Tree, your point about "trustability" is a good one. A college professor once told us that if you discover a certain number of factual errors in a written work, you should consider the entire work unreliable until you can prove otherwise. I have come to that same conclusion over and over again regarding various books, magazines, map compilations, etc. If I'm able to spot a consistent number of errors in a particular product where it deals with content that I'm familiar with, it makes me question the accuracy of the other subjects being covered which are outside my area of expertise. (And trust me, my own work over the years has caused some people to question my accuracy, and rightfully so.)
I remember a phone conversation or exchange of letters I had with Blair Kooistra way back in the late 1980s or early 90s when Mark Hemphill was working on his UP Salt Lake Route book. Mark had shared with Blair some of his disappointment when looking through certain previously-published works on the subject, and if I recall my conversation with Blair correctly, Mark had said to him regarding one or more of those works, "It's wrong...it's all wrong."
Which would not be surprising when you read enough books and articles on a given subject and hear the stories about how a certain piece of misinformation can get published once, and how every author afterward who uses that initial work as their source will end up repeating the same mistake. The review that Trains did years ago picking apart the Stephen Ambrose book Nothing Like it In the World was a perfect example. Hemphill was aiming for a much higher level of accuracy and scholarly research with his Salt Lake Route book.
I can count on both hands and feet the number of times I made the mistake of relying on a previous author's research and writing as fact without doublechecking it against more authoritative, official, primary sources. It wasn't until Hemphill's time as Editor of Trains, when I sensed his push for more thoroughly-researched and fact-checked material, and when I let him down with a faux pas in one of my articles regarding the date of a realignment on the GN main line in Washington state (I trusted what was depicted on a dated government topo map rather than digging deeper into GN archives) that I decided to set my personal goals higher than what I had often aimed for in the past.
Not saying my work is flawless now. Nor is the work of the most highly-regarded, widely-published authors or shooters in the rail field today. The rush to get something posted online or into print before the competition will often result in a degree of error. Haste makes waste. And as I also like to say, hurry leads to worry. Which is why I vastly prefer to spend weeks or months carefully toiling over a feature project vs. hustling to get some breaking news piece keyboarded and submitted in a matter of minutes.
Let me conclude with a comical observation on commas. My wife Amy has often told a story from her senior year of high school. Or maybe it was at community college. When an English teacher instructed Amy to read her sentences aloud, and then insert commas wherever she took naturally-occurring pauses in the word structure, she ended up with sentences that were riddled with commas. What the teacher didn't realize was that Amy had been in a terrible car accident a year or two earlier, spent time on a respirator, which scarred her throat. That, coupled with a mild case of asthma, caused Amy to be unusually short of breath, and therefore to take more frequent pauses in her speech. It shot holes in that teacher's well-intended but not fully sufficient theory on using the human voice as a guideline for comma placement.
Thanks, Tree68. I'll look out for that.
If I remember correctly, a before a noun, a cat, a dog, a train; an before a vowal, an almond, an office, an awning, an unknown. But also an hour, with h treated as a vowal for this purpose.
