Unlike the so-called Romance languages that include Greek, Spanish, Italian, and French, the English language doesn’t have a well-developed past imperfect tense. In fact, English doesn’t inflect its verbs at all for the imperfect tense in much the same way that it doesn’t for its future tense. All it has done to denote the imperfect—meaning the sense of continuous, incomplete, or coincident past actions—is to combine the past progressive form of its verbs with the past tense forms of the verb “be.” And to compensate for its inability to inflect verbs for the past imperfect, English also came up with three special ways of evoking it.
I discussed the mechanisms of the English past imperfect in an essay that I wrote for my English-usage column in The Manila Times in 2004, “Dealing better with the past imperfect.” I have posted that essay in this week’s edition of the Forum to help members and guests become more conversant with the of use this less-familiar tense form of English. If you aren’t confident now in using the past imperfect, you will surely be after studying the grammar prescriptions offered in this essay.
Dealing better with the past imperfect
Many of the languages closely related to English have a well-developed imperfect tense, that tense which shows a past action or condition as incomplete, continuous, or coincident with another action. This is true with Greek, Spanish, Italian, French, and most of the other Romance languages; they all elaborately inflect or morph their verbs for the imperfect. Those who have tried memorizing the many Spanish inflections for its preterito imperfectos, for instance, know how complicated this could get.
In contrast, English does not inflect its verbs for the imperfect, in much the same way that it doesn’t for its future tense. The farthest English has gone to formally capture the essence of the imperfect—the past imperfect in particular—is the past progressive. The English past progressive, of course, either shows an action in progress at a specific time in the past, or one in progress in the past when another action happened or interrupted it.
To better understand how English evokes the imperfect tense, it will be instructive for us to formally distinguish first between the “imperfect” and “perfect” in traditional grammar. Recall that verbs, apart from indicating the time element, also conveys other information about the verb’s action. This information, which is called aspect, shows whether the action is continuous, complete or incomplete, in progress, or habitual. Some languages, like those mentioned earlier, have several of these aspects and reflect them through the inflections of their verbs. In contrast, English has only two aspects: the perfect, which refers to a past action that was completed or “perfected,” as in “She danced with me,” and the imperfect, which refers to a past action that was still in progress or was incomplete, as in “She was dancing with me.”
We can see that the imperfect aspect of English verbs is grammatically formed in the same as their past progressive, which as we know simply combines the past tense of the verb “be” with the main verb’s—ing or present participle form. For the verb “dance,” for instance, the imperfect singular aspect is “was dancing” and the imperfect plural aspect is “were dancing.” Also called the continuous participle, this basic form of the English imperfect is meant to describe an action or event that was in progress in the past. To form the past imperfect, however, we must make it clear that the unfolding action or event was unfinished or interrupted, not “perfected,” as in these sentences: “We were touringParis when the recall order came.” “She ran the business while her husband was gallivanting in Europe .”
Another way of saying this is that in English, a simple past progressive statement like, say, “We were touringParis ” is not enough to establish the past imperfect aspect. It always needs a time frame established by another past action or condition. Thus, the statement “We were touring Paris ” is meaningful only in the context of being an answer to a previously asked question like, say, “What were you doing when the recall order came?” That question, in tandem with the past progressive “We were touring Paris ,” establishes the statement’s imperfect aspect.
The past progressive is, thankfully for users of English, not the only way English can evoke the past imperfect. To compensate for its inability to inflect verbs for the various shades of this aspect, the language came up with three other ways of capturing the sense of continuous, incomplete, or coincident past actions. They are as follows:
“ Used” + the verb’s infinitive form. This form elegantly expresses repeated, regular, or habitual actions or situations in the past: “We used to dance all night every summer.” “Dreams ofVermont winters used to obsess me in my youth.” “The couple used to host lavish parties until the Asian economic crisis crippled their export business.”
“ Would” + the verb’s basic form (the verb stem). “We would dance all night every summer.” “Every night the astronomer would wait for the stars to manifest themselves in the sky.” One caveat here: the past imperfect usage of “would” is not the same as its conditional usage, as in “If the weather were clear, we would dance all night at the terrace.”
