As the fifth item in this rerun of a seven-part series on jaw-dropping grammar gaffes that I came across in the mass media in 2006, here’s a badly constructed statement from a newspaper story: “…the moment that Mayon starts emitting pyroclastic flow at
about 60 velocity per hour speed, its
300 degrees Celsius temperature could instantly kill” (underscoring mine).
Daytime Nighttime
MAYON VOLCANO ERUPTION IN 2006
What we have here is obviously not just a problem in grammar, structure, and semantics but also one in numeracy. By numeracy, I mean the facility in using numbers and measurements, and I would venture to say that literacy without numeracy could lead to frequent misuse of language.
From a numeracy standpoint, the phrase “about 60 velocity per hour speed” above misuses the language because of its peculiar measure for speed, “velocity per hour.” We must grant, though, that this was probably due to a simple proofreading error; the writer must have meant “kilometers per hour (kph)” but simply got distracted. But the point I’d like to make is that if the writer were numerate enough, he or she could not have possibly thought of using the term “velocity” in that context because “velocity” and “speed” are actually two different things.
“Velocity” means the rate of change of position of a body along a straight line with respect to time. As a measure, it requires not only magnitude but also direction; for instance, “60 kph due north” and “60 kph to the southwest” would be correct statements of velocity. In contrast, “speed” means only the rate of motion of a body, measured in terms of the distance traveled divided by the time of travel. In other words, it is the magnitude of a velocity without considering its direction. Thus, when we take out the direction from “60 kph due north” and “60 kph to the southwest,” we’ll get a speed of “60 kph” common to both. Without a stated direction, velocity becomes speed.
Now let’s go back to what the writer presumably had intended to write: “about 60 kilometers per hour (kph) speed.” Is that acceptable phrasing? Hardly. Its syntax is so unnatural and it sounds awful to read. This is what sometimes happens when a noun is modified by an extended adjective phrase that’s positioned ahead of it. In our problematic sentence, in particular, “about 60 kilometers per hour (kph)” is the extended adjective phrase and “speed” is the noun being modified.
The longer the adjective phrase, the more cumbersome and confusing it becomes as a stand-ahead modifier, as in this sentence: “She criticized
the unlikely to be followed admission rule.” One way to clarify such constructions is to hyphenate the adjective phrase: “…the
unlikely-to-be-followed admission rule.” Another way is to position it after the noun: “…the admission rule
that is unlikely to be followed.”
In practice, however, we have to play it by ear whether to hyphenate or reposition an adjective phrase. In the case of “about 60 kilometers per hour (kph) speed,” the hyphenation approach is no good because it yields this awkward construction: “
about-60-kilometers-per-hour-(kph) speed.” In contrast, the repositioning approach produces this much clearer, smoother phrasing: “a speed of about 60 kilometers per hour (kph).”
Now for the other problematic phrase, “300 degrees Celsius temperature.” The phrasing is numerate this time, but it doesn’t sound right because it suffers from the so-called “stacked noun phrase” effect. Here, the stacking involves the three-layered noun phrase “300 degrees Celsius” modifying the noun “temperature.” Hyphenation won’t solve this euphony problem, but putting the noun phrase after the noun it is meant to modify makes the phrase sound much better: “a temperature
of 300 degrees Celsius.”
Now we have a firm basis for this grammatically, semantically, and structurally correct rewrite of the problematic statement in question: “…the moment that Mayon starts emitting pyroclastic flow, which could instantly kill with its
speed of about 60 kilometers per hour (kph) and
temperature of 300 degrees Celsius.” (2007)
This essay, 523nd in the series, first appeared in the weekly column “English Plain and Simple” by Jose A. Carillo in The Manila Times
in its February 12, 2007 issue, © 2007 by Manila Times Publishing. All rights reserved.The Manila Times
ran one column on “The importance of grammar-perfect English” series each week for seven weeks in 2006, and my Facebook Gateway to the Forum is now running one of them every three days in succession on February 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, and 21, 2017 for the benefit of new Forum members and English learners. (Next:
The importance of grammar-perfect English – VI (February 18, 2017)
