MY MEDIA ENGLISH WATCH

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

A newspaper is generally as lax as its language

A well-regarded English-language website, The Vocabula Review, used to carry this slogan in its banner: “A society is generally as lax as its language.” It explained that slogan in this wise: “Even today—subjected as we are to the apotheosis of popular culture—using the English language respectfully helps us maintain a sense of ourselves and our values. To do otherwise, to disregard the ways of our words, is to forsake our humanity and, perhaps, even forfeit our future. A society is generally as lax as its language. And in a society of this sort, easiness and mediocrity are much esteemed.”

I think this truism, “A society is generally as lax as its language,” can be justifiably paraphrased to apply to journalism as well: “A newspaper is generally as lax as its language” or, even more to the point, ““A newspaper is generally as lax as its reporters and editors.” And along this line, I believe that it’s the obligation of every newspaper and also in its best interest to be ever watchful of its language, making sure that its reportage is not only grammatically and semantically correct but also logical at all times.

That said, I’ll now proceed to list down and analyze what I believe are manifestations of serious language laxity in last week’s issues of three major Metro Manila broadsheets (all italicizations in the passages presented below are mine):

1. Philippine Daily Inquirer: Seriously flawed, imprecise reportorial language

Phivolcs warns: Mayon to blow its top in few weeks

“LEGAZPI CITY — Mayon Volcano, which has blown its top nearly 40 times in 400 years, Thursday menaced nearby residents with small eruptions of ash and lava as relief agencies moved more than 30,000 people to shelters in case of a larger eruption.”

Here, I submit that using the figurative expressions “blow its top” and “blown its top” in reference to Mayon Volcano is seriously flawed, inappropriate language to. Also, the phrase “in case of a larger eruption” is used in a semantically inappropriate way that I’ll explain later.

2. Manila Bulletin: A wrong word sends the wrong message

Restive Mayon a tourist draw

Local and foreign tourists have started flocking to Albay to take a glimpse of the glowing lava flow from rumbling Mayon Volcano, while police and military personnel were told to seal off danger zones from tourists and hardheaded residents who have been evacuated but who continuously try to return to their homes.

Here, I submit that it’s bad grammar as well as bad semantics to use the verb phrase “take a glimpse” in reference to the glowing lava flow from Mayon Volcano. Also, the motivation implied for the tourists in wanting to go to Albay—“to take a glimpse of the glowing lava flow from rumbling Mayon Volcano”—is lame and unconvincing.

3. Philippine Star: In peacetime, no nation can really tighten its borders

3 government agencies forge ties to tighten RP borders

“MANILA, Philippines - The government has tightened the country’s borders to stop smuggling and human trafficking and prevent the entry of diseases.

“Customs Commissioner Napoleon Morales, Immigration Commissioner Marcelino Libanan and Bureau of Quarantine Director IV Edgardo Sabitsana have agreed to establish a Joint Chiefs of Enforcement Bureau (JCCIQEB) to implement a Strategic Partnership on Immigration, Customs, Quarantine Enforcement or SPICQE.”

Here, I submit that from a language standpoint, it’s seriously inappropriate and illogical to say that the government “has tightened the country’s borders,” for elementary logic tells us that unless encroached upon, the borders of any country remain fixed.

MY CRITIQUE AND SUGGESTED IMPROVEMENTS:

Let’s now analyze the language of the three problematic passages I listed above and see how the passages can be improved:

1. Philippine Daily Inquirer: Seriously flawed, inappropriate reportorial language

Phivolcs warns: Mayon to blow its top in few weeks

“LEGAZPI CITY — Mayon Volcano, which has blown its top nearly 40 times in 400 years, Thursday menaced nearby residents with small eruptions of ash and lava as relief agencies moved more than 30,000 people to shelters in case of a larger eruption.”

I said earlier that using the figurative expressions “blow its top” and “blown its top” in reference to Mayon Volcano is seriously lax and inappropriate language. If, as the headline declares, Phivolcs had indeed made this warning, “Mayon to blow its top in few weeks,” that agency not only had taken extreme liberties with its English but had also used very unscientific language in its pronouncement. Instead of the well-established, level-headed word “eruption,” it used an emotionally charged figurative expression instead, “blow its top,” which means “to become violently angry” or “to go crazy.” If the Phivolcs spokesperson actually said that, using personification—in this case, language that ascribes such deplorable human behavior to volcanoes—then he should be reminded to henceforth be more levelheaded and circumspect in his use of English.