The verb’s simple past tense + an adverb of frequency. “We were always dancing partners in our younger days.” “She often sang each time I played the piano.” “We rarely complained whenever she made impossible demands.”
To sum up, the English past imperfect always conveys the idea of someone doing something or something happening when something else happened. Its job is always to emphasize the continuation or interruption of a past action, in contrast to the past perfect, which always makes sure of putting a finis to that past action.
We can see that the imperfect aspect of English verbs is grammatically formed in the same as their past progressive, which as we know simply combines the past tense of the verb “be” with the main verb’s—ing or present participle form. For the verb “dance,” for instance, the imperfect singular aspect is “was dancing” and the imperfect plural aspect is “were dancing.” Also called the continuous participle, this basic form of the English imperfect is meant to describe an action or event that was in progress in the past. To form the past imperfect, however, we must make it clear that the unfolding action or event was unfinished or interrupted, not “perfected,” as in these sentences: “We were touring
Another way of saying this is that in English, a simple past progressive statement like, say, “We were touring
The past progressive is, thankfully for users of English, not the only way English can evoke the past imperfect. To compensate for its inability to inflect verbs for the various shades of this aspect, the language came up with three other ways of capturing the sense of continuous, incomplete, or coincident past actions. They are as follows:
“ Used” + the verb’s infinitive form. This form elegantly expresses repeated, regular, or habitual actions or situations in the past: “We used to dance all night every summer.” “Dreams of
“ Would” + the verb’s basic form (the verb stem). “We would dance all night every summer.” “Every night the astronomer would wait for the stars to manifest themselves in the sky.” One caveat here: the past imperfect usage of “would” is not the same as its conditional usage, as in “If the weather were clear, we would dance all night at the terrace.”
The verb’s simple past tense + an adverb of frequency. “We were always dancing partners in our younger days.” “She often sang each time I played the piano.” “We rarely complained whenever she made impossible demands.”
To sum up, the English past imperfect always conveys the idea of someone doing something or something happening when something else happened. Its job is always to emphasize the continuation or interruption of a past action, in contrast to the past perfect, which always makes sure of putting a finis to that past action.
-------
From the weekly column “English Plain and Simple” by Jose A. Carillo in The Manila Times, March 5, 2004, © 2004 by the Manila Times Publishing Corp. All rights reserved. This essay later appeared as Chapter 53 of the author’s book Give Your English the Winning Edge, © 2009 by Jose A. Carillo. All rights reserved.






Name a Romance language that includes Greek, Spanish etc.
ReplyDeleteGreek is a Romance language?
ReplyDelete"Recall that verbs, apart from indicating the time element, also conveys other information about the verb's action." conveys?
ReplyDeleteFriday, November 27, 2009
ReplyDeleteWatch out for the language register of your English!
Except perhaps for readers of my column in The Manila Times way back when it started in 2002, not many people know that I had made it my self-imposed task to make Filipinos aware that if their English was bad, it was largely because of our society’s fervid addiction to legalese or jargon as its default English.
“Had made it…..” ? If you change “know” to “knew”, you just may have a sentence with a genuine past perfective aspect. As it stands, you don’t.
"self-imposed" is superfluous, is it not?
ReplyDeleteFrom "Give Your English The Winning Edge":
ReplyDelete"We really had no choice then but to begin to live up to that standard by getting a good, up-to-date American English dictionary - and that, I am happy to way, was precisely what I had done."
"Had done"? After what?
Whoops! I should have said, "Before what?"
ReplyDeleteForum members will recall Carillo’s final post on the subject of “cavalierly vs cavalier”.