Bruce Kelly Tree, your point about "trustability" is a good one. A college professor once told us that if you discover a certain number of factual errors in a written work, you should consider the entire work unreliable until you can prove otherwise. I have come to that same conclusion over and over again regarding various books, magazines, map compilations, etc. If I'm able to spot a consistent number of errors in a particular product where it deals with content that I'm familiar with, it makes me question the accuracy of the other subjects being covered which are outside my area of expertise. (And trust me, my own work over the years has caused some people to question my accuracy, and rightfully so.) I remember a phone conversation or exchange of letters I had with Blair Kooistra way back in the late 1980s or early 90s when Mark Hemphill was working on his UP Salt Lake Route book. Mark had shared with Blair some of his disappointment when looking through certain previously-published works on the subject, and if I recall my conversation with Blair correctly, Mark had said to him regarding one or more of those works, "It's wrong...it's all wrong." Which would not be surprising when you read enough books and articles on a given subject and hear the stories about how a certain piece of misinformation can get published once, and how every author afterward who uses that initial work as their source will end up repeating the same mistake. The review that Trains did years ago picking apart the Stephen Ambrose book Nothing Like it In the World was a perfect example. Hemphill was aiming for a much higher level of accuracy and scholarly research with his Salt Lake Route book. I can count on both hands and feet the number of times I made the mistake of relying on a previous author's research and writing as fact without doublechecking it against more authoritative, official, primary sources. It wasn't until Hemphill's time as Editor of Trains, when I sensed his push for more thoroughly-researched and fact-checked material, and when I let him down with a faux pas in one of my articles regarding the date of a realignment on the GN main line in Washington state (I trusted what was depicted on a dated government topo map rather than digging deeper into GN archives) that I decided to set my personal goals higher than what I had often aimed for in the past. Not saying my work is flawless now. Nor is the work of the most highly-regarded, widely-published authors or shooters in the rail field today. The rush to get something posted online or into print before the competition will often result in a degree of error. Haste makes waste. And as I also like to say, hurry leads to worry. Which is why I vastly prefer to spend weeks or months carefully toiling over a feature project vs. hustling to get some breaking news piece keyboarded and submitted in a matter of minutes. Let me conclude with a comical observation on commas. My wife Amy has often told a story from her senior year of high school. Or maybe it was at community college. When an English teacher instructed Amy to read her sentences aloud, and then insert commas wherever she took naturally-occurring pauses in the word structure, she ended up with sentences that were riddled with commas. What the teacher didn't realize was that Amy had been in a terrible car accident a year or two earlier, spent time on a respirator, which scarred her throat. That, coupled with a mild case of asthma, caused Amy to be unusually short of breath, and therefore to take more frequent pauses in her speech. It shot holes in that teacher's well-intended but not fully sufficient theory on using the human voice as a guideline for comma placement.
Having read Ambrose's book, I would be very interested in reading the Trains review. Bruce, do you happen to know what issue it was in? Or does anyone else?
I vaguely remember reading that critique, too. However, a quick search of the Magazine Index here between 1990 and 2020 found nothing for "Ambrose", and only 9 for "transcontinental", none of which related to him.
- PDN.
I've read Band of Brothers and Pegasus Bridge. Ambrose is a better storyteller than an accurate historian.
The Ambrose book was reviewed on page 92 of the December 2000 Trains by Walter Gray, who was described at the time as California State Archivist and former director of the California State Railroad Museum. Gray went into great detail about specific errors, but the following quote sums it up best:
"It is customary for authors on this topic to retire to their studies with a stack of 15 or 20 previous books and emerge with one more. Errors and inaccuracies are inadvertently transmitted through successive generations of books, becoming true -- or at least accepted -- through repetition."
I can't tell you how many times I've made similar mistakes when writing articles for rail magazines in the past, relying too much on the previously published works of seemingly trustworthy individuals. And there have been many places over the years where I could detect that other authors have done likewise. Anymore, the dates and figures and names and facts that I come across in much of my research through previously-published books or magazine articles serve merely as indicators or placeholders of facts, which I then try to prove, to the best of my ability, through other, more reliable sources. Often not easy, and sometimes not entirely possible.
Another discussion of the shortcomings of the Ambrose book can be found here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing_Like_It_in_the_World
This all became somewhat personal for me and my daughter during her college years and beyond (she earned her BA and MA in History) because much of her interest in history began during the bicentennial events here in the Northwest for the Lewis & Clark expedition, which Ambrose famously wrote about in Undaunted Courage. My daugther met Ambrose's daughter (after Ambrose had passed away) at an annual meeting of the Lewis & Clark Trail Heritage Foundation. Turns out Ms. Ambrose became hooked on history much the same way my daughter did, through numerous childhood road trips and vacations with her dad to state and national parks, historic sites, museums, etc. History becomes far more fascinating to kids who experience it hands-on with a mix of visuals and adventure rather than simply being required in class to memorize a long list of names and dates.