But I strongly doubt that the expression “blow its top” came from Phivolcs itself. This much we can already gather from the lead sentence of the broadsheet’s story itself: “Mayon Volcano, which has blown its top nearly 40 times in 400 years, Thursday menaced nearby residents with small eruptions of ash and lava…” That expression obviously springs from the same figurative mindset of the reporter or deskperson who wrote that lead sentence—a statement that happens to be erroneous not only in its language but also in its arithmetic. For even granting without accepting that Mayon does “blow its top” whenever it erupts, then Mayon definitely has blown its top not just “nearly 40 times” during the last 400 years but perhaps so many hundreds—if not thousands—of times.

Indeed, when Mayon had a major eruption 20 or so years ago, I happened to have watched the spectacle from Oas, Albay, just several kilometers away from the base of the volcano. I recall that in the span of an hour or so, it erupted with fire and volcanic rocks at least six or seven times, shooting fireballs of molten lava high up into the air, after which the lava would fall and cascade down the mountainside. And since that eruption lasted for several days, it must have “blown its top” several hundred times during that single eruption period. Now, for a total 40 eruption periods during the past 400 years, how many times do you think Mayon had actually “blown its top,” if its eruptions can truly and logically be termed as such? Definitely not just 40 times but surely several thousands of times. This is the serious problem that arises when figurative language is mixed with bad arithmetic—you come up with highly improbable or even ridiculous conclusions.

Again, from a semantic standpoint, does it make sense for a volcano to have “erupted nearly 40 times”? When it had already erupted 39 times and was about to erupt the 40th time, was this last eruption somewhat aborted for the total figure to remain 39? What we have here is another problem with the word choices and language used. In reality, of course, the reporter was dealing with an estimated number of major eruptions—about 40 in 400 years. Such an estimate, however, isn’t the same semantically as erupting “nearly 40 times” or “almost 40 times.”

Finally, in the coordinate clause “as relief agencies moved more than 30,000 people to shelters in case of a larger eruption,” the use of the phrase “in case of” is semantically improper. It doesn’t grammatically and logically link the preceding statement with the final phrase “a larger eruption.” The 30,000 people have already been moved, so the contingent aspect of the phrase “in case of a larger eruption” can’t apply here. The appropriate prepositional phrase for achieving that linkage is “as a precaution against.” 

This is why to sum up, I think a more sensible rendition of that headline and story lead is this:

Phivolcs warns: Mayon girding for major eruption in few weeks

“LEGAZPI CITY — Mayon Volcano, which is estimated to have had 40 major eruptions in 400 years, Thursday menaced nearby residents with small eruptions of ash and lava as relief agencies moved more than 30,000 people to shelters as a precaution against a larger eruption.”

Indeed, in reporting volcanic eruptions, calling a spade a spade is still the best policy.

2. Manila Bulletin: A wrong word sends the wrong message

Restive Mayon a tourist draw

“Local and foreign tourists have started flocking to Albay to take a glimpse of the glowing lava flow from rumbling Mayon Volcano, while police and military personnel were told to seal off danger zones from tourists and hardheaded residents who have been evacuated but who continuously try to return to their homes.”

Why is it seriously lax language as well as bad grammar to use the verb phrase “take a glimpse of the glowing lava flow from Mayon Volcano?”

First, the verb phrase used is incorrect. You “don’t take a glimpse” of anything; you “get a glimpse” of it. We say, “The poet William Blake got a glimpse of eternity in a flower,” not “The poet William Blake took a glimpse of eternity in a flower,” As a transitive verb, “glimpse” means “to get a brief look,” not “to take a brief look.” It’s very important to know this shade of difference.

But an even more serious flaw in that statement is the use of the verb “glimpse” itself. For simplicity of analysis, let’s take the locals out of the equation and just focus on the foreign tourists. Do you think they would take the trouble of flying in to Manila, then fly or drive or take a ride some 400 kilometers all the way to Legazpi City just “to take a glimpse of the glowing lava flow from rumbling Mayon Volcano”? No way! Just a “glimpse” would be too short for all that trouble!

So what’s a more appropriate verb instead of “glimpse”? Perhaps good, old “watch” will do; but really, who in his or her right mind would take all that trouble just to watch “the glowing lava flow from rumbling Mayon Volcano”? All volcanoes spew lava when they erupt, and they all rumble during an eruption. So what’s the true motivation for a foreign tourist who comes to the Philippines to watch a volcanic eruption? It’s definitely not just the lava and the rumblings of just another volcano, so what would it be? It would be majestic Mayon with its almost perfect cone! Really, this is Mayon’s primary claim to fame and it’s biggest tourist draw. This is the motivation that should have been incorporated in the language of that lead sentence, but which the reporter was unable to provide.

One final comment: The sentence in question used the adverb “continuously” to modify the verb phrase “try to return to their homes.” It’s an incorrect word choice, for “continuously” means “marked by uninterrupted extension in time.” The correct word is “continually,” which means “recurring in steady usually rapid succession.”