ReplyDeleteI don’t think there’s any need to bother the experts about the usage of “cavalierly” and “cavalier.” The semantic distinction between the two is actually very elementary and it has been clarified in the Forum beyond any doubt. Please just go over the previous discussion thread on the usage of these two words. You’ll see that we have already beaten the horse dead on this subject, so to speak, so there’s really no need to bring the animal back to life for renewed flogging. Enough is enough. (from You Asked Me This Question, 5 June, 2010)
But the eminent American Professor of Journalism and brilliant essayist, Mr Ben Yagoda, commented that Joe was in serious error in using “cavalierly” instead of “cavalier” in:
By being too colloquial and cavalierly with the language, they are obviously not practicing what they are preaching to their students.
Why was Professor Yagoda’s comment expunged?
"In the case of compound sentences, it is grammatically mandatory to put a comma between the first coordinate clause and the second coordinate clause."
ReplyDelete"grammatically" is superfluous, is it not?
"ABOUT THE BIOGRAPHERS:
ReplyDeleteDavid Wootton is Professor of History at the University of York. Before coming to York, has held positions in history and politics at four British and four Canadian universities and visiting postions in the United States. He was educated at Oxford and Cambridge."
"...HAS held"..?
"Do better than a calculated guess in handling conditional sentences
ReplyDeleteI know for a fact that a lot of writers and editors—including myself when I still didn’t know any better..."
..myself..?
"You can report the English misuse by e-mailing a verbatim transcription or an image in GIF or JPEG format to jcarilloforum@gmail.com. When doing so, please be mindful of the laws against libel and oral defamation."
ReplyDelete"Oral defamation? Is "slander" not good enough a word?
In July 2010, Carillo chastised a journalist for using “scour” for “search”. He based his objection on the Merriam-Webster’s lack of this definition. Had he looked at the American Heritage Dictionary (which he often uses in his own support), he would have found:
ReplyDeletescour2 (skour) KEY
VERB:
scoured, scour·ing, scours
VERB:
tr.
1. To search through or over thoroughly: The detective scoured the scene of the crime for clues.
2. To range over (an area) quickly and energetically.
VERB:
intr.
1. To range over or about an area, especially in a search.
2. To move swiftly; scurry.
Other major dictionaries give similar definitions.
ENGLISH IDIOMS
ReplyDelete“in the doghouse”
Someone who is in the doghouse is in disgrace and is very unpopular at the moment. Example: “The high-flying executive who got the ire of the company’s owners suddenly found himself in the doghouse, stripped of his title and corporate privileges.”
This is a very misleading example. "In the doghouse" is used, almost exclusively, to describe (with a degree of exaggeration) the domestic situation wherein the husband has so upset his wife that the only place he is permitted to sleep is in the dog kennel; hence "in the doghouse".
"If you do this for at least 20 minutes each night for a month, it just might do wonders to your recalcitrant tongue and diction as it did to mine." (SSB, Sept 2010)
ReplyDeleteThe idiom is “work wonders for”
"With no tutor and learning tapes and with only a battered English-Russian dictionary from a Peace Corps volunteer who had hurriedly flown back to the United States, that enterprise withered in the bud in less than two weeks." (SSB, Sept 2010)
"Withered on the vine" is the idiom Perhaps you meant “was nipped in the bud”, but that idiom implies an outside influence.
"Indeed, only when we have become adequately conversant with its idioms can we really say that we know our English." Jose Carillo in "Give Your English the Winning Edge".
"...its use of the relative pronoun “which” in the phrase “especially in this conflict-stricken province which depends heavily on this agricultural produce” is grammatically wrong (it should be “that” instead because what follows is a restrictive clause, not a nonrestrictive one)."
ReplyDeleteA restrictive clause is unnecessary here because we already know which region is being written about. Indeed, if we replace "this conflict-stricken province" with the already-given name of the region, the sentence becomes almost nonsensical. Besides, "depends heavily on this agricultural produce" does not restrict, or limit, or define; it simply describes. Hence, "which" (with a preceding comma)ia correct.
ENGLISH IDIOMS
ReplyDelete“cut to the quick”
When someone is cut to the quick by something, that person is very hurt and upset indeed. Example: “The revelations of the indicted coronel about illegal payoffs in the military establishment cut to the quick many retired high-ranking generals.”
