Tue 4 Nov 2008
I thought you grammar mavens might like an exercise:
http://topics.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/03/red-pencils-ready/
Probably too easy for y’all, but I like the notion of using specific examples from the Times’ own pages.
2 Responses to “NYTimes quiz on grammar and usage”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
November 5th, 2008 at 5:00 pm
Interesting quiz! Quite challenging! #1, #3, and #7 immediately leapt out at me, but I read right over #2 (doh), #8 (obscure), #9 (excessive), and #10 (doh again!).
#4 didn’t immediately seem ambiguous to me (I attached “swiftly” to “concluded” because that makes more sense). I would have rephrased #5 as “It seemed that Mr. Allen was trying…”
I had to look up “fulsomely”.
I’ll be interested to hear Elizabeth’s thoughts on these. :)
November 5th, 2008 at 9:16 pm
Wow – a really geeky-fun peek inside the offices of some of the greatest editors in America. I got all except 5 and 6. I should have gotten 5, although not all publications have a problem with this usage of “like” anymore. I found the answer to 6 a little disappointing – as someone who spends a lot of time reading novels written before 1900, I’m fond of the word “fulsome” in its original sense and wish the Times would hang on to it a little bit longer.
Interestingly, question 9 contains an example of a grammatical battle that I have soundly lost. In addition to the “Sahara desert” problem (I only knew that from being an editor – I don’t think most people would notice or care), I loathe the construction “their metabolism.” More than one tardigrade, more than one metabolism. Hence, I would have written “Tardigrades can suspend their metabolisms.” Although few editors today will remove this “s” if the author includes it, almost none will insert it if omitted. A sad state of affairs.
Thanks for sharing this!