenty of other language errors annoy me, but this, to me, is the absolute worse: Treating two words with disparate sounds and meanings as homonyms.

Brian Fies

We all have our preferences and peeves, and I’ll always credit you for turning me around on “alright” even though I still can’t bear use it myself.
But I most appreciated your thought on knowing your audience. No one likes a joyless pedant. I apply different standards when writing/speaking conversationally, online (where I never assume English is anyone’s first language), and when I’m getting paid for it. (My toughest clients tend to be engineers, who delight in sucking all the life out of prose until it becomes the driest recitation of facts, bullet points and passive sentences possible. I can do that, but it hurts my soul.)
Still, someone ought to convince kids that they will be judged by the language they use and mistakes they make. I recently read about a boss who gives his prospective software coders a grammar test because he believes that sloppy writing betrays sloppy thinking that will result in sloppy coding. I like that.

Woodrowfan

its vs. it’s and there, they’re, and their. ARGH!!!

Mike Peterson

I once had a reporter who was dyslexic. It might seem like dyslexia would be a problem for a reporter, and, well, sure, of course it was. But she was perceptive, dealt with people well and was a good storyteller, so it was worth dealing with.
Her style of dyslexia mostly had to do with shapes, which made editing her work kind of fun, once you got into the groove. She’d pick up most of her errors in spellcheck, but correctly spelled mistakes got through, and the challenge was that the words she got wrong were not related to the words she had wanted by meaning, but, rather, by shape.
So you’d be reading along and you’d come to a word that was totally irrelevant, and, instead of trying to figure out a word that was spelled pretty much the same and would make sense, you have to figure out a word that kind of looked like it, but made sense.
So “sense” might really be “sauce” or “rinse” but it wouldn’t be “tense” because the t sticks up too far.
I got pretty good at it. And it was a helluva lot more fun than changing “it’s” to “its” or “may have” to “might have.”

ddc

I know it’s misuse is massive, but I’m pretty sure it’s ‘different from’ and not ‘different than’.
No different than, “So she says, ‘You weren’t invited’ and I yell at her, ‘So what?’ and then she goes …”
Sorry.

vppeterson

But the Brits keep saying “different to…” I’m almost used to it.

Sherwood Harrington

Your shapes-dyslexia story is interesting and surprising — I’ve never heard of that particular perception disorder.

Comments are closed.