This is another misleading example. To "cut to the quick" is to emotionally wound a person deeply. Far more often than not, it is used to describe the hurt felt by a person who has been unfairly maligned.
Failed programs
ReplyDeleteData in the last three decades show that although the number of researchers in the Philippines has been increasing, publications per PhD even decreased;
The figures show that although the country’s researchers have increased to 7,500 during the past three decades, the total research output has even gotten worse; it increased in quantity b
And “even gotten worse”? How about “gotten even worse”?
ENGLISH IDIOMS
ReplyDelete“like fish out of water”
The idiom is "like A fish out of water".
"This is like jumping from the frying pan to the fire, so to speak."
ReplyDeleteThe idiom is ...INTO the fire.
"I must say for the record that being a newspaper columnist myself, I have made it a policy in My Media English Watch not to critique the English of fellow newspaper columnists—no matter how faulty their English grammar and usage might be sometimes. This is as much a matter of courtesy to them as senior journalists as well as a tacit acknowledgment that most of them enjoy the privilege—and suffer the editorial pitfall—of not being subjected to line-by-line copyediting before their pieces go to print."
ReplyDeleteNow that you have stated it, your tacit acknowledgement can no longer be "is"; it must be "was".
And "well as" is superfluous, is it not?
ReplyDelete"ABOUT THE AUTHOR:
ReplyDeleteRoger Rosenblatt is an American journalist, author, playwright and teacher. He is the author of 14 books that have been published in 14 languages."
So, has he written other books, ones that have NOT been published in 14 languages?
'Dealing better with the past imperfect
ReplyDeleteMany of the languages closely related to English have a well-developed imperfect tense, that tense which shows a past action or condition as incomplete, continuous, or coincident with another action. This is true with Greek, Spanish, Italian, French, and most of the other Romance languages;'
Greek is not a Romance language!
'ABOUT THE AUTHOR:
ReplyDeletePeter Forbes is a writer, journalist and editor based in the United Kingdom who has a longstanding interest in the relationship between art and science. He has been researching biological subjects for the last 10 years, an effort that culminated in his two books to date, The Gecko's Foot..etc'
Past ten years.
"Culminated in his two books to date.."? "To date" implies that there may be more, so "culminated" should be "has culminated"...no?
"He has previously written The Man Who Made Lists, a biography of Peter Roget, originator of Roget’s Thesaurus."
ReplyDeletePreviously to what? Should this not be "He HAD previously written....etc"? or "He previously wrote....etc"?
"DOWNPOUR IN MINDANAO. Mariano Untal Memorial High School in Mlang, North Cotabato is submerged in knee-deep flood water following a downpour on Thursday evening. Classes in this school has been cancelled."
ReplyDeleteJoe caught the subject/verb mismatch in this par but missed the more egregious one - that of the school being submerged in knee-deep water. Ir it must be a tiny school indeed!
Whoops! "It....etc"
ReplyDelete“Rx for the hyphen in written English.
ReplyDeleteNext to the comma, the hyphen is probably the most unappreciated and neglected elements of the English language.”
Another number error, one that any half-way competent proofreader (or a spellchecker) should pick up.
Because the later action, “it was served to the guests,” is obvious in that sentence, it can simply be implied in the following present perfect construction:
ReplyDelete“The vodka mix had been shaken.”
Present perfect?
Taken out of context and served all by its lonesome as Alek would have it, that sentence can also be constructed in the simple present tense, as follows:
“The vodka mix was shaken.”
"Was shaken" is simple present tense...?
Once Carillo realised (thanks to Alek) that he'd
made these two monumental bloopers, he quietly corrected his own posts and removed Alek's. Such gratitude!
Commuters’ umbrellas, raincoats not enough for ‘Falcon’ rains
ReplyDelete"MANILA, Philippines—Makati city commuters seemed prepared for Tropical Storm “Falcon,” armed with umbrellas, rain coats, and even flip-flops for the flood. But they seemed to be caught off-guard by the storm’s strength."