Taking all these observations into account, the following reconstruction of that lead probably comes close to providing that much-need motivation that could make the statement semantically acceptable:

“Local and foreign tourists have started flocking to Albay to watch a major eruption of majestic Mayon Volcano, while police and military personnel were told to seal off danger zones from tourists and hardheaded residents who have been evacuated but who continually try to return to their homes.”

(For us local newspaper readers, of course, the adjective “majestic” could probably be treated as optional to that sentence.)

3. Philippine Star: In peacetime, no nation can really tighten its borders

3 government agencies forge ties to tighten RP borders

“MANILA, Philippines - The government has tightened the country’s borders to stop smuggling and human trafficking and prevent the entry of diseases.

“Customs Commissioner Napoleon Morales, Immigration Commissioner Marcelino Libanan and Bureau of Quarantine Director IV Edgardo Sabitsana have agreed to establish a Joint Chiefs of Enforcement Bureau (JCCIQEB) to implement a Strategic Partnership on Immigration, Customs, Quarantine Enforcement or SPICQE.”

As I said earlier, elementary logic tells us that unless encroached upon, the borders of any country remain fixed. To say that the government “has tightened the country’s borders” is therefore seriously lax and inappropriate language. Because a country’s borders are fixed by topography, tightening them just couldn’t be done physically, even if the government wanted to. It is the security measures in a country’s boarders that can be tightened in this particular case, and it’s really a surprise why this crucial element was overlooked in that lead statement.

Perhaps the reporter or deskperson had problems incorporating the phrase “providing security” in that sentence. Whatever the case, perhaps the word “watch” would work better instead of the phrase “providing security.” Let’s try it:

3 government agencies agree to tighten watch of RP borders

“MANILA, Philippines - The government has tightened its watch of the country’s borders to stop smuggling and human trafficking and prevent the entry of diseases.”

Now I think everything has become clear and logical in that statement.

SHORT TAKES IN MY MEDIA ENGLISH WATCH:

(1) The Manila Times: It’s the helping verbs that should take the tense

Civilian rewarded for escapees’ capture

“BASILAN Province: Philippine authorities rewarded Tuesday P350,000 to a civilian who helped security forces tracked down two of 31, mostly Abu Sayyaf terrorists, who bolted a prison in Basilan province.

“Philippine Navy regional chief Alexander Pama and Marine Lt. Gen. Benjamin Dolorfino handed the reward.

“‘This money is given to the civilian who helped us tracked down two of those who escaped from prison. We are continuing our hunt to recapture the rest. We need the cooperation of the civilians to capture all the fugitives,’ Dolorfino said.”

The two underlined phrases in the passage above violate a basic rule in the usage of main verbs that do their work with a helping verb: It’s the helping verb that takes the tense, not the main verb; the main verb takes the verb stem of its infinitive form—meaning the verb without the “to.”

In the first sentence of the passage above, the phrase in question is “a civilian who helped security forces tracked down.” The main verb is “track,” and the helping verb is “help.” It is “help” that should take the tense, which in this case is the past tense—“helped.” The main verb will then take the verb stem of its infinitive form “to track”—just the word “track,” which doesn’t have any tense. The correct form of that phrase will thus be “a civilian who helped security forces track down.”

In the third paragraph of the passage, the phrase in question is “the civilian who helped us tracked down.” In the same manner, the main verb is “track” and the helping verb is “help.” Following the same logic as that of the analysis above, the correct form of the phrase will therefore be “the civilian who helped us track down.”

The grammatically correct passage will therefore read as follows:

“BASILAN Province: Philippine authorities rewarded Tuesday P350,000 to a civilian who helped security forces track down two of 31, mostly Abu Sayyaf terrorists, who bolted a prison in Basilan province.

“Philippine Navy regional chief Alexander Pama and Marine Lt. Gen. Benjamin Dolorfino handed the reward.

“‘This money is given to the civilian who helped us track down two of those who escaped from prison. We are continuing our hunt to recapture the rest. We need the cooperation of the civilians to capture all the fugitives,’ Dolorfino said.”

3. Manila Bulletin: A badly edited or unedited news story 

Retired cop slain in Ilocos ambush

“CAMP PRESIDENT QUIRINO, Bantay, Ilocos Sur—A retired policeman was killed in a broad daylight ambush by motor riding unidentified suspects along the road in Barangay Ayusan Sur, Vigan City last Wednesday afternoon. The victim was driving his tricycle going towards north direction when the suspects who were riding in tandem in a motorcycle and were coming from his behind shot him once hitting his chest.

“Investigation disclosed that the shooting incident happened at about 4 oclock in the afternoon. The victim was driving his tricycle going to Barangay Capangpangan to petch his daughter when the suspects ambushed him. The victim sustained bullet wound in his chest and he was rushed by the bystanders into the nearby hospital but he was declared dead on arrival.”

