Showing posts with label Philip B. Corbett. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Philip B. Corbett. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Words We Love Too Much

Thank you for your time with my blogs and welcome back in the near future.

October 27, 2009, 8:00 am


Notes from the newsroom on grammar, usage and style.

I’ve steered away from my give-this-word-a-rest refrain recently. For one thing, these are among the most subjective judgments — one person’s handy shorthand is another’s grating cliché. And I was afraid that if I denounced too many words as overused or worn out, our writers wouldn’t have much left to work with.

I needn’t have worried, of course; these screeds have little discernible effect. Still, I ran into one too many “famouslys” recently, and I couldn’t help myself. In many cases, “famously” is completely superfluous; in other instances, there’s a more precise way to say what we mean.

Some recent examples:

•••

At a White House meeting in mid-March, in which the counterinsurgency policy was initially presented, Mr. Biden famously began to stake out his position that a larger military presence in Afghanistan could breed resentment among Afghans and would be politically untenable at home.

Yes, the fact that Biden holds this position has been widely reported. But the fact that he began staking out this stance at a particular White House meeting in mid-March could surely be famous only among a handful of Washington reporters with exceptionally good memories.

•••

Former Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas famously broke an antique chair during a cabinet meeting before losing 110 pounds, becoming a presidential contender and writing a self-help book, “Quit Digging Your Grave With a Knife and Fork.”

Is “famously” supposed to make me think that everyone knows this story except me? Perhaps what we wanted to convey was something more like “Huckabee drew wide attention in Arkansas when …”

•••

From that varied background, Brees [the New Orleans quarterback] developed nimble footwork in the pocket, deft movement that safety Darren Sharper, in his 13th season, described as the best he has ever seen. Brees combined that with uncanny vision to overcome what he famously lacked in height (he is listed at 6 feet).

Hard to see what the word adds here, except to make those of us who didn’t know how tall he is feel out of it.

•••

Not every former governor has a portrait hanging in the Capitol. Mario M. Cuomo has famously — and rather cantankerously — refused to allow an artist to paint his likeness.

Again, outside of Albany-watchers, I’m not sure how famous his refusal really is. Perhaps we meant something more like, “Cuomo has made a point of refusing …”?

In a Word

This week’s grab bag of grammar, style and other editing missteps, compiled with help from colleagues and sharp-eyed readers.

•••

“My CD’s,” he said. “I regret that. That was a mistake.” He had 3,500 of them. Country, blues, jazz, rock. They went to a collector, after he put them on his computer, and iPod. But the iPod is not the same, he said. The music sounded better on the CD’s.

We changed our style several years ago on plurals like this. Here’s what the current “plurals” entry in The Times’s stylebook says:

But do not use apostrophes for plurals of abbreviations without periods, or for plurals formed from figures: TVs, PCs, DVDs; 1990s, 747s, size 7s.

•••

After New Ads, iDoubts Grow About a Verizon iPhone

It no longer seems clever, if it ever did, to attach an “i” to words in articles and headlines about Apple.

•••

Top aides in the Obama administration waxed on the Sunday news shows about their relationship with Fox News, the current media nemesis of the latest White House team.

“Wax” as an intransitive verb means “grow.” It is occasionally used in an extended sense to mean “become,” in expressions like “She waxed sentimental.” A further extension yields colloquial expressions like “He waxed on and on about it.” None of those uses really covers this case.

•••

Dr. Hagerty sounded surprised at the news but not alarmed, because most of the pigs, or perhaps all, that were at the state fair at the same time as a group of 4-H children who became ill were to be sent to the slaughterhouse shortly afterward.

This convoluted sentence made for tough going. Let’s hope no one, in confusion, read the highlighted phrase as a unit.

•••

[Caption online] Alan Ceballos at his building in the Bronx. He lives in a subsidized two-bedroom apartment for about the same price that he payed previously for a market-rate one-bedroom.

Make it “paid,” of course.

•••

All of which begs the question: what are the chances that a new business whose product and gestalt are based on a rather old — that is to say, two decades old — idea might find success in a still-punishing retail environment?

“Beg the question” does not mean pose the issue. This version appeared in print; it was changed on the Web site to “prompts the question.”

•••

Ms. Ashwell’s fans, of course, could care less if Shabby, as Ms. Ashwell calls her company, is “in” or “out.”

The phrase is “could not care less.”