The use of the verb phrase “seemed to be caught” second sentence of that lead paragraph is also grammatically wrong; since the action is in the past, that phrase should have been rendered in the passive form “seemed to have been caught” instead.
It is already in the passive voice. Did you mean "perfect" form?
And what's wrong with the simple "But they were caught....etc"?
ReplyDelete"In my book Give Your English the Winning Edge, I did give this example of a sentence with an adjective clause: “The strategy which they used to win the bidding was superb.” This is an example of how British English normally uses the relative pronoun “which” to introduce a restrictive clause without setting off that clause with a pair of commas, in contrast to American English, which uses “that” to do the same thing, also without setting off the clause with a pair of commas."
ReplyDeleteCarillo's above assertions about the British and American usage of 'which' and 'that' can be shown to be dubious simply by reading the definitions of both words in the Oxford,
Cambridge, Merriam-Webster and American Heritage dictionaries. In any case, his example above of a restrictive clause, "which they used to win the bidding" is not defining, neither is it limited, and nor is it restrictive. It is simply descriptive.
"Metro Manila’s four major Metro Manila broadsheets and two major TV news websites made much fewer mistakes in their English during the past few days."
ReplyDelete"..much fewer..."...? When this blooper was pointed out, the above sentence magically became:
"The four major Metro Manila broadsheets and two major TV news websites did quite well with their English during the past few days."
Of course, there was no attribution.
“The imposition of a 60-kilometer per hour (kph) speed limit in major roads and highways of Metro Manila was proposed in the House of Representatives over the weekend.”
ReplyDeleteSurely Filipinos travel on their roads, not in them?
This is Carillo's definition of the past perfect: This tense, which uses the auxiliary verb “had” with the past participle, is used to describe (1) an action completed before another past event, and (2) an action that began and ended at some unspecified time in the past.
ReplyDeleteBut then he comes up with:
"My reply to Menie: You’re absolutely right! I’ve done some back-checking and it does look like Reuters, the international news agency, had goofed grammatically in this lead sentence of their news dispatch from San Francisco datelined July 15, 2011."
So why "had goofed"..?
"The Reuters guys obviously didn’t want to be caught committing this basic error in English grammar, but in the process of avoiding it, they misplaced the adverb “openly” and made their lead sentence jump from the frying pan to the fire."
ReplyDeleteTo repeat: the idiom is "into the fire".
That lead sentence should therefore read as follows:
ReplyDelete“The National Irrigation Administration (NIA) Administrator Antonio Nangel disclosed yesterday that his office has allocated P30 billion in loans for the initial start of construction of the restoration and rehabilitation of non-functioning irrigation systems in the country.”
"Initial start"? What's wrong with plain old "start"? And construction of what? Of the restoration and rehabilitation? I don't think so. Both "initial" and "of construction" are superfluous, are they not?
From Media Watch, Aug 8:
ReplyDelete"There just are too intervening words for a clear grammatical connection to be clearly established between verb and subject."
Or, in this case, not enough words!
From Media Watch, Aug 8:
ReplyDeleteObviously, Joe didn't notice the deficiencies in the following sentence:
"POLANGUI, Albay: Sen. Jinggoy Estrada revealed here that his colleague lawmaker Jose Miguel “Migz” Zubiri quit his post as he was beset with paying 600,000 a week or more than P2 million a month in the electoral protest he was embroiled."
The sentence gives the impression that Zubiri quit simultaneously with being beset with paying 600,000 (presumably pesos). The more likely meaning is that he quit because of such a handicap.
Plus, the phrase "the electoral protest he was embroiled" is nonsense. Surely it should be "...in which he was embroiled."
From Media Watch, Aug 8:
ReplyDelete"As a courtesy to the speaker and in the interest of good usage, he or she would paraphrase the phrase instead to reflect the proper usage....etc."
The idiom is "in the interests"...
Joe is always chastising journalists for misplacing their modifiers. But then, in Media Watch, Aug 8, he comes up with: 'In the following sentences, the participial phrases need to be set off by commas for the statements to make sense: “The cause-oriented groups, spoiling for a showdown with the government, held a massive protest rally.” “Alicia threw a tantrum, angered by the late arrival of her date.”'
