The couple that uses parallel constructions properly… uh, wins together?

Written By: admin - Oct• 03•12

Two orders of business before we get down to red-penning.

One, HAPPY BIRTHDAY MOM! <insert singing, including joyful dog joining-in, here>

Ahem. Okay. Two: a warning. It seems that Colleen — otherwise known as GrammarTroika sister #1 — took my title-offering threat seriously and has stepped up her submission rate. So buckle your seatbelts and prepare for a bunch of stuff from her, y’all!

Colleen’s not just bringing the quantity, she’s got quality in the mix too. Check this one out.

We do have a clear error here, I’d argue: “Women Rights” is just not okay no matter how I parse it. But I think I can see how they got there. For whatever reason, I’m okay with “Patient Rights,” and you wouldn’t want to go sticking an apostrophe-s on “women” when you don’t have one on “patient.” The balance of the sign would be all wonky. You follow? My CDO (it’s OCD, in the correct alphabetical order!) tendencies are grateful.

On the other hand, they did decide to go with what I assume is a resume point (“charitable org. president”) as a parallel to an imperative verb statement (“remove corrupt politicans”). Which is way more unwieldy than that neglected apostrophe would have been.

I’m not going to imply that these… interesting choices cost Major and Mrs. Shah the election. I’m just saying. You know?

Must… maintain… cranial… integrity…

Written By: admin - Sep• 21•12

UPDATE: My father correctly points out that I have misspelled the great Yul’s last name. In the process of correcting this mistake I have also discovered that the video to which I linked has been taken down. So I’ve linked to another one, which is really worth viewing. Ignore the incorrect lyrics and enjoy the genius.

============

Julie noticed something about this charming new Bic product, as described by Amazon. I’d seen the product, because it’s kind of been meme-ified — fortunately, its fame seems to be due to a general recognition of the total stupidity at work here. (And also, the product reviews are awesome.)

I put some red arrows to help you move past the vomitousness and see the [typographic] error. You’re welcome.

$5 says the copywriter here put “women’s,” and then was all “Whoa, is it ‘women’s hands’ or ‘women’s hand’? Or even ‘womens’ hand’s? WHO KNOWS SCREW IT” and went with (or intended to go with) “a woman’s hand.”

Anyway, as Julie acknowledged, the typo is “by no means the wrongest thing about this product.” That’s for sure. I mean, I very clearly remember the etiquette class on ink. A lady doesn’t write by hand in black ink in this day and age, because doing so might lead to confusion about whether she hand-wrote her correspondence or printed/photocopied it. Of course, now that I think about it, that advice was probably given to me before color printers became common, and is probably irrelevant now, and now I’m going to have Yul Brenner Brynner  stuck in my head all day again.

Oh, wait, the actual other errors: “cristal” is not a thing, and also, you know, misogyny. Where’s Sarah Haskins when we need her?

More small favors!

Written By: admin - Sep• 21•12

Okay, Kacia is rapidly becoming Reporter #2! (That’s a challenge issued, Colleen. And Dad. Just saying.)

Kacia found this one on the Facebooks. I’m tagging Facebook posts now because Facebook is its own cesspool of typographic awful. You’re welcome.

Again, I’m distracted by the good in this post. I guess I’m just in an optimistic place recently! I’m just excited by that comma after “that.” I’m fantasizing that there was a matching comma at the other end. Leave me alone, it’s only my Tuesday.

(In other good news, the group in question appears to have either ceased to exist or have come to its senses, as I can’t find it on Facebook. Kacia, if you’re a member and know where they went, sent the info and I’ll linkify.)

RPB gets COMPETITIVE

Written By: admin - Aug• 15•12

Y’all, RPB is contagious. It’s a fever. And the only prescription… is more cowbell.

Er, I mean, having your submission posted, so that you’re not the only one of your siblings who has yet to be anointed by the RPB.

