Monday, November 19, 2007
BURNING BUILDING
A headline from the Indianapolis Star over the weekend: WAREHOUSE BURNS NEAR AIRPORT. How about, "WAREHOUSE NEAR AIRPORT BURNS?" They make it sound like someone picked up a warehouse and moved it to a location near the airport, then set it on fire. I know their headline isn't exactly incorrect, but, as James Kilpatrick would say, it could have been stated with greater clarity.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
I agree with Philipp.
The dependent clause, "Near Airport," modifies "Warehouse," not "Burns." Therefore, it (the clause) should be located as close to the word "Warehouse" as possible. "Near Airport" helps define the warehouse -- it helps us know where this particular warehouse was located. They make it sound like the fact that it burned had something to do with the fact that it was located near the airport, which (I'm almost 100% positive) is not true.
I see what you're saying. It's like they moved the warehouse from location and found "near the airport" was the only place it would burn.
Amazing!
The name of your blog was intriguing enough!
Hello. This post is likeable, and your blog is very interesting, congratulations :-). I will add in my blogroll =). If possible gives a last there on my blog, it is about the Dieta, I hope you enjoy. The address is http://dieta-brasil.blogspot.com. A hug.
I am amused that you put the question mark inside the quotations, since the question was yours and not the original sentiment of the headline. :) Nesting errors?
thnxxx for sharing the information
public speaking
I believe that " wherehouse burnt" near Air Port was like this " wherehouse which is at Air Port was burning.
Andy made very good point. I agree with that. I believe that " warehouse which is at Air Port was burning.
And the thing is, your version and theirs take up exactly the same amount of headline space… so why not do it correctly?
Post a Comment