ReplyDeleteJoe should take your his advice and place "angered by the late arrival of her date" adjacent to "Alicia", should he not?
From You Asked Me This Question, Aug 8:
ReplyDeleteThis is also the reason why unlike you, Dik, I really wouldn’t frown on people who use the noun phrase “a man on the street” instead of “a man in the street.”
Why is "unlike you" not fully parenthesized?
From Media Watch, Aug 8:
ReplyDelete"And money was a big driving factor as he was spending P600,000 a week or more than P2 million a month for the poll recount.”
"...or more than P2 million a month" is not offered as a choice; it's an alternative way of expressing "...P600,000 a week". As such, it is parenthetical and should be adorned with commas fore and aft.
From Media Watch, Aug 8:
ReplyDeleteJoe's corrected sentence reads: “VIGAN CITY, Ilocos Sur: Local officials declared the province under a state of calamity due to a dengue outbreak that claimed eight reported fatalities and hospitalized 1,169 others."
If the action being reported (in this case, the dengue outbreak) is continuing (and we can well infer that it is) then the "one tense back" rule does not apply. The present perfect "has claimed" is correct. "Claimed" would be appropriate only if the outbreak had been stemmed.
In Essays, you have:
ReplyDelete“We lost the account because my boss insisted on doubling the proposed budget that I had strongly recommended, which of course the prospective client found excessively high. Its winning bid turned out to be only half as ours.”
"Excessively high" modifies "the proposed budget that I had strongly recommended", does it not?
And the winning bid comes from the bidder, not the client, as you have it.
And "only half as ours" is meaningless.
From Advice & Dissent:
ReplyDelete...Barbara Bradley Hagerty reports that there is now a growing cadre of Christian scholars who are convinced that the Adam and Eve story runs counter to all of the genomic evidence that have been assembled by scientists over the last 20 years.
"Evidence" is a mass noun used in the singular; it is not synonymous with "data". "Has been assembled" is the correct form.
"Past" 20 years.
The correct construction for that interrogative sentence is “Does absence make men’s hearts fonder?” This is actually the contemporary idiomatic expression “Absence makes men’s hearts fonder” in question form. That idiomatic expression is, in turn, an 18th century variation of a line from the poem “Elegies” by the Roman poet Sextus Propertius ((50–45 BC - circa 15 BC) that translates into English as follows:
ReplyDelete“Always toward absent lovers love’s tide stronger flows.”
The contemporary idiomatic expression (at least in countries where English is the native language) is "Absence makes the heart grow fonder"....which admits of no gender distinction. It is thought that this expression derives from the 19th century "'Tis absence, however, that makes the heart grow fonder," which itself flows from the Propertius original. Again, neither makes a gender distinction. And rightly so!
In Carillo's statement:
ReplyDeleteI’m delighted to take note that during the past week, the four major Metro Manila broadsheets and the online news websites of the two major TV networks have been remarkably free of English grammar and usage errors...etc.,
the past tensed "during the past week" does not jell with the past perfect "have been". Delete "have been"; insert "were".
"When an aspiring writer gains enough mastery of English grammar and usage, he or she quite naturally becomes anxious to develop a distinctive way of expressing himself or herself in writing."
ReplyDeleteOne is either a master of English, or one is not. There are no degrees of mastery.
"A writer’s personal style is supposed to develop largely on its own accord, of course..etc"
The idiom is of its own accord.
“GM has taken Bob Lutz, one of Detroit’s most colourful if sometimes controversial executives, out of retirement to advise its senior management team.”
ReplyDelete"But an even better and trouble-free way, regardless of the verb or phrasal verb used, is to use the passive voice construction for such sentences:
“Bob Lutz, one of Detroit’s most colourful if sometimes controversial executives, was brought out of retirement by GM to advise its senior management team.”
To retain the tense of the first sentence, should not the passive form be has been brought etc...?
