Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Clueless writing about our sport

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • dukehjsteve
    replied
    Related of course to this is how in everyday parlance, the implement is typically a " shotput."

    Leave a comment:


  • Atticus
    replied
    Originally posted by br View Post
    notch the longest shot recorded in the Big Ten this season.
    And, of course, the 'shot' here refers to what the writer should be . . . [rimshot]

    Leave a comment:


  • br
    replied
    From the front page story Michigan "Meat Factory" Wins Weight Throw At Home, the writer extols the accomplishments of Michigan throwers, but misidentifies the event.

    Junior Joseph Ellis helped to pace the Wolverines, finishing with the furthest distance amongst the field on five of his six attempts, including one that traveled 22.55 meters to set a personal record and notch the longest shot recorded in the Big Ten this season.

    “That’s a huge confidence booster,” Ellis said when informed his shot was a personal best.

    Leave a comment:


  • tandfman
    replied
    I agree. I'm a real grammar scold, and I always ignore solecisms on these Message Boards. But I couldn't resist pointing out the errant apostrophe in this case because the previous post had cited the NY Times obit as the antithesis of the thread title.

    Is it clueless writing "about track"? I suppose it could be, if the writer didn't know that the name of the meet is the Penn Relays.

    But in any event, this one just happened to hit one of my hot buttons--the faulty grammar that appears much too often in the NY Times. If there were a website devoted to such things, I might be a daily contributor.

    Leave a comment:


  • wamego relays champ
    replied
    Originally posted by tandfman View Post
    The only clueless thing about the NYT obituary was this:

    >>The Penn Relay’s four-mile event in 1949 was won by a team that included three Ashenfelter brothers: Horace, Bill and Donald.<<

    It was, and is, the Penn Relays. I'm not sure that the name of the meet is intended as a possessive, but if it is, it should be Relays', not Relay's.
    As the OP of this thread I suppose you make the rules, but to me grammatical errors do not qualify as "clueless writing."

    Leave a comment:


  • br
    replied
    Originally posted by tandfman View Post
    It was, and is, the Penn Relays. I'm not sure that the name of the meet is intended as a possessive, but if it is, it should be Relays', not Relay's.
    Meet the 'Grammar Vigilante' of Bristol

    For years, it has been rumoured that somebody has been going out late at night, correcting bad punctuation on Bristol shop fronts.

    The self-proclaimed "grammar vigilante" goes out undercover in the dead of night correcting street signs and shop fronts where the apostrophes are in the wrong place.

    Leave a comment:


  • tandfman
    replied
    The only clueless thing about the NYT obituary was this:

    >>The Penn Relay’s four-mile event in 1949 was won by a team that included three Ashenfelter brothers: Horace, Bill and Donald.<<

    It was, and is, the Penn Relays. I'm not sure that the name of the meet is intended as a possessive, but if it is, it should be Relays', not Relay's.

    Leave a comment:


  • JayIsMe
    replied
    From the NYT obituary piece for Horace Ashenfelter, the antithesis of this thread title. IMO one of the best descriptions of the steeplechase for the non-fan-

    Ashenfelter’s event was the 3,000-meter steeplechase — a punishing obstacle course of nearly two miles with 28 waist-high hurdles that do not topple, seven of them followed by water pits almost 12 feet long. Runners leap most of the fixed hurdles, but at the water jumps they use it as a step to bound toward the shallower end; after splashing down, they scamper out to continue the race.

    Leave a comment:


  • tandfman
    replied
    I just used Google and found the original. Yes, the word was "close" and the article appeared on the website of the Anchorage Daily News.

    https://www.adn.com/sports/running/2...championships/

    I don't know why anyone would find a version of that article translated into a foreign language, then translate it back into English, and publish it as news 7 weeks after the race.

    Leave a comment:


  • tandfman
    replied
    Originally posted by Pego View Post
    I suspect, detailed=close.
    You're probably right, given the context. But again, it looks as if the original text was translated from English into some other language, and then translated back to English. I wonder what language. We'll probably never know.

    Leave a comment:


  • Pego
    replied
    Originally posted by tandfman
    I'm not sure what a detailed second is supposed to mean.
    I suspect, detailed=close.

    Leave a comment:


  • Powell
    replied
    Originally posted by Atticus View Post
    I realize that Milesplit articles are frequently written by non-professionals (with little editorial oversight), but this is linked on the front page here. It made me LOL.

    How 'low' can you go?
    That doesn't really belong in this thread, though. It's just poor writing skills, not clueless writing about T&F.

    Leave a comment:


  • tandfman
    replied
    Here's a weird one. The headline reads:

    >>Alaska’s Ostrander a detailed second at NCAA West Area cross nation championships<<

    This also sounds as if it had been translated from another language. West Area means West Region, and cross nation means cross country. I'm not sure what a detailed second is supposed to mean.

    The other odd thing is that the article appears here:

    https://kaplanherald.com/2017/12/30/...championships/

    Note that it bears today's date, December 30, 2017, but it says:

    >> Allie Ostrander finished a close second in the women‘s race at Friday‘s NCAA West Region cross-country championships in Seattle.<<

    Well, the race did happen on a Friday, but that was seven weeks ago. Why is it news today?

    Leave a comment:


  • tandfman
    replied
    I can understand how a literal translation could give you circle for throwing instead of throwing circle, but valve baton racing? That just boggles.

    Leave a comment:


  • Atticus
    replied
    Originally posted by tandfman View Post
    How about this description of our sport:
    >>Sport jargon such as circle for throwing, bar clearence, valve baton racing and starting area describe track & field<<
    Valve baton racing? Wow!
    http://www.novaguide.gr/en/show/1016...llenge-league/
    Ha! Literal translations are tricky. I suspect an idiom got in the way.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X