This is why I am ignoring my personal rule of thumb and posting an email. Because I have to, y’all. You see, Heather is the only one of three sisters who has not yet been published here! We have to fiiiiix iiiiiit.

I wonder if Gigatent asks its prospective employees for resume’s?

Thanks for the submission, Heather, and welcome to the club. 🙂

Uh… Candygram.

Reporter #1 Goes On Vacation

Written By: admin - Aug• 10•12

As always, I can mostly leave this post up to Reporter #1 herself. First, a picture from Johnston Ridge Observatory at Mt. St. Helens.

The ants go marching one by one, hoorah, hoorah. The ants go marching one by one, hoorah, hoorah! The ants go marching one by one until the side of their mountain fell down and then it erupted in a way that geologists and vulcanologists had totally not anticipated, leading to the loss of 57 lives and the biggest landslide ever recorded. So that’s why there’s a monumant.

Actually, Reporter #1, you might be having too much fun with this.

I got nothing. I’m just sad.

That’s more like it.

I got things! Sorry, thing’s. My favorite is the list of good and bad attributes at the bottom, which lead me to believe that this workplace would be approximately my personal nightmare. Also, Manager who likes to Give Direction, Randomly Capitalize, and Never Let Your Employees Take Breaks? “Unlike” is not the word you wanted. Ahem.

Well, the French never care what you do, actually, as long as you pronounce it properly.

Written By: admin - Jun• 22•12

…and as many high school French students know, there is a way to pronounce French definite articles — using a certain speed and degree of mumblingness — such that one can sort of gloss over the difference between masculine and feminine, if one has forgotten which article is correct. I mean, a clever French teacher (hi, Madame!) will catch you doing it, but you can try.

But in writing, you kinda gotta know the difference.

And this one is easy. It isn’t even a trick. “Woman”? Female. Really.

Beautiful submission from the lovely Grace F. and Leah S.  Bisous!

Faith and disgust, Consumer Reports style

Written By: admin - Feb• 17•12

Reporter #1 found this on the Consumer Reports website (a direct link requires a subscription).

I have nothing further to say about this nonsense.

I like your circles, Reporter #1.  I’d add some where we learn the microwave offers “excellent at” and “very good at” things.

Last-minute Christmas gift idea!

Written By: admin - Dec• 23•11

…for that has-everything annoyance on your gift list!  Because seriously, who *wouldn’t* want a danger laser?

This idea brought to you by Reporter #1, who presumably received no compensation from the Danger Laser Corporation for this pitch.

BRAINS!

Written By: admin - Nov• 28•11

Lisa R. submitted this one without comment.

photo22

I totally get that what we’re looking for here is “a zombie.”  But I’m a bit distracted by all my other questions.  What is this sign?  Is it an ad?  For what awesome thing?

Also, why wouldn’t you want to be a zombie twice?  I mean, obviously the living don’t typically want to be the living dead.  But if you already are one, is there a particular reason you wouldn’t want to come back in that form again?  Maybe if you’re the slow-moving, stiff-armed kind of zombie instead of the kind that can play video games and have a non-demanding career.   Is that what this sign is going for?  Some kind of zombie hierarchy?

Picking a fight?

Written By: admin - Nov• 18•11

Colleen apparently would like to observe a lively debate in my comments.  (Actually, so would I, but it would appear that y’all are just not comment-inclined, although my software tells me you are reading SO WHY WON’T YOU COMMENT GOOD GRIEF HELP A BLOGGER OUT WITH HER SITE STATS WOULD YOU PLEASE?)

Ahem.  Sorry, Colleen, back to your pot-stirring.  The question comes in relation to this Brown Paper Tickets ad:

Here is a lively debate starter… Should it be “who” or “that”? I know this issue is murky and divisive.  My two cents? Who= people, that=inanimate. But then is this people as a group, thus making “that” correct?

Actually, I don’t think this is even that divisive.  My ruling:  WRONG.  Anybody want to argue?  (Please?)

WP Facebook Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com