Friday, April 22, 2011

No Bears Were Harmed In the Crucifixion of This Filipino

I saw this over at the UK Daily Mail a few minutes ago:

While my friend Wally will sneer about this proving that the Daily Mail is just a tabloid, it's an error I see all of the time because editors rely too heavily on spell-check programs, which don't catch homonyms such as these. In this case the word needed was grisly: adj. gris·li·er, gris·li·est
Inspiring repugnance; gruesome.

What they used, of course, was grizzly: adj. griz·zli·er, griz·zli·est
Grayish or flecked with gray.
n. pl. griz·zlies
A grizzly bear.

And they could have easily used gristly, which is also the wrong word: adj. gris·tli·er, gris·tli·est
1. Composed of or containing gristle.
2. Resembling gristle.

(Gristle is, of course, connective tissue found in meat, pieces of ligament and tendon.)

So that is your grammar/spelling lesson for the day.

1 comment:

wally said...

How can you tell I'm sneering? Actually, I prefer the "grizzly" version. It makes more sense.