Comma Chameleon
Posted on November 13th, 2008 at 7:38 pm by Michael Antman
Here, taken verbatim from an obituary in the Chicago Sun-Times, is the amazing story of a woman who succumbed in old age to a terrible disease, then by some mysterious agency was given a second chance at life, and took full advantage of it by enjoying another 79 years:
“Born June 18, 1929 after a long struggle with Alzheimer’s disease, departed this life on Saturday, November 7, 2008.”
Good karma? Nah, bad comma.
Print This Post
About Michael Antman
Abusive comments may be deleted and abusive commenters may be banned. See comment policies.
“i could have sworn that birth canal was right here!”
What a fantastic catch!
Friends of mine who read this blog are probably wondering what I’m doing reading random obituaries. Well, I used to read, or at least scan, up to five newspapers a day — the Chicago Tribune, Chicago Sun-Times, Wall Street Journal, New York Times and USA Today, plus plenty of online resources. But because of time constraints, I recently cut back to just one, the Chicago Sun-Times (because it’s local, generally well-written, and has some columnists I like.) But this cutback is sort of analogous to a heavy smoker who switches to an “ultra-light” cigarette — he just draws harder on the cigarette to get the same dose of nicotine. In the same way, I just read more of my one paper, including the bridge column (which I do not play) and the obits. For professional reasons, I’ve recently started reading the Wall Street Journal again, so maybe I’ll stop reading the obits — and catching funny typos — as as result.
“Born June 18, 1929 after a long struggle with Alzheimer’s disease, departed this life on Saturday, November 7, 2008.”
into
“Born June 18, 1929, departed this life on Saturday, November 7, 2008, after a long struggle with Alzheimer’s disease.”
I doubt very much a well-placed comma would have helped much here.
True, it would be only a palliative and not a panacea, but if the comma were to be excised from its place following the word “disease,” and reattached to the spot after “1929,” the sentence would kinda, sorta make sense — especially if you paused for a really long time after “1929,” then read the rest of the sentence very quickly.
Ah, what a fine touch, editing.
I mean, hey. At least they didn’t say it was -her- Alzheimer’s.
I keep swearing I won’t go back to cnn.com but the snack-food nature and frequent editorial faux pas keep me coming back.