Many of the criticisms against Nothing Like it In the World were also aimed at Undaunted Courage. Between that, and my handing her a copy of the Trains review, and what she learned in college and grad school about research and primary sources, my daughter seems better prepared to approach her writing than I did when I was her age, and writing my first articles for rail magazines in the 1980s and early 90s.
It goes without saying that Ambrose earned astronomically more money and acclaim for just those two books (he wrote several others) than any of us in the rail journalism field ever will in our lifetimes. The Trains review of his book came out around the same time I was undergoing my own transformation as a researcher/writer, and that review was a powerful motivator that prompted me to begin digging a bit deeper and wider in my work. A process that is often tempered by the realization that -- unlike Ambrose -- my efforts will earn me only a few hundred dollars per story.
daveklepperBut also an hour, with h treated as a vowel for this purpose.
It's not that the h is 'treated as a vowel', it's that it is silent in that word. That is why using 'an' with a word like 'historical', in which the h is pronounced on 'this side of the pond', is considered an affectation rather than correct standard Engilsh.
Thanks, Bruce. The wiki article mentions a LOT of criticism from historians!
Has anyone ever written a good historical novel centered on the building of the transcon? (Don't say Ambrose!)
Overmod: You are absolutely correct that there are times h take an an and times that it takes an a. But I believe an historical is OK. Optional But a huge job, a heavy hauler. A happy hour. And if I recall correctly, there are places where y is also treated as a vowel, but I cannot remember them at the moment.
Another situation for the option with h: An huristics, whatever that means.
I agree with Overmod that "an historical" is, these days, an affectation.
But that reminds me of a story I heard about some famous newspaper editor (maybe New York Times) who would cable his correspondents and ask, "Are there any news?"
No one wanted/dared to call this out as pompous. But finally one day a reporter wrote back, "Nope. Not a single new."
Lithonia Operator I agree with Overmod that "an historical" is, these days, an affectation. But that reminds me of a story I heard about some famous newspaper editor (maybe New York Times) who would cable his correspondents and ask, "Are there any news?" No one wanted/dared to call this out as pompous. But finally one day a reporter wrote back, "Nope. Not a single new."
Another example is the word "media," which is the plural of "medium," However, since apparently few people today have knowledge of Latin, many people think that "media" is a singular form. (They may know rhe connotation of the word "mediums."--persons who act as go-betweens for ithers who want to communicate with the spirit world.)
Johnny
Then there's different areas of the world. In the US, it's "math" singular or plural. In the UK, it's "maths".
The language is taking a serious beating these days. Even the media misuse the word "media." I think Webster's will eventually declare it singular, meaning "all of the various journalistic enterprises, taken together as a whole."
Probably the most common mistake in written English involves "its" and "it's." For reasons known only to the English Gods, "its" is the possessive. (The car blew its engine.) "It's" is the contraction for "it is." Me personally, I would have decreed exactly the opposite; but, surprisingly, I got no vote.
A pet peeve of mine is "I could care less." It's supposed to be "I couldn't care less." THAT is how little you care. The former, incorrect, version is basically saying, "My care level is not particularly low."
Lithonia OperatorA pet peeve of mine is "I could care less." It's supposed to be "I couldn't care less." THAT is how little you care. The former, incorrect, version is basically saying, "My care level is not particularly low."
Since we're already off on a tangent, there's an expression that I've found puzzling for some time: head over heels. Isn't that the normal position?
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
Paul of Covington Since we're already off on a tangent, there's an expression that I've found puzzling for some time: head over heels. Isn't that the normal position?
Apparently the basis for that goes back to the 14th Century, where it originated as "heels over head," denoting that things were upside down.
The idiom got switched in the 1700s, but still carries the same connotation - one's life is topsy-turvy.
Variations on the theme include the well-known "a** over teakettle" when describing a fall.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
Paul of Covington Lithonia Operator A pet peeve of mine is "I could care less." It's supposed to be "I couldn't care less." THAT is how little you care. The former, incorrect, version is basically saying, "My care level is not particularly low." Since we're already off on a tangent, there's an expression that I've found puzzling for some time: head over heels. Isn't that the normal position?
