Actually, given it was the name of a film, “the Birds is coming” was grammatically correct. There was but one film. You can’t say “a film are coming”. As to the ever increasing “ly” omission, is that not just another example of the ongoing erosion of good English by Americanisms, like the all too pervasive “fit” instead of “fitted”? I could go on! Further damage has been done by the woke induced fear of “he” or “she”, so often now reduced to a decidedly ungrammatical and vague “they”.
I find these English language errors grate horribly, and it is depressing to find them in a major newspaper. Since you've opened up the subject, can I add raise two more peeves? The phrase "bored of" instead of "bored with". This seems to be used even by people who I thought would know better, which makes me wonder if perhaps I'm wrong. The other phrase which feels ugly to me is the use of "gone extinct", or "went extinct" instead of "have become extinct" or "became extinct". I'd like to know what others think.
The death of Jimmy Carter prompted some memories of Mad magazine for me, as it was at its satirical peak during his presidency. Not only did it cleverly lampoon Carter and his administration, it brilliantly captured the spirit of the time via Dave Berg and the other cartoonists. After that it went into decline.
And re the Herald editorial:
"What is the problem here? A rushed editorial? A failure to properly proofread? An ignorance of the proper use of the English language?"
A poorly-trained AI model could also be an explanation.
I despair of current illiteracy... not just among "journalists" and so-called "editors" but across a wide spectrum of academia... and many "teachers" at multiple levels can barely express themselves. Modern children haven't a hope unless they attend quality schools. GenAI is a useful tool that can be used but not relied on to produce content that necessarily delivers quality English language.
Don't get me started. Even road signs - 'Drive safe'. Have we completely abandoned adverbs? The Herald always states 'you're doing this wrong'. No, you, NZ Herald, are writing this wrongly.' And less instead of fewer. Begs the question instead of raises the question - tv journalists are terrorists with this one. Every manuscript I edit for publication these days has 'that' scattered through like confetti. Nobody knows the difference between 'which' and 'that' anymore.
I shall decline the invitation in the last sentence and rather say that in fact we need you and others like you to maintain standards of proper English.
Dare I venture to say that I rather dislike the insertion of words from another language into the dialogue (although I know that English is a hybrid). But rather like the Academie Francaise who hated franglais, when I say work I mean work and not mahi.
My third dog (a two-year-old rambunctious black Labrador) is called Mahi. It's easy to shout, rhymes with Puppy, and I knew he would be really hard work because when I asked the breeder for a dog (as opposed to a bitch) with attitude she said, 'don't worry, I'm saving the biggest bastard for you'.
Aha - one of the things I try to do after I have written a piece is try to imagine a description for an illustration - what I would say to an artist or how I would imagine a photo (photography is a hobby) and then I put the description into an AI chatbot and see what happens
I think it would be correct if written. ("The Birds" is coming) Nevertheless it's a amusing little poke by the magazine, which I also read for many years.
I think it was obvious what was intended - but the intention was to create an apparent grammatical error which would enhance the impact of the advertisement. People were far more aware of bad grammar in 1963 than they are now.
I used to enjoy the cartoons drawn by Don Martin!
Actually, given it was the name of a film, “the Birds is coming” was grammatically correct. There was but one film. You can’t say “a film are coming”. As to the ever increasing “ly” omission, is that not just another example of the ongoing erosion of good English by Americanisms, like the all too pervasive “fit” instead of “fitted”? I could go on! Further damage has been done by the woke induced fear of “he” or “she”, so often now reduced to a decidedly ungrammatical and vague “they”.
I find these English language errors grate horribly, and it is depressing to find them in a major newspaper. Since you've opened up the subject, can I add raise two more peeves? The phrase "bored of" instead of "bored with". This seems to be used even by people who I thought would know better, which makes me wonder if perhaps I'm wrong. The other phrase which feels ugly to me is the use of "gone extinct", or "went extinct" instead of "have become extinct" or "became extinct". I'd like to know what others think.
Thanks Sheryl.
Examples abound these days.
The death of Jimmy Carter prompted some memories of Mad magazine for me, as it was at its satirical peak during his presidency. Not only did it cleverly lampoon Carter and his administration, it brilliantly captured the spirit of the time via Dave Berg and the other cartoonists. After that it went into decline.
And re the Herald editorial:
"What is the problem here? A rushed editorial? A failure to properly proofread? An ignorance of the proper use of the English language?"
A poorly-trained AI model could also be an explanation.
AI - perish the thought (yeah right)
I despair of current illiteracy... not just among "journalists" and so-called "editors" but across a wide spectrum of academia... and many "teachers" at multiple levels can barely express themselves. Modern children haven't a hope unless they attend quality schools. GenAI is a useful tool that can be used but not relied on to produce content that necessarily delivers quality English language.
Don't get me started. Even road signs - 'Drive safe'. Have we completely abandoned adverbs? The Herald always states 'you're doing this wrong'. No, you, NZ Herald, are writing this wrongly.' And less instead of fewer. Begs the question instead of raises the question - tv journalists are terrorists with this one. Every manuscript I edit for publication these days has 'that' scattered through like confetti. Nobody knows the difference between 'which' and 'that' anymore.
Please, just kill me now.
I shall decline the invitation in the last sentence and rather say that in fact we need you and others like you to maintain standards of proper English.
Dare I venture to say that I rather dislike the insertion of words from another language into the dialogue (although I know that English is a hybrid). But rather like the Academie Francaise who hated franglais, when I say work I mean work and not mahi.
My third dog (a two-year-old rambunctious black Labrador) is called Mahi. It's easy to shout, rhymes with Puppy, and I knew he would be really hard work because when I asked the breeder for a dog (as opposed to a bitch) with attitude she said, 'don't worry, I'm saving the biggest bastard for you'.
For a moment I thought you might have named the dog after the Mayor of Tauranga for some reason.....
...but also, & speaking of illustrations, have been meaning to ask where you find yours, the unattributed ones?
Do you mean the MAD one of the images that head up my articles?
The coloured images you often use...not MAD ones I don't think...
Aha - one of the things I try to do after I have written a piece is try to imagine a description for an illustration - what I would say to an artist or how I would imagine a photo (photography is a hobby) and then I put the description into an AI chatbot and see what happens
Oh haha! Didn't occur to me...
You didn't think I laboured over a hot paintbrush as well as a hot keyboard - surely not. :-)
Some readers like the pix - others prefer the words.
Not quite that thilly, thought there might be a sort of 'Getty Images' for illustrations...
Like you I abhor incorrect grammar but it occurs to me the “The Birds” was the title of a movie?
The film is a singular piece and whilst “The Birds is coming “ appears incorrect does it mean birds or the film?
I think it would be correct if written. ("The Birds" is coming) Nevertheless it's a amusing little poke by the magazine, which I also read for many years.
I think it was obvious what was intended - but the intention was to create an apparent grammatical error which would enhance the impact of the advertisement. People were far more aware of bad grammar in 1963 than they are now.
Tell me about it!
Hedren lived with a tame lion after fame struck, I seem to recall reading somewhere...
The older bro bought MAD & NME & Melody Maker so my pocket money was saved for other stuff. Still have a pile of them...