•••

Vyacheslav K. Ivankov, a Russian crime boss who survived tangles with the K.G.B., the F.B.I. and other violent criminals in a bloody career that spanned decades, was laid to rest at a Moscow cemetery. Hundreds attended the funeral.

Watch where you place those phrases. A reader inquired, “Had any complaints from the K.G.B. and F.B.I.?”

•••

[Blog post headline] NYMF: Five Questions About ‘Academy’

Alphabet soup in a headline (or text) is not a good idea, especially for an acronym unfamiliar to many readers. This one (pronounced nymph) stands for the New York Musical Theater Festival.

•••

After Deadline examines questions of grammar, usage and style encountered by writers and editors of The Times. It is adapted from a weekly newsroom critique overseen by Philip B. Corbett, the associate managing editor for standards, who is also in charge of The Times’s style manual.

Tuesday, July 28, 2009

NYT: Words We Love Too Much

Thank you for your time with my blogs and welcome back in the near future.

July 28, 2009, 9:00 am


Notes from the newsroom on grammar, usage and style.

My colleague Mark Bulik offered this note on an overworked phrase:

Once upon a time, not so long ago, policymakers resisted or criticized proposals, and the authors of those proposals parried or rebutted the criticism.

In that kinder, more genteel time, “to push back” generally meant that one was either postponing something or reclining in a beach chair. The phrase rarely appeared in stories with Washington or Albany datelines, perhaps because using it as a metaphor for the thrust and parry of public discourse seemed to reduce policy debates to just so much schoolyard shoving.

About five or six year ago, that started to change. Slowly at first, but with increasing frequency, policy makers began “pushing back” in our pages.

One measure of the increasing use is that in 2004 the noun form “pushback” appeared in The Times just eight times. In the first half of this year it was used 26 times, or about once a week. Granted, some of those uses are in quotations, as sources spout the latest buzzwords. But that’s all the more reason to be wary of echoing the trend in our own prose.

If you include other forms — push back, pushed back, pushing back — the term has appeared 209 times this year, well over once a day.

A daily dose seems a bit much. Perhaps it’s time to resist the reflexive use of this mannerism.

Words We Love Too Much, Part 2

Another colleague, Charlie De La Fuente, points out a faddish bit of marketing jargon that has become ubiquitous: “price point.”

This, too, may be unavoidable occasionally in quotes, but there seems little reason for us to succumb in our own prose. As Charlie says, there’s a shorter term that will frequently serve: “price.”

For example:

•••

Her terrariums and crystal gardens range from $4,000 to $60,000, and living necklaces (bromeliads in delicate crocheted sacks) from $200 to $1,200; she is looking to mass-produce the Dumplings [a type of planter] at a more affordable price point.

•••

In the early part of the aughts, it was shocking to pay as much as $195 for designer shorts. But that is now the entry price point at Barneys New York and Bergdorf Goodman.

•••

Asus has long been active, though, and among the more charming of netbook newcomers — with Dell’s barrier-busting $299 Mini 10v, just unwrapped — is the Asus Eee 1008HA a k a the Seashell. Superlight at less than three pounds, the Eee looks to be handsomely tapered, with a 10-inch LED-backlighted LCD screen and a prospective price of $429. That price could drop in view of Dell’s setting a strong $299 price point.

How about something simple like, “That price could drop to compete with the Dell model”?

•••

Also un-Lexuslike is the IS-F’s price point. While the Lexus LS 460 still undercuts a Mercedes S550 by about $26,000, the $57,585 IS-F is actually about $2,000 more expensive than its primary German nemesis, the BMW M3 sedan.

On the Home Front

Finally, my colleague John Haskins offered this style reminder:

With many sections writing about the housing crisis and the mortgage mess, we should take care with “home-” words. We’ve been inconsistent. When in doubt, check our standard newsroom dictionary (Webster’s New World College).

Homeowner: It’s one word, of course, and we almost always get this right. (The archive shows that we’ve had it as two when it made sense: second-home owners, vacation-home owners.)

Homesite: This should also be one word, according to the dictionary. But we’ve used it as two words many times.

Home builder: It should be two words, but we’ve run it as one word six times in the last year.

Home buyer: Same thing. We’ve slipped a few times and made it “homebuyer.”

•••

After Deadline examines questions of grammar, usage and style encountered by writers and editors of The Times. It is adapted from a weekly newsroom critique overseen by Philip B. Corbett, the deputy news editor, who is also in charge of The Times’s style manual.