?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Without me linking to the article, can anyone figure out what this headline is trying to say? I already don't like the way a lot of headlines are formatted, using comma-delimited lists of predicates (subordinate clauses) to complete a robotic-sounding sentence (Sorry, Alex, is this hate speech?) in multiple ways. It's a fancy way of making a comma-splice or a run-on sentence somehow formally acceptable. But this one has no commas, and is more cryptic than most:
Red Clover Protects Brain From Monosodium Glutamate Food Additives Leads To Brain Damage
(I'm going to ignore the capitalization problems I've already ranted about in the past.)

Breaking it down, it looks to have one subject and two predicates. This might be ok, if they had used the comma convention that I hate. The following makes (relative) sense:
[Subject ] [                     Predicate 1                     ], [    Predicate 2    ]
Red Clover Protects Brain From Monosodium Glutamate Food Additives, Leads To Brain Damage

Ok, so they forgot the comma. Red Clover, while it protects the brain from MSG, also happens to cause brain damage. That's unfortunate. What's also unfortunate is that, even though that could be a viable explanation, it isn't correct. The article actually says (and so the headline, I would guess, means to say) that this clover protects the brain from the brain damage that MSG is already known to cause. I cannot find a way to amend this headline to say that without changing the overall structure. Does anyone even proofread anything anymore?

Latest Month

December 2010
S M T W T F S
   1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031 

Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Naoto Kishi