He died of an apparent heart attack (usage question)

Factual Questions
1

I keep hearing this sort of thing of the radio. “He died of an apparent heart attack”, or of an apparent something else, whatever.

I wonder, how many people die each year of apparent heart attacks? Is it more or fewer than those who die of real heart attacks?

My point is that it seems to be a stupid phrase, in my mind. They ought to be saying, “He died, apparently of a heart attack.”

But I want to keep this in GQ, so here is my question: Is there an authoritative source (like the “AP Style Book” or something) which discusses and rules on this sort of usage? And can I find it online?

2

It’s like saying “the suspected killer” or “the alleged robbery.” The noun isn’t so much a thing as a specific nature for the thing (a death, a person, an event), and the adjective casts doubt on the nature.

3

The #5 definition from Merriam-Webster:

manifest to the senses or mind as real or true on the basis of evidence that may or may not be factually true

I’d say there’s nothing wrong with this particular case.

4

I’m with you, Keeve. “Apparently, he died of a heart attack.” Saying that he died of an apparent heart attack actually means that there was no question that