We had given a great deal of thought in regards to whom would be the recipient of our first Criminal Sentence. Crimes against grammar are on the increase and despite constant reports on research statistics revealing the demise in standards of Australian literacy, offenders are still out there committing acts against language.
The first accused to come under the hammer – Cosmopolitan. An article featuring on the Cosmopolitan website, part of the ninemsn media conglomerate, has committed a treacherous act against sentence structure. Imagine my delight to see the article Dinner for six? No problem: The party tricks we all need to master. Imagine my horror though, when my focus shifted from linguine to linguistics.
The subheading of the first section within the article tells the reader to “Serve up snacks like Nigella Lawson”! In this particular instance the copywriter really didn’t put enough thought into the qualifier within the sentence. A sentence advising us to “Serve up snacks” really would have been sufficient – no qualifier required. Instead, the relative clause that has been written, “like Nigella Lawson”, is most inappropriate within the sentence structure as it refers back to the noun it modifies, the actual “snacks” themselves.
The inference to serve Nigella Lawson up as a snack at a dinner party is one this Cosmo journo didn’t quite think through. Besides, I would hardly call Nigella a “snack” – roasting her on a spit would constitute a banquet, and easily serve more than 6.
No comments:
Post a Comment