Jose Carillo's Forum

MY MEDIA ENGLISH WATCH

If you are a new user, click here to
read the Overview to this section

Team up with me in My Media English Watch!

I am inviting Forum members to team up with me in doing My Media English Watch. This way, we can further widen this Forum’s dragnet for bad or questionable English usage in both the print media and broadcast media, thus giving more teeth to our campaign to encourage them to continuously improve their English. All you need to do is pinpoint every serious English misuse you encounter while reading your favorite newspaper or viewing your favorite network or cable TV programs. Just tell me about the English misuse and I will do a grammar critique of it.

Read the guidelines and house rules for joining My Media English Watch!

The need for parallelism and voice consistency in doing the news

Over and above flawless grammar, what characterizes good writing is parallelism along with consistency of voice. When writers make it a point to always set down their thoughts in parallel and avoid mixing the active voice and the passive voice in their sentences, they will find it much easier to match the rhythm of their ideas with the rhythm of their words. Their writing then becomes clearer, more cohesive, and more pleasant to read—a highly desirable state of affairs not only for literary work but for news journalism as well.  

This past weekend, however, I came across a news story in a major Metro Manila broadsheet whose lead paragraph flagrantly violates both the parallelism rule and the voice-consistency rule. I therefore decided to dissect and reconstruct that lead paragraph for its instructive value to those desirous of improving not just their grammar but the quality of their writing as well.

Here’s that badly constructed lead passage:

BIR vows to continue drive vs tax cheats

They started with highly paid doctors and lawyers but even taxi drivers and small business owners will not be spared. And the consumption patterns of upward striving politicians make particularly delicious targets.

Revenue commissioner Kim Henares on Friday said the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) will carry on with its campaign to run after tax-dodging professionals as the program seems to be bearing fruit.

At first glance, everything seems aboveboard with the English of that lead paragraph. On closer scrutiny, however, we’ll find that it makes four very serious violations of good writing: (a) mixing of the active voice and the passive voice in the same sentence, (b) unparallel sentence construction, (c) semantically flawed linking of ideas with a wrong conjunction, and (d) voice usage in a subsequent sentence inconsistent with that of the preceding one.

(a) Active voice and passive voice mixing

A basic rule in English sentence construction is to avoid mixing the active voice and the passive voice in the same sentence. This rule is violated by that lead paragraph’s first sentence, which consists of the following clauses: the active-voice clause “they started with highly paid doctors and lawyers” and the passive-voice clause “even taxi drivers and small business owners will not be spared.” These two clauses in different voices are then linked by the coordinating conjunction “but” to yield this mixed-voice, compound sentence: “They started with highly paid doctors and lawyers but even taxi drivers and small business owners will not be spared.” This, I must hasten to say, is a big no-no in sentence construction.

(b) Unparallel sentence construction

By combining two clauses in different voices, that lead sentence also violates the parallelism principle. We will recall that the basic rule for achieving parallelism is that all of the grammatical elements of the ideas listed or set in a series in a sentence must be similar in form, structure, or voice. This rule applies to all parts of speech, from articles and prepositions to nouns, verbs, adjectives and adverbs as well as to the verbals—the infinitives, gerunds, and participles. (For a comprehensive review of parallelism in the Forum, click this link to “Lesson #11 – Using Parallelism for Clarity and Cohesion” and this link to “Lesson #12 – Harnessing Parallelism for Structural Balance”)

The lead sentence under discussion here begins with the active-voice clause “they started with highly paid doctors and lawyers.” Obviously, for the second clause to be parallel with it, it should be constructed in the active voice, too. The passive-voice clause “even taxi drivers and small business owners will not be spared” is thus a misfit in that sentence. It should be rendered in its active-voice form, “(they) will not spare even taxi drivers and small business owners,” to be parallel with the active-voice first clause.

(c)  Semantically flawed linking of ideas by using the wrong conjunction

That problem with that lead sentence is further compounded by its erroneous use of the coordinating conjunction “but” to link its two coequal coordinate clauses. Why is the usage of “but” wrong? It’s because the logic of “but” is to express dissimilarity or contrast between ideas, which isn’t the case for the coordinate clauses “they started with highly paid doctors and lawyers” and “(they) will not spare even taxi drivers and small business owners.” Instead, the intended logic is that of adding information similar to—not contrasting with—a previously given statement. The proper coordinating conjunction for that sense is “and,” so those two coordinate and parallel clauses should be combined with “and” instead of “but,” as follows:

“They started with highly paid doctors and lawyers and will not spare even taxi drivers and small business owners.”

