Let me be clear. I do not want to disparage Karen Hao, to whose Empire of AI I have turned for information on the despicable tech bros who appear to be dismantling civilization for their profit. But I do want to question the abilities of the people at Penguin Press to whom she entrusted the editing of her book.
I settle for the moment on a single sentence. One of the things I discover day after day, not only in casual online texts but in presumably edited work by professional writers, is a failure to make subjects and verbs agree in any sentence that is sustained longer than half a dozen words. Here's that one sentence:
"Bold declarations that it was within reach enough to invest in it presently was viewed largely as pseudoscience and quackery."
Declarations ... were.
Most of the time what I see is a prepositional phrase with a plural object interposed between a singular subject and a verb, as if the writer had a goldfish's span of attention between subject and verb, but this example will do as well. I fix these on a regular basis in editing, but they litter my reading.
So let me just inquire: IS ANYONE OUT THERE STILL PAYING ATTENTION?
“It” was.
ReplyDeleteI apologize; I do not agree. The phrase "that it was...presently" modifies or expands on what the bold declarations (that is, the subject) were.
DeleteRubbish. The clause describes the content of the declarations. It does not metamorphose “declarations” into a singular noun.
DeleteAlso: My guidance often is to avoid "presently," since it is misunderstood just as often as it is misused.
ReplyDelete(Yes, she SEEMS to have used it correctly here.)
I had a teacher in 7th grade who made us memorize prepositions. Never end a sentence with one. Always make singular matched with plural etc. I still remember her teachings. Ex: aboard, about, above, after etc etc
ReplyDeleteNo, not so much, I’m afraid.
ReplyDeleteIt is galling, tiresome, and becoming the new normal.
ReplyDeleteI think the sentence before the one you quoted above would be important to know in order to make a fair determination.
ReplyDeleteRewrite!
ReplyDeleteTrying to pack too much into one sentence invites this kind of trouble.
ReplyDeleteEven if its subject and verb agreed, it would still be a horrible sentence. “Within reach enough”? A thing is either within reach or it’s not, so “enough” makes no sense. “Presently” adds zero meaning to the sentence (it’s redundant to the “within reach” mish-mosh), but it does show that instead of “now” or “soon,” you know how to use a fancy three-syllable word that can confusingly mean one or the other. “Presently” is also placed as far away as possible from the verb that it modifies (“invest”) so that it wrongly appears to modify the verb that it’s adjacent to (“was viewed”). “Pseudoscience and quackery”? This writer would probably describe the federal budget deficit as “big and large.” Also, it’s confusing that the sentence is structured such that the “bold declarations” are described as pseudoscience/quackery, when those terms are actually applicable to the thing being declared (that AI technology was mature enough to be investable).
ReplyDelete