So here’s a little somethin’ somethin’ from the “Let’s Stump the Editor” files.
At La Oficina de MRP, it’s common to see this type of sentence construction:
Looking back, we can see all the things that point to Anakin’s eventual surrender to the dark side, from his love for his mother, to his stubborn nature, to his lack of self-control, to his growing anger at the Jedi Council, to his passion for Padme Amidala.
Crackerjack Copy Editor queried me: Are these commas necessary?
After puzzling it out for awhile, neither of us could come up with a rule one way or the other. My theory was that the commas stand in for conversational pauses and are therefore not technically needed. Crackerjack Copy Editor thought that “to” stands in for the comma or for “and,” and that therefore commas are not needed. We both agreed, however, that without commas, the sentence is cumbersome:
Looking back, we can see all the things that point to Anakin’s eventual surrender to the dark side, from his love for his mother to his stubborn nature to his lack of self-control to his growing anger at the Jedi Council to his passion for Padme Amidala.
Crackerjack Copy Editor suggested rewriting the sentence:
Looking back, we can see all the things that point to Anakin’s eventual surrender to the dark side: his love for his mother, stubborn nature, lack of self-control, and growing anger at the Jedi Council, as well as his passion for Padme Amidala.
I agree that sometimes, a complete rewrite is just your best option, but I also think that in this case, the sentence is written the way it is for emphasis.
So I put the question to you editors out there: Would you use commas as indicated here or would you leave them out? And what rule guides your decision? Or finally, is a rewrite just the best answer anyway?
This little tidbit appeared in the Boston Globe “Brainiac” column. Sounds like Rickey Henderson could give Chuck (“Chuck Norris destroyed the periodic table, because he only recognizes the element of surprise”) Norris a run for his money:
The metaphysics of Rickey Henderson
The blog Benzene 4 notes that the following language appears on Rickey Henderson’s plaque at the Baseball Hall of Fame:
“Faster than a speeding bullet, scored more runs (2,295) and stole more bases (1,406) than any player in history, combined power, plate discipline, flair and an uncanny ability to electrify crowds.”
Cliche aside (“speeding bullet”? really?), the blogger notes that the text doesn’t say Henderson was faster than any other player in history, but than any player, period. Which would include Rickey Henderson.
“You can think of that as an editing error if you like,” observes the blogger, “but I prefer to think of it as a metaphysical conundrum. If God is omnipotent, is He able to create a stone so heavy that He cannot lift it?”
“How fast is Rickey? Rickey is so fast that he can steal more bases than Rickey. (And nobody steals more bases than Rickey.)”
Check out the actual plaque here.
Unfortunate headline or salacious double entendre?
Spotted here.
I can highly recommend the kaddo (described as “pan-fried then baked baby pumpkin seasoned with sugar and served on yogurt garlic sauce”) at The Helmand, an Afghan restaurant in Cambridge, Mass.
On the other hand, I can’t really recommend their proofreader, who served up this delicious typo on their website.
Spottted this little tidbit in a description of a house that’s currently on the market:
Curtail means “to make less by or as if by cutting off or away some part” (Merriam-Webster), which makes this sentence say that the play/recreation space cuts off the rear patio. Doesn’t seem particularly desirable to me. The word they actually want here is dovetail, which means, “to fit skillfully to form a whole” (also Merriam-Webster), which would suggest a fluid backyard design that fits together in a pleasing way.
Somewhere, there is apparently a proofreader who could make neither head nor tail of it.
Take a gander at the caption for this photo that appeared on wbztv.com. For those of you not from the area, the “Coakley” of the caption actually refers to Martha Coakley, candidate for Massachusetts’ open U.S. Senate seat. Unfortunate oversight or political bias? You decide:
I’m sort of sorry to say that this caption has since been corrected.
h/t JG.
I’m doing it. I’m opening up my Shakespearean Insult Gum.
Let’s see, so many choices. I’m going to go with MacBeth, that’s gotta have some good insults in it. Here we are, two gumballs. Pop one in my mouth. Chew, chew. Let’s see how we’re doing for an insult:
“Hang yourself, you muddy corger.”
This is actually an insult from Henry IV, Part 2, not sure what that’s about.
Let’s try another. How ’bout King Lear?
The gum turns out to have little flavor or lasting power, so that’s a minus. Here we are, King Lear:
“How foul and loathsome is thine image.”
An insult from The Taming of the Shrew. So it seems that there is little correlation between what the cover of the “book” says and which play the insult is drawn from.
If my little play-by-play doesn’t give you enough of a sense of the experience of Shakespearean Insult Gum, this little video will.
Overall, I would say that the excitement and amusement over discovering Shakespearean Insult Gum greatly outweigh my actual experience of the gum. In retrospect, probably much funnier not to unwrap the package and just show it to your word nerd friends, who will be green with envy over the perfect word nerdiness of Shakespearean Insult Gum.
And by the way: “Thy breath stinks with eating toasted cheese.” Just sayin’.
I can tell you there was only one person that was feeling flirtatious after reading this horoscope, and it wasn’t MRP. And it wasn’t in a good way, either.
Let’s just say the person who proofread this tidbit was flirting with disaster. Spelling disaster.
As the winter season rapidly approaches, we look forward to such things as softly falling snow, sledding breathlessly down a wintery slope, chestnuts roasting on an open fire (okay, not really on that last one), and, if you’re anything like MRP . . . annual report planning. Am I right?
Hat tip to Gopher.
Steve Pagliuca is one of the candidates for the U.S. Senate seat in Massachusetts left open after the recent passing of Ted Kennedy. MRP just spotted this advertisement for his campaign. I’m sure Pags is an endearing nickname among those who know the candidate, but it’s hard to take seriously as a campaign pitch:
Call me fussy if you like, but I prefer my candidates to have a certain amount of gravitas. “Building a Bridge to a Better Bubba”? “Poppy for President”? “Dubya=Compassionate Conservative”? They’re just missing a certain je ne said quoi.