(d)  Voice usage in a subsequent sentence that’s inconsistent with that of the preceding one

Now let’s take a look at the second sentence of that lead paragraph: “And the consumption patterns of upward striving politicians make particularly delicious targets.” We can see that its passive-voice form is inconsistent with that of the first sentence, which had mixed the active voice and passive voice in its original form and thus needed to be reconstructed  into a consistent active-voice form. Thus, to make the second sentence parallel to the reconstructed first sentence whose two clauses are now both in the active voice, it has to be rendered in the active voice, too, as follows:

“And they find the consumption patterns of upward striving politicians as particularly delicious targets (for taxation).”

So now here’s that entire lead paragraph made into a consistently active-voice, all-parallel statement:

“They started with highly paid doctors and lawyers and will not spare even taxi drivers and small business owners. And they find the consumption patterns of upward striving politicians particularly delicious targets for taxation.”

I think you’ll find the above paragraph more straightforward, more pleasant-sounding, and more elegant than the original one—proof that parallelism and consistency in voice make for much clearer, more readable, and structurally balanced journalistic prose.

SHORT TAKES IN MY MEDIA ENGLISH WATCH:

(1) The Manila Times: Wrong word choice

Former Aquino fiancée engaged

WILL wedding bells soon ring for Shalani Soledad and Rep. Roman Romulo of Pasig City (Metro Manila)?

The congressman confirmed that he and Soledad are engaged, and may tie the knot next year.

Romulo’s sister, Agriculture Assistant Secretary Berna Romulo-Puyat, also confirmed to reporters that her brother gave Soledad a diamond ring.

Soledad, 31, a councilor of Valenzuela City (also in Metro Manila), was the former girlfriend of President Benigno Aquino 3rd. The two broke up a few months after Mr. Aquino was installed in Malacañang.

The particulars of the news story above are factually, grammatically, and semantically airtight, but the headline, “Former Aquino fiancée engaged,” is grievously wrong. Although they were a twosome for almost two years, Shalani Soledad never became President Benigno Aquino III’s fiancée because, as far as I can gather, they never got formally engaged to be married. By definition, for a woman to be someone’s “fiancée,” she must be formally engaged to be married to that man, who then becomes her “fiancé.”

So then, how should that headline be worded?

This may not sound as elegant, but at least it’s as factual as that headline can get:

Former Aquino girlfriend engaged

(2) Philippine Daily Inquirer: Misplaced modifying phrase

Touring bus steers anti-TB campaign for Metro bus, jeep drivers

Bus and jeepney drivers can now learn about a health menace they may acquire on the job on this special bus.

The antituberculosis (TB) bus of oil giant Chevron Philippines Inc. (formerly Caltex) has started touring the city of Manila as part of its information campaign to fight tuberculosis.

Cherry Ramos, Chevron coordinator for policy, government and public affairs, said the campaign, dubbed  “Labanan ang TB Para sa Tsuper Healthy,” targets 2,500 public transport drivers as well as Manila residents.

Due to improper construction, the lead sentence above reads very badly. It has misplaced the prepositional phrase “on this special bus,” making it wrongly modify the noun “job.” Its grammatically proper role, however, is that of an adverbial modifier of the main clause of that whole sentence, as follows:

On this special bus, bus and jeepney drivers can now learn about a health menace they may acquire on the job.”

(3) The Philippine Star: Wordiness

DepEd boosts measures to fight violence against children

MANILA, Philippines - The Department of Education (DepEd) is now working on the formulation of a comprehensive child protection policy, as it seeks to intensify efforts at shielding school children against abuse, exploitation and discrimination, especially bullying.

Education Secretary Armin Luistro said that the move was being pursued to further strengthen safeguards to prevent incidence of violence against children.

The above lead passage from an education story is extremely wordy, certainly not an exemplar of plain and simple English reportage. In particular, the phrase “is now working on the formulation of a comprehensive child protection policy” can be more concisely and simply written as “coming up with a comprehensive child protection policy.” Also, the clause “as it seeks to intensify efforts at shielding school children…” suspiciously overstates its case; it can be said more matter-of-factly as “to strongly shield.”

As to the second paragraph, it needlessly repeats information that has already been made clear in the first paragraph. Worse, by using the passive-voice form “the move was being pursued to further strengthen safeguards to prevent incidence of violence against children,” it gives the wrong impression that the speaker is unwilling to acknowledge the undertaking as that of the Department of Education itself.

Here’s how I think that lead passage can be more clearly and concisely written without any appreciable loss of the information presented in the original:

“MANILA, Philippines - Education Secretary Armin Luistro said the Department of Education is coming up with a comprehensive child protection policy to strongly shield school children from abuse, exploitation and discrimination, especially bullying.”

