Which part of speech is that?

N&O Grammar Errors Forum
RE: Father finally reunites with children

" For years, Denis Mukoka has sweat over a mop and corralled shopping carts ..."

Has SWEAT? Most of us have sweat, but I think in this instance he may have sweatED.

Today it's more style than grammar

N&O Grammar Errors Forum
RE: Teen dies in Wake Forest accident

This story refers to a 17-year-old several times as a woman. Has the style changed recently? Or do you not use AP at the N&O? The cutoff between girl and boy or woman and man has always been 18, I thought. Perhaps you're working on the current NC legal conversion from juvenile to adult at 16, but this story just jangled my nerves.

UNC TV is indeed for NC, imagine that

Wilmington Star News Forums
RE: Letter to the Editor

EDITOR: (On May 2) I settled into my easy chair to watch Atlantic Records: The House that Ahmet Built.
It wasn't on. There was something about dogs. The program was on across the rest of the U.S. … We have a censored, University of North Carolina-controlled PBS.
Just look at the May 5 programs: N.C. Now, Our State, Exploring N.C., N.C. Folkways, then, at 10 p.m., Live from Lincoln Center. Do you think the rest of the U.S. is watching Exploring N.C.?
I was told the original program last night had "objectionable language." Who determined that?
Our cable subscription pays for PBS. We are not getting PBS. We are getting a censored version, abridged version of PBS.
I think it must be illegal. It's certainly archaic and suppressive.

Donald DiGiulian
Leland

I don't know which state this writer recently moved here from, but public television is pretty much the same all over - and in fact, the way the programming is slotted is very similar to the commercial networks and their affiliates. PBS and other sources make programs available. The PBS programming feed is much more varied and the scheduling is much more flexible - local affiliates run many programs as they are fed, but some are run at other times and some don't air at all. There is absolutely no such thing as a required national PBS schedule, very much less so than the commercial networks. Programming decisions at the local affiliates are based on finances, local tastes and needs, and getting some different kinds of programming on the air - different from the commercial offerings and diverse within the schedule.

First, I watched that program. I won't swear it was that day, but it did indeed air on NC Public Television. My schedule - which I receive because I am a subscriber to public television, not cable - shows that it was on May 2, and I haven't seen many times that the printed schedule was ignored. There is no indication in the detailed listing of any problem with language, etc. So you may actually have had a problem with your calendar or your clock.

That likelihood is borne out by your second problem with the UNC-TV schedule. The list of May 5 programs provided above is actually for May 3. Regardless of the date, though, what on earth is wrong with the NORTH CAROLINA TAXPAYER-supported UNC Public TV running North Carolina-oriented programming? If your cable company told you you would receive a direct feed of programming straight from PBS, not the very highly acclaimed programming from the public broadcasting network in this state, then your problem is with the cable people.

To answer your question about what people in the rest of the country watch: on the New Jersey Network, they're watching State of the Arts: The life and unique history of Peters Valley Craft Education Center, New Jersey Network News, Caucus New Jersey, Ask the Governor, Here Comes the Weekend, and other NEW JERSEY-oriented programs. Tonight, they're also watching Tracks Ahead, about the Wisconsin and Southern Railroad, and on May 13 they will finally get the chance to watch the Ahmet Ertegun program that got you so riled up.

I'd like to be clear - I don't now nor ever have had any connection to UNC-TV, beyond supporting it both as a North Carolina taxpayer and as a member. I don't think it's perfect and quite frankly I don't like a lot of the stuff they air, both locally produced and from PBS or other national sources. But that's when I watch another channel, and when I complain, I prefer to have at least the first freaking clue what I'm talking about!

Today's most annoying

N&O Grammar Errors Forum
Under the Dome:

" McKissick said he has owned homes in each of Durham's Senate districts since 1993."

Is that two districts, nine districts, or 22 districts? Seems germane to me, considering the expense of owning homes and the rarity of owning even two homes in the same city/county, much less more. I assume that there are two districts and he owns two homes. If the writer and editor wish to convey that succinctly, then the word is both, not each.

"Could GOP bring Dole down?

A top political observer said this week that U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Dole could falter in her bid for re-election in 2008, but that North Carolina Democrats still have a tough road ahead of them."

I'm pretty sure GOP still means Republicans, and there isn't the slightest hint in this item that they intend to commit fratricide upon the good Senator. I nearly spit out my tea, wondering how that could be a subordinate item in the column, then read and realized it was just a stupid error.

Wolfowitz's Story Disputed By Ex-Official

Washington Post
I've been waiting for someone to point out that neither Wolfowitz's job nor Riza's is or was an immutable right.

