Student Media: When Copy Editors Fail

From the "It sure could be worse" file:

Brigham Young University's student newspaper, The Daily Universe, ran a photo in its Monday morning edition of a vote at the Latter Day Saints General Conference. The cutline (what a layperson may refer to as a caption) stated the following:

"Members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostates and other general authorities raise their hands in a sustaining vote Saturday morning."

If you've grown up around church you know that Apostate is not something a religious person would want to be called. Especially when you consider that the actual name is Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. And especially when your group is one of the governing bodies of the religious group that is affiliated with Brigham Young University and your newspaper.

This would be like the Bison calling Jimmy Allen -- one of the church of Christ's legendary preachers -- Jimmy Antichrist. More or less.

Apparently the students tried to pick up all of the copies that had not already been taken. Then they ordered an expensive re-run.

This is why every adviser at church-sponsored schools dies before they reach old age. The night before delivery is always a bit restless, especially if you know there is something that could be considered controversial in the issue. Let me add from experience that there is always something that will be considered controversial by someone, even more so at a religious school.

For example, this week I have heard of people upset that we ran pieces on a student working for a Palestinian health organization, a fashion show highlighting unsustainable clothing companies (and sustainable ones), a photo showing the protests at the G20 summit and a column from a Bible professor suggesting Christians and theistic evolutionists work together.

All in a week's work.

But I sure feel for that BYU adviser. Sometimes you eat the bar, sometimes, well, he eats you.

Here's that link.

In Case You Didn't Know

This semester I'm teaching Editing for Print Media for the second time since I ascended to the lectern. I love teaching this class not only because it helps my students appreciate and respect the language, but also because it offers several opportunities to destroy some long- (or never-) held beliefs. This week I talked about problems in word choice and garbled idioms.

When I was a Dow Jones Newspaper Fund intern I received a hefty packet of material that relates specifically to these two problems. In conducting research for the class, I also stumbled upon a site that has a rather exhaustive collection of idioms (cliches) that are often garbled.

Here are a few trouble areas for American English writers and speakers:
Career vs. Careen: These two verbs can drive an uptight editor to release an "Oh, look at me; I'm so intelligent that this mistake is making me sigh" sigh. Careen is a nautical term meaning to rock or sway from side to side. Career as a verb means to drive recklessly or speed out of control. Cars usually career more often then they careen.

Bemused: This does not mean smugly amused, as many people mistakenly believe. It means confused.

Nonplussed is often believed to mean apathy or disaffection. It actually means bewilderment. Quite a difference, actually. I used to misuse this all the time. If you are planning on wading into the deep waters of big words, be sure you've double checked your water wings.

Loathe vs. Loath: I have roughly two kinds of students: those who are fascinated by the minutiae of the English language and those who hear a definition of loath (no e) and ask, "Who cares? Nobody uses it." This is a problem of adjective vs. verb. Loathe is a transitive verb meaning to hate (I loathe the Giants), and loath is an adjective meaning unwilling or refusing (I am loath to live in a state with no professional baseball teams).

Rifle vs. Riffle: I see this wrong every so often. Rifle as a verb means to plunder or steal. Riffle as a verb means to search or sift through (I am riffling through your sock drawer).

-------------------

One of my favorite topics is garbled idioms. Here are a few you may be unaware of (and if you are aware of them, why are you still using them? They are cliches!):

When worst comes to worst: It's hard (impossible) to move from the last degree of something to the last degree of something (unless you're using terribly unfunny hyperbole or you are a 12-year-old girl and your boyfriend dumped you then your mom cut off your Hannah Montana supply). If you are trying to show progression (or in this case regression) you should say "When worse comes to worst."

Don't mix words: We mix words all the time; they're called sentences (or possibly malaprops). The idiom is an imperative to not "mince" words.

Veil of tears: This mistake makes a bit of sense; imagine someone crying so hard that it covers his or her face. The idea, however, is that one is passing through a valley of tears or — archaically — a vale.

Chomping at the bit: All cowboys know that a bit refers to an important part of standard horse riding equipment. Chomping does indeed mean bite vigorously, but it is a variant of the original, to champ. If you are using an idiom it is because it has entered into the lingo in an original form and stuck around. You must say the horse (or the over-eager kid) is champing at the bit.

Missed it by a hair's breath (or worse, missed it by a hairs breath): Without taking a single anatomy course, a grammarian can tell you that hair does not breathe (no lungs, you see). However, a hair is rather thin. Its width, or breadth, is very scant. In fact, if you were to miss something by a hair's breadth, you may have escaped by the skin of your teeth (don't get me started).

Slight of hand: If you have a very small paw, you may indeed be very crafty with it. Sleight, however, is skillful, clever or a show of dexterity. The magician used sleight of hand to rifle the man's wallet.

-------------------

The problem with parsing or vetting the various misuses of the English language is that the battle is a losing one. Misuse over time has led many unworthy words to take on new meanings (Impact as a verb? Come on. What's wrong with affect...oh, nevermind.) The words you see incorrect today will be correct tomorrow.

The Internet will also impact (argh!) how words get slaughtered in the future. We can already thank gaming for "pwned" and who knows what for "I heart _______." Where is the love?

Anyway, I'll do my part hunting Moby Dick with a toothpick and feeling like a Latin teacher.