Although I've got several examples of useless editing from the weekend, I've been trying to lay off the
Sydney Morning Herald for a day or two. Instead, I bought the
Australian this morning. Once again, it seems that subs can't cope with women journalists being amusing. Samantha Maiden has a funny turn of phrase about Malcolm Turnbull - "A hot-tempered thoroughbred, marked for the knackery by the toothless peasantry of the Coalition climate change debate" - but is undone by careless editors, just as Lenore Taylor was in the SMH the other day. It's not meant to be "on outbreak", surely:
Mind you, Dennis Shanahan fares no better, despite not being female and making no effort to be amusing. An alert editor would, I think, have removed "little" from the sentence beginning "But Labor", in order for it to mean what I think Shanahan wants it to mean:
and is that our old friend the rogue apostrophe sheltering in the lee of the Greens:
For heaven's sake,
Australian, all this and I haven't even got to the end of page 4.
Hmm, that is a tricky one. Maybe it's early in the morning but "...the Greens' continuing to poll..." works for me, if continuing to poll..." can be considered a gerundive phrase, as in "Mike's running set up the goal." But it's early - I'll look it up in my Big Book when I get to work.
ReplyDeleteYou've got a point, but I think it's not necessary - the sentence would work without the apostrophe and having it there seems distracting. On the other hand, the more I think about it, the more I wonder if it is actually the most absolutely tip-top spot-on piece of grammar and I am wrong.
ReplyDeleteActually, no, I think I'm right - the Greens' continuing high polling would be all right, but not the Greens' continuing to poll. It's not 'Mike's running to set up the goal'. What does the Big Book say? I hope my big brother will look at this and give his opinion too. He is the ultimate reference point for me.
ReplyDeleteI forgot to bring Big Book home with me, sorry - I'll try to remember this evening. At the moment I'm coming round to your point of view. I'm wondering if one has to be careful with the 'to', as here it's used as an infinitive and not a prepostion; e.g. "Mike's running to the touchline" would not be a parallel example but "Mike's running to score the goals (ensured us victory)" would be. Hmm but that doesn't sound wholly bad. I'd like to meet this Mycroftian brother of yours!
ReplyDeleteYou forgot? How could you? Forget North Korea/South Korea skirmishes, this is serious.
ReplyDeleteAnd I forgot again :-( Call Mycroft (he can fix the North Korea/South Korea thing too).
ReplyDeleteFunnily enough, he's just written a column on that very subject (he's a journalist)
ReplyDelete