That’s 30 words against the original 56 words, or a savings of 26 words.

(4) The Manila Times: Wordiness

Nokia brings interactive learning to provinces

WITH a purpose of creating more interactive, student-focused learning environment for elementary students across the country, Nokia recently launched the fourth phase of Text2Teach to deliver educational video materials to 850 schools in Visayas and Mindanao.

In the Philippines, Text2Teach is spearheaded by Nokia in partnership with Pearson, the Ayala Foundation, the Philippines Department of Education, Globe Telecom and SEAMEO-INNOTECH.

In the lead sentence of the press release above, the phrase “with a purpose of creating” is too officious and wordy. Here’s how that sentence might be constructed as a simple and forthright news report:

To create more interactive, student-focused learning environment for elementary students across the country, Nokia recently launched the fourth phase of Text2Teach, which aims to provide educational video materials to 850 schools in the Visayas and Mindanao.”

(5) Manila Bulletin: Wordiness; specious phrasing

Subic celebrates Nat'l Tourism Week

SUBIC BAY FREEPORT, Philippines — A coastal clean-up, a search for its first tourism ambassador, and a tourism job fair are all part of the events highlighting the celebration of National Tourism Week in this premier tourist destination.

Subic Bay kicked off the celebration Saturday, joining the nation and the entire globe in observing this year's international theme, “World Wetlands Day – Forest for Water and Wetlands.”

In the lead sentence above, the phrase “are all parts of the event” is totally extraneous; it can be dropped altogether and not be missed. In the second sentence, the phrase “the entire globe” is too specious and unsuitable for the context of that statement; “the rest of the world” will do much better.

So here’s that lead passage rid of those undesirable grammatical elements:

“SUBIC BAY FREEPORT, Philippines — A coastal clean-up, a search for its first tourism ambassador, and a tourism job fair are the highlights of National Tourism Week in this premier tourist destination.

“Subic Bay kicked off the celebration Saturday, joining the nation and the rest of the world in observing this year’s international theme, ‘World Wetlands Day – Forest for Water and Wetlands.’”

(6) Manila Bulletin: Grammatically, semantically, and structurally troubled sentence

Pilar OKs P1.6-M zip line

PILAR, Bataan, Philippines — Noting its viability and tourism potential, this historic town will soon have a zip line seen to boost its eco-tourism campaign, the Sangguniang Bayan (Municipal Council) reported last Friday.

The Council approved a P1.6-million budget for the setting up of the zip line project to be installed on Mt. Samat.

The lead sentence above is in serious grammatical, semantic, and structural trouble. Since it doesn’t have a legitimate subject, the front-end phrase “noting its viability and tourism potential” has ended up as a dangling modifier; in fact, the sentence would be better off if that phrase is dropped altogether. Also, the main clause “this historic town will soon have a zip line seen to boost its eco-tourism campaign” is a run-on clause whose sense is made fuzzy by the uncalled-for presence of the verb “seen.”

Here’s my attempt to make sense of that highly troublesome lead passage:

“PILAR, Bataan, Philippines—This historic town will soon have a zip line to boost its eco-tourism campaign, the Sangguniang Bayan (Municipal Council) reported last Friday.

“The Council approved a budget of P1.6-million for the zip line project that will be undertaken on Mt. Samat.”

(7) Manila Bulletin: Almost pure and grammatically flawed gobbledygook

Doable energy solutions, measures encouraged

MANILA, Philippines — The Aquino government is focused on coming up with doable solutions and alternative measures to address the increasing prices of energy sources in the country as it encourages for more studies that will help in mitigating its effects to the Filipino people.

Heeding to this call, a foreign firm specializing on the transformation of garbage into useful energy is unabatedly gaining grounds locally with its proposed “Energy from Waste (EfW)” concept concerning cool plasma process aimed at addressing such concern of the government and ease the lives of the people.

I’ll admit that I’m still befuddled by the gobbledygooky lead sentence above and by the predicate of the sentence that follows it. My mind has blanked out. May I therefore invite Forum members to decipher and improve that lead passage? I’m offering an autographed copy of my book English Plain and Simple to the Forum member who comes up with the clearest and most readable rewrite of that problematic passage. (So nobody can copy your rewrite, don’t post it in the Forum; instead, send it by e-mail to j8carillo@yahoo.com. The deadline is Thursday, September 22, 2011.)

Click to read responses or post a response

View the complete list of postings in this section




Copyright © 2010 by Aperture Web Development. All rights reserved.

Page best viewed with:

Mozilla FirefoxGoogle Chrome

Valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional

Page last modified: 19 September, 2011, 11:35 a.m.