How many thousands of couples have had to face that dilemma: a ban on fraternization or nepotism within the workplace where they met, much less one as in this case, where one works there and the other gets an offer? What is so special about these two that makes it their prerogative to both work there?

In my life, everyone I know who faced that situation actually made a choice that was within their own power. Either one of them quit or, if career was their main priority, they ended the relationship. Since when did the level of public-sector service either of these two have performed deserve a publicly funded guaranteed job, or a golden parachute?

As a non-Beltway type, I also find it absolutely astounding that someone on the World Bank payroll would be working inside the US State Department for an indefinite period, and now running a supposed non-governmental organization. Last I heard, these three institutions were in entirely different silos, so to speak. How can someone work at all three without actually changing jobs?

These are questions I would like to see answered in addition to seeing Mr. Wolfowitz and Ms. Riza both removed from what they appear to consider their high entitlements.

Star News photo caption problems

Star News Forums

I won't go into a lot of detail as the last time I assessed the apparent professionalism of the online staff, they disappeared me for weeks.

This CQ business has been going on for months - it comes from whoever enters the information about the photograph into their computer archive, and CQ indicates the spelling has been verified. That makes this even funnier, as the person who wrote this added "I HAVE CALLED SGT. WILLIAMS AND THIS IS THE PROPER SPELLING OF HIS NAME" even though that is what CQ is supposed to stand for.

It is normally removed before publication, don't know why they don't bother to do it for the online edition, but then again I think we've already established that I don't understand a lot of how and what they do to the online edition ....

The "satalite" typo is separate but related, just more failure of whoever makes the online edition to do the most basic part of the job.

By the way, you missed the other typo in the same sentence, Pman - "Nesbit" Courts.

p.s. I also agree with you that this was a poor choice of photos to accompany the tax increase story. And the caption doesn't tie it into the story at all - maybe I missed it, but I don't see anything in the story about satellite offices or anything about morale or whatever the last sentence in the caption is referring to.

Remembering Halberstam

News & Observer Editors Blog

To clarify the statistic about black baseball players mentioned above: the report from the University of Central Florida’s Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport says that 8.4% of major league baseball players are AMERICAN, non-Hispanic blacks.

American black athletes, it seems, have moved from baseball to other sports because of the programs available to them in their youth, or perhaps because of community preferences for football and basketball or the increasing number of Michael Jordan and Warren Moon and Donovan McNabb role models.

The news is not that black people are being pushed out of baseball, as the striking decline might appear to indicate, but that people from other cultures now make up more of the player pool. There are also significantly fewer WHITE Americans playing major league baseball now, with 29.4% of players considered Hispanic, which could be black or white, American or not. However, the bulk of them are from Latin American countries, including Cuba, the Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico, and many of them would be considered black by any standard.

Really, it's not lobbying

N&O Triangle Grammar Guide blog

Thanks for the comments and for understanding about my slow response. I appreciate your three valid points.
The usage on "lobby" does seem to have loosened quite a bit.
687 lips!? That's a very good catch. We definitely should have fixed that.

I agree that lobby has loosened. But it remains an extremely disrespectful way to refer to courtroom proceedings - disrespectful mainly to our judicial system itself, but at the same time denigrating the issue and its advocate.

Lobby, as a verb, is not a synonym for request or even for advocate - the reason we have so many words in the English language is so we can clearly express true meaning, and this usage flat fails that test. At best, it is incorrect, and at worst it editorializes.

Lobbying is not a legal term

N&O Triangle Grammar Guide blog

In his challenge of the state's biggest economic incentives deal, Robert Orr was thwarted before he got started. On Wednesday, he lobbied for a second chance to begin.

While the lumpen rhymishness of thwarted and started might bear discussion, the real problem is with the use of "lobbied." The word has a pretty specific meaning, and it pretty specifically excludes a lawyer making legal arguments in a court of law.

I don't care for the good justice nor particularly support his effort here, but nothing justifies flippantly disparaging him and his effort by equating it to the pimping of special interests by frequenting the lobbies or corridors of legislative chambers.

Where'd that lip go?

N&O Triangle Grammar Guide blog
"Dedicated earlier this month, the simple stone sanctuary honors 687 eloquent lips silenced"
How did that one guy lose his lip, to make it an odd number? Or should it say "pairs of lips," perhaps?
At first, when I read it as the blurb on the main news page, I though it was totally ridiculous but then realized the source was the Paul Green quote with the story. So only the counting of lips is ridiculous.