Leaving this par in his site for so long does not give it legitimacy:
ReplyDelete"Barbara Bradley Hagerty reports that there is now a growing cadre of Christian scholars who are convinced that the Adam and Eve story runs counter to all of the genomic evidence that have been assembled by scientists over the last 20 years."
"Evidence" is still a singular noun, and "last" should logically be "past".
This particular comparative construction is, of course, an elliptical, more succinct version of this sentence: “The processor of your laptop is more powerful than the processor of your laptop.”
ReplyDeleteSome laptop!
From You Asked me This Question:
ReplyDelete“With them wavering, the troops finally raised the white flag.”
Unless we know who "them" are, the sentence makes little sense.
And if "them" are the troops, they are not wavering, they are capitulating!
From Media Watch:
ReplyDelete“ILIGAN CITY, Philippines – Thousands of Iliganons and from other places flocked to the Lechon festival, one of the highlights of Diyandi (gathering) festival Tuesday along Roxas Avenue here.”
...and people from other places..."?
Still appearing in Advice & Dissent:
ReplyDelete"....a growing cadre of Christian scholars who are convinced that the Adam and Eve story runs counter to all of the genomic evidence that have been assembled by scientists over the last 20 years."
"Data" may be plural but, as with "information", "evidence" is not. And is "the last 20 years" going to be our last?
Still appearing in Advice & Dissent:
ReplyDelete...a growing cadre of Christian scholars who are convinced that the Adam and Eve story runs counter to all of the genomic evidence that have been assembled by scientists over the last 20 years.
Was wrong last week, is wrong this week and will be just as wrong next week!
Still appearing...:
ReplyDelete...a growing cadre of Christian scholars who are convinced that the Adam and Eve story runs counter to all of the genomic evidence that have been assembled by scientists over the last 20 years.
Wrong for past weeks, is wrong this week and will be just as wrong next week!
From "Time Out..."
ReplyDeleteBut during the Middle Ages in Europe, when you could be put to death at stake for ideas that challenged religious wisdom, you’d most likely cower in mortal fear...etc.
Put to death at stake?
Do you mean "on the stake"?
The traditional expression is "burnt at the stake".
...the Adam and Eve story runs counter to all of the genomic evidence that have been assembled by scientists over the last 20 years.
ReplyDeleteWrong when first presented and still wrong. And will be just as wrong next week!
From Media Watch:
ReplyDelete“Employees and junior officers of the Department of Education (DepEd) on Saturday complained that officials of the department are traveling abroad so frequently in violation of its own austerity measure.”
This is awful editing. It repeats the (probably defamatory)implication that ALL the department's officials are travelling abroad. Also, "it's" is dangling so far from "department" that the sentence requires a second reading to gain sense. The sentence is not helped by having "so" introduce a term of degree. It should read "..too frequently,in violation...etc"
Whoops.....its!
ReplyDeleteBut during the Middle Ages in Europe, when you could be put to death at stake for ideas that challenged religious wisdom, you’d most likely cower in mortal fear of your own discovery and just keep it to yourself until your dying day.
ReplyDeleteWrong last week and just as wrong this week. The idiom is "burned at the stake".
"...there is now a growing cadre of Christian scholars who are convinced that the Adam and Eve story runs counter to all of the genomic evidence that have been assembled by scientists over the last 20 years."
ReplyDeleteApparently Carillo believes that, if you print the same errors often enough, readers will come to believe them as right!
From "Media Watch": "The word “leader” is, of course, a collective noun that’s unquestionably grammatically singular...etc"
ReplyDelete"Leader" is, of course, unquestionably NOT a collective noun.
From "The Lounge":
ReplyDelete"I came across the link to that video in “Faith Matters: The Kingdom of God in A Food Court,” a very interesting article by Walter Russell Mead in the December 5, 2010 issue of AmericanInterest.com. I highly recommend it for your reading."
You could hardly recommend it for anything else!
From The Manila Times:
ReplyDelete“India was the farthest Alexander the Great had gone in his eastward conquests.”
The farthest had gone before what....?