Stircrazy wrote:

---

Stircrazy wrote:

---

Stircrazy wrote:

---

Stircrazy wrote:

---

I had to smile at the Beeb's gaffe.  That said, on the evidence of the linguistic abominations I regularly see perpetrated by its journalists (generally the younger ones!) on the news site, but which are never acknowledged (are their reports subject to sub-editing?), I'm not sure it should be drawing attention to its ignorance in such a way. 

---

A prime example from the current home page:

Jailed cancer charity thief ordered to pay back rest of £95,000 she defrauded

How on earth do you defraud money as opposed to a person, a bank, HMRC or some other institution?    The journo responsible for it was obviously too damned lazy to type "obtained by fraud" instead - two words too many! 

---

And here's another one!  I had absolutely no idea that trees could be said to possess special abilities in a particular area & I am sick to death of seeing "gift" used as a synonym for the verb from it is formed.  

---

And yet another one, the plonker who wrote it obviously too thick to realise that it's open to misinterpretation or, if he or she does, too lazy to type "Woman's heartache as search for mother's body goes on", which is unequivocal. 

---

Two more for the collection from the live article on the yellow/amber weather warnings for the weekend:

1) Meanwhile, National Highways suggests travellers to delay their journeys if they can.

I'm noticing that clumsy, ungrammatical construction more & more now & it's by no means confined to the Beeb.  Why that "to"?    What was wrong with "National Highway suggests travellers delay their journeys", ideally with a "that" between "suggests" & "travellers"?

2)  Many of us have experienced the disappointment of putting sledges away after predictions of snowfall ended up to be just more rain.

"ended up to be"?  Most people would say "ended up being"!    What do they teach kids in English classes these days - assuming English classes are in fact still given?