Don't Be One of Those People

The Post recently ran an article about controversy over the big spending bill's inclusion of a million bucks toward battling an insect called the Mormon cricket, and the headline was "One of Those Earmarks That Bug People."

As surely as the chirping of a male cricket attracts female crickets, that construction attracted some raised eyebrows. It should have said "One of Those Earmarks That Bugs People," I was told. The predicate has to agree with the subject.

Yes, the predicate does have to agree with the subject. But it has to agree with its own subject, and sometimes that's the subject of its clause and not the subject of the entire sentence.

That's the technical explanation, but it's the technicalities that tend to lead people to make this common error. Forget all the times you were slapped with a ruler and think about the intended meaning of what you're reading; don't pull out your parts-of-speech flash cards and chant "Subject, verb, subject, verb" like a zombie.

In that headline, it's "those earmarks" that bug people, and this is just one of them. Why would we have dragged those other earmarks into this if we were talking about only this one? Of those earmarks that bug people, this is one. The story is about one of [those earmarks that bug people], not [one of those earmarks] that bugs people. The verb has to agree with "those earmarks," not with "one."

Either Way, They Got Some Crazy Little Women There

"Kansas City" alone is often ambiguous, and so I would not include it on a list of "dateline cities." For every person who thinks it's obvious that a reference with no state means the much larger one, in Missouri, there's probably, oh, I don't know, a third of a person who thinks it's obvious that it means the one in the eponymous state.

But here's an example of why the dateline-city thing, like all style guidelines, is only a guideline:

RAYTOWN, Mo. — Police say that the bodies of four people have been found in an apartment near Kansas City and that they suspect foul play. Police are trying to confirm the identities of the dead, including two preteen boys.

No need to say "Kansas City, Mo." when (a) we already know the suburb is in Missouri and (b) if it's near the one in Missouri, it's also near the one in Kansas.

Idaho -- Alaska!

Occasionally we old-fashioned newspaper people are asked what the heck the deal is with this Calif., Fla., Mich. business. Why don't we use the modern, streamlined, newfangled state abbreviations provided to us by the U.S. Postal Service?

I usually don't like to answer a question with a question, but -- quick -- what's MI? Minnesota? Wrong. What's AK? Arkansas? Wrong! What's MS? Massachusetts? Wrong!

Yeah, I know you didn't get any of those wrong, because my readers are sharper than that, but trust me: Ordinary people outside of Arkansas and Alaska (I'll let you fill in your own redundancy joke) would bat maybe .600 on the AK question. And just as AK could be Alaska or Arkansas, AL could be Alabama or Alaska; MA could be Massachusetts or Maryland; MI could be Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi or Missouri; MO could be Missouri or Montana; MS could be Mississippi or Missouri; and NE could be Nebraska or Nevada. I think that about covers it. Now, how many of the standard old-fashioned abbreviations used in Associated Press style run the risk of confusing people? Miss. and Mo. are the only ones that come to mind.

We'd love the ink and the newsprint savings that the two-letter abbrevs. would provide, but, to the degree that these style decisions are more than just arbitrary rulings for the sake of consistency, clarity is Job One.

Work at Home!

For years, people have been asking me about work-at-home opportunities for copy editors. Today, I finally saw one of some substance.

United Press International seeks a speedy, eagle-eyed,
English-language wordsmith with a strong journalism background to join
its copy desk.

The ideal candidate is an experienced grammar and style maven who
thrives in a fast-paced news environment, works swiftly and
efficiently on tight deadlines, and is quick with an extensive set of
Internet reference tools.

You must have an innate enthusiasm for dictionaries and stylebooks; a
proofreader's attention to the tiniest detail; a mastery of grammar
and composition; a passion for polishing copy; and a proven ability to
edit news stories for accuracy, clarity and fairness -- quickly.

Requirements:

-- Supreme command of the English language and a familiarity with
government, politics, international relations, history, economics,
current events and more.

-- Experience in all facets of daily copy desk work, including style,
grammar and libel issues.

-- Strong organizational, time-management and communication skills.

-- Bachelor's degree in journalism or related field.

This position does not include design work but requires strong
computer literacy and familiarity with Outlook, Word and Mozilla Firefox.

This is a full-time telecommuting position, Monday through Friday.

Salary determined by experience and performance evaluation.

Reply here.

Is Wal-Mart Now Walmart?

In the new issue of the Copyediting newsletter, Paul R. Martin writes:

Today's lesson, class, is about the differences between company names and brand names or logos.

Hey, that's my lesson!

Paul goes on to discuss the latest example of the signs-don't-match-the-name phenomenon. The stores of Wal-Mart Stores Inc., which once bore signs reading WAL*MART, now bear signs reading Walmart*. We grown-up publications types don't go for starbursts or asterisks (or all caps when initials aren't involved, for that matter), but should we now be writing about Walmart rather than Wal-Mart?

Short answer: No.

Long answer: As with J.C. Penney Co. Inc. and its JCPenney stores, and Exxon Mobil Corp. and its ExxonMobil service stations, we're faced with one rendition for the company and another on the signs it uses. Because it would be rather silly outside of a discussion like this to write about "J.C. Penney Co. Inc. and its JCPenney stores" or "Exxon Mobil Corp. and its ExxonMobil service stations," we grown-up publications types need to pick one rendition or the other, and it makes sense to choose the one that's on file with the Securities and Exchange Commission.


If you're still rooting for "Walmart," by the way, the company behind the stores, as Paul Martin points out, makes a bid for the "most refreshing bit of logo candor" award in its news release announcing the change in typography:

In its 46-year history, Wal-Mart has freshened up its logo on a number of occasions. Its last revision was in 1992.

Wal-Mart, eh? Well, there you go.