Grammar Catastrophes

A blog about catastrophic failures to deploy English grammar effectively.

Riddled with what, exactly?

Tuesday, January 18, 2005

Phil

In a rather scathing Department of Defense press relesase, the following sentence appears: "Mr. [Seymour] Hersh’s [recent New Yorker] article is so riddled with errors of fundamental fact that the credibility of his entire piece is destroyed."

The middle part of this sentence, "riddled with errors of fundamental fact," is a bit confusing. What does it mean, really? There are a few possibilities, as I see it:

  1. There is one fact, which is fundamental (to something; the issue at hand, perhaps?) Hersh's article is riddled with errors about this one, fundamental fact.
  2. There are many facts. The article is riddled with errors about these facts. These errors are fundamental.
  3. There are errors (about something.) These errors are erroneous because they are fundamentally, factually, in error; that is, there erroneous-ness stems from errors about fundamental facts.

If (1) is what is meant, the sentence should read: "riddled with errors about the fundamental fact, which is..." If (2) is what is meant (I think it is,) the sentence should read: "riddled with fundamental errors of fact..." If (3) is what is meant, the sentence should be reworked because, for some reason, the author of the press release wants to get into what the errors are, and from whence they come. I, personally, find the idea of one, fundamental fact, about which one may make various errors, amusing. I find it most likely, however, that (2) is the intended meaning, in which case "riddled with fundamental errors of fact" is a much cleaner phrase.

2 comments. Post a Comment

Comment

Blogger Ian Ward Comfort

7:17 PM

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 

Comment

Blogger Phil

8:07 PM

While "from whence they come" is technically redundant, it is a common construction. Moreover, it's better than alternatives like "what are and whence these errors" or, "what the errors are and what their sources are;" using "and where they come from" would be really unforgiveable. Yes, I know, technically, it would be forgiveable, but we ought to allow for hyperbole and idiom here and there, no?

 

About Us...

Site Feed

Related Sites