Saw this on a major news outlet’s Web site about important legislation that a governor was reconsidering:
“The governor said it is his policy not to say if he will sing or veto anything during the session … .”
Funny, isn’t it, how a simple switch of two letters can alter the meaning of a sentence? Heck, this transposition alters legislative procedures.
* Turns out the governor exercised his veto power on the referendum. Too bad he couldn’t sing.
Monday, June 6, 2011
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
The Kind of Day Today Is
“[Y]ou can’t help respecting anybody who can spell TUESDAY, even if he doesn’t spell it right; but spelling isn’t everything. There are days when spelling Tuesday simply doesn’t count.”
—From The House at Pooh Corner, by A. A. Milne
[Photo: Original toys that inspired the legendary Pooh tales.]
Monday, February 28, 2011
WordGazing: When Politeness Collides with Meaning
As I walked across a local park recently, I saw a large wooden sign that gave me pause. I had to read it twice to make certain I was reading it correctly. Here’s what it said:
Besides the obvious lack of punctuation, the word eliminate confused me about the message. Had the writer of this warning used a dictionary, s/he would have discovered these definitions for eliminate: to put an end to, to get rid of, to expel (to force to leave)—none of which convey the real meaning of the sign.
It’s not a mandate to rid the park of things (ball players, dogs, litter) that are already there. Nor is it suggesting that people would enjoy their park visits more if they eliminated one or more of the items listed. It’s a plea to park users to prevent any of these things from being in the park in the first place. People aren’t being given permission to “put an end” to dogs; they’re being asked to NOT play with or walk their dogs within the park’s boundaries.
Sometimes when we search for a way to say something politely or to say it without ruffling anyone’s feathers, we get trapped in a world of euphemisms and synonyms and quickly digress from our original intent. Sometimes the best way to say something is the most straightforward way:
This article was originally published on Lull: Practicing Life Between the Past and the Future, 3 January 2010.
To aid your enjoyment
please eliminate
ball playing
dogs
litter
please eliminate
ball playing
dogs
litter
Besides the obvious lack of punctuation, the word eliminate confused me about the message. Had the writer of this warning used a dictionary, s/he would have discovered these definitions for eliminate: to put an end to, to get rid of, to expel (to force to leave)—none of which convey the real meaning of the sign.
It’s not a mandate to rid the park of things (ball players, dogs, litter) that are already there. Nor is it suggesting that people would enjoy their park visits more if they eliminated one or more of the items listed. It’s a plea to park users to prevent any of these things from being in the park in the first place. People aren’t being given permission to “put an end” to dogs; they’re being asked to NOT play with or walk their dogs within the park’s boundaries.
Sometimes when we search for a way to say something politely or to say it without ruffling anyone’s feathers, we get trapped in a world of euphemisms and synonyms and quickly digress from our original intent. Sometimes the best way to say something is the most straightforward way:
So everyone may enjoy this park,
the following are prohibited:
ball playing
dogs
litter
the following are prohibited:
ball playing
dogs
litter
This article was originally published on Lull: Practicing Life Between the Past and the Future, 3 January 2010.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)