The many phrases that I have underlined above indicate that the passage wasn’t edited or was hardly edited at all. I won’t go into the details of the grammatical and semantic problems of the passage; instead, I’ll simply present a copyedited version below to show how that passage might have been improved by judicious editing:

“CAMP PRESIDENT QUIRINO, Bantay, Ilocos Sur—A retired policeman was killed when he was ambushed in broad daylight by unidentified motor-riding gunmen along the road in Barangay Ayusan Sur, Vigan City last Wednesday afternoon. The victim was driving his tricycle northward when the suspects shot him once, hitting him in the chest.

“Investigation disclosed that the shooting incident happened at about 4:00 p.m. The victim was driving his tricycle going to Barangay Capangpangan to pick up his daughter when he was ambushed. The victim was rushed by bystanders to a nearby hospital but was declared dead on arrival.”

Just a few important notes about the original passage:

1. The use of the term “his behind” in the second sentence of the original passage is improper and should be avoided altogether. When the word “behind” is preceded by a possessive pronoun like “his,” “her,” or “your,” it becomes a euphemism for “buttocks” or “ass,” as in “get your behind over here.” So, when “behind” is used as a preposition to indicate a position in the back or rear, the use of the possessive pronouns before it should be absolutely avoided.

2. The word “fetch” was, of course, misspelled as “petch” in the original second paragraph to mean “to pick up.” It must be kept in mind, though, that “fetch” isn’t a very good word to use in that context. Because of its strong connotation with the idea of, say, a dog getting and bringing back a stick or killed game, it’s much better to use “pick up” when the reference is to humans.

3. Philippine Star: A needless prepositional phrase and wrong tense usage

Cayetano to Comelec: Jamby not qualified for presidency

“Cayetano and Madrigal had been at odds with each other because Cayetano is allied with Nacionalista Party standard-bearer, Manuel Villar Jr. Madrigal was the one who filed an ethics case against Villar in connection with the C-5 Road controversy.”

When two persons or parties are “at odds,” meaning that they are in disagreement, there’s no need for the phrase “with each other” to complete the expression. The phrase “at odds” already subsumes the idea of “with each other.”

Another thing: I’m positive that Cayetano and Madrigal remain at odds even up to this time, so the past perfect “had been” is not the correct tense for their being “at odds.” It should be the present perfect “have been.”

Finally, the comma between “standard-bearer” and “Manuel Villar Jr.” is totally unnecessary because the two are meant to be a contiguous term, “standard-bearer Manuel Villar Jr.”

That sentence should therefore read as follows:

“Cayetano and Madrigal have been at odds because Cayetano is allied with Nacionalista Party standard-bearer Manuel Villar Jr. Madrigal was the one who filed an ethics case against Villar in connection with the C-5 Road controversy.”

4. Philippine Star: Wrong form of verb phrase; wrong form of the subjunctive

Column: Using Shoe Mart name in vain
(December 14, 2009 issue)

“Instead they, along with SM were taken advantaged of by ‘talent scouts’ who proved to be very talented at scalping helpless people as well as Shoe Mart. If by chance Ms. Tessie gets to read this “sumbong,” may I also suggest that she develops a team who can reach out to people who encounter problems or difficulties with their various business units.”

In the first sentence above, the verb phrase “were taken advantaged of” is improperly constructed. Its correct form is “were taken advantage of” where “advantage” is a noun and not a verb in the past participle form. That first sentence should therefore read as follows:

“Instead they, along with SM were taken advantage of by ‘talent scouts’ who proved to be very talented at scalping helpless people as well as Shoe Mart.”

In the second sentence of the passage, the clause “may I also suggest that she develops a team…” is in the subjunctive mood, so its correct form is “may I also suggest that she develop a team…” where the verb “develop” has shed off the “s.” This shedding off of the “s” by the verb in the subordinate clause—meaning that the verb takes it base form—signals that the subjunctive is at work. The main clause in such sentence constructions normally have such operative verbs as “suggest,” “recommend,” “insist,” and “wish” to express a wish or desire.

Here are other examples of sentences in the subjunctive form:

“We requested that she refrain from issuing statements without the chairman’s authorization.”

“The party leaders insisted that he join the party first before seeking inclusion in the draft ticket.”

“I begged that she calendar my petition for discussion tomorrow.”

The correct construction of the second sentence in the original newspaper passage should therefore be in this subjunctive form:

“If by chance Ms. Tessie gets to read this “sumbong,” may I also suggest that she develop a team who can reach out to people who encounter problems or difficulties with their various business units.”

Click to post a comment to this critique

View the complete list of postings in this section