I have for years collected instances in print, for which it is likely the author and editor both relied on spelling checkers but went no farther to establish a correct text. My favorite, seen at least every year or two in the daily paper, is often seen in a headline:
"New Store Draws a Hoard of Shoppers"
To which an evil voice in my head asks, "Oh, where were they cached? I hope they had enough cash!"
(Did I need to tell you the mot apropos is horde? Yes? Then please keep reading!)
Recent examples that set me off today:
- In a marvelous book on anthropology that I'll soon review, one caption states, "Almost all living apes are restricted to living in tropical rainforest environments — accept the chimpanzee..." "Accept" is a verb meaning to tolerate or to admit into a group (among a dozen similar meanings), while "except," the word meant here, is a conjugation that means just the opposite: to exclude. The sentence as written loses its meaning entirely!
- The recent issue of Scientific American, reporting the death of polymath Philip Morrison, stated that he was "a font of new ideas." No, not really. A font is a typeface, such as Roman or Arial. Dr. Morrison was genuinely a fount (think Fountain) of new ideas, and I am sad to see he is gone.
- The newest Harry Potter book has a couple: "...the site of Mr. Fudge..." Really, now, it was the sight of Fudge that so discomfitted the P.M. And elsewhere "fug" is used rather than "fog," of a deposit on a cold windowpane. The former, incorrect word, refers to a gloomy, even perhaps a foggy, mood, but never to what you get by breathing against a cool window.
Now, we really have two kinds of errors here. "Accept" vs "except" are near-homophones. They sound much alike, though not exactly so. "Horde/hoard" and "cache/cash" are more exact homophones, as are "site/sight". (Many of us were taught that they are homonyms, but that word, meaning "same name," can mean either similar spelling or similar sound; homophone is more exact in this case) However, "font/fount" and "fug/fog" are more nearly look-alikes that sound roughly similar. I suppose they are more nearly what is meant by "homonyms."
I keep waiting for someone to put the smarts in a grammar checker (maybe the one in Microsoft Word?), so it can ask you whether the word you're using is really what you want, and offer a sound-alike that might carry the meaning you want. Meantime, there is still no substitute for a properly educated editor.
No comments:
Post a Comment