Lithonia Operator A pet peeve of mine is "I could care less." It's supposed to be "I couldn't care less." THAT is how little you care. The former, incorrect, version is basically saying, "My care level is not particularly low."
Wow, Paul. I never thought of that! Good one.
Expressions can be so weird. Wanna guess at the derivation of "by and large?" Literally that makes zero sense.
A prepostion and an adjective. How about "with and small?" Could go viral!
tree68 Paul of Covington Since we're already off on a tangent, there's an expression that I've found puzzling for some time: head over heels. Isn't that the normal position? Apparently the basis for that goes back to the 14th Century, where it originated as "heels over head," denoting that things were upside down. The idiom got switched in the 1700s, but still carries the same connotation - one's life is topsy-turvy. Variations on the theme include the well-known "a** over teakettle" when describing a fall.
tree68The idiom got switched in the 1700s, but still carries the same connotation - one's life is topsy-turvy.
Okay, now where did topsy-turvy come from?
She was the twin sister of Tipsy Turvy, who also had a bad drinking problem.
Paul of CovingtonOkay, now where did topsy-turvy come from?
Dates to 1520-1530... From some olde English, with a touch of Germanic.
tree68 Paul of Covington Okay, now where did topsy-turvy come from? Dates to 1520-1530... From some olde English, with a touch of Germanic.
Paul of Covington Okay, now where did topsy-turvy come from?
How far back do you remember? Is this personal first-hand information?
Paul of Covington How far back do you remember? Is this personal first-hand information?
But, of course....
What about jiminy=cricket? (Sp?)
daveklepperWhat about jiminy=cricket? (Sp?)
Our south-of-the-border version of tabarnac de tabarnacs.
"Jiminy Cricket" is one of those euphemisms for 'taking the Lord's name in vain" -- some people think the 'Jiminy' is dialect for "Jesu domine".
Another form, although not useful for the grillo parlante crowd, is 'Jiminy Christmas'.
I'm still trying to find out the truth behind what the H stands for in Jesus H. Christ, though...
Since we're down this branch line...
(Trying to keep a little "railroad reference" in this topic.)
One of things that annoys me is the current use of the word "decimate" instead of "devastate." Two different things, but today's media types don't seem to know this. Then again, most of them are as faddish as teenagers so maybe I shouldn't be surprised.
Look how they all went crazy with the word "gravitas" a few years back.
Flintlock76 Since we're down this branch line... (Trying to keep a little "railroad reference" in this topic.) One of things that annoys me is the current use of the word "decimate" instead of "devastate." Two different things, but today's media types don't seem to know this. Then again, most of them are as faddish as teenagers so maybe I shouldn't be surprised. Look how they all went crazy with the word "gravitas" a few years back.
How about how almost everything now is "literally" something, when 99% of the time it's not.
I saw a woman on TV describing a surprise she experienced: "I literally died!!" (I don't think so.)
Somewhere satirical (maybe The Onion) I saw this headline: Webster now defines "literally" as meaning "figuratively."
Overmod-- " I'm still trying to find out the truth behind what the H stands for in Jesus H. Christ, though."
Thinking it's similiar to Harry S. Truman.. it's just a letter OR it's like the Montreal Canadians logo with the 'H' in the 'C'. This stands for the French 'Center H'ice'.
One of my pet peeves is the overuse of "incredible" (and variants), as in "He was incredible." Really? He was not credible = not believable?
And "one of the only . . . " instead of "one of the few". It's become so common - even heard it on NPR a couple of times - that I'm afraid it'll become the new standard.
Perhaps the H. in "Jesus H. Christ" doesn't have a meaning, but is included simply to give it a different poetic "meter" - 4 beats instead of 3 - or emphasis on a different syllable. Or some other explanation . . .
And there's the use of the phrase "co-conspiritor." There's no such thing as a "co-conspiritor," a member of a conspiracy is a conspiritor, and either you are, or you aren't.
Oh, and concerning "J-H-C?" I've heard variants, but I'm not going there, I don't want to swerve into blasphemy and offend some folks here.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.