"Impeccable grammar" and "the New York Times" don't belong together as much as one might think! (But it's always scary to write grammar commentary because of the 99.9% probability that the grammar critic will write something ungrammatical.) I found several howlers in that article in addition to the injured table. For instance: the incredibly long and awkward first sentence has a tense error. Removing most of the verbiage to reveal the problem: "A man who was killed . . . had . . . ran at [the agent] with a metal pole before being shot" It's "had run," not "had ran" -- or leave out the "had" so that the verbs "knocked" and "ran" are parallel.
4 comments:
To those who say grammar and spelling are unimportant, I say:
fjoskk sjlfkj diopopop mogluut!
"Impeccable grammar" and "the New York Times" don't belong together as much as one might think! (But it's always scary to write grammar commentary because of the 99.9% probability that the grammar critic will write something ungrammatical.) I found several howlers in that article in addition to the injured table. For instance: the incredibly long and awkward first sentence has a tense error. Removing most of the verbiage to reveal the problem: "A man who was killed . . . had . . . ran at [the agent] with a metal pole before being shot" It's "had run," not "had ran" -- or leave out the "had" so that the verbs "knocked" and "ran" are parallel.
And there's more! But I'll spare you. :-)
My favorite part is that the article is still up in full without any corrections.
And it was co-authored! Two heads are not better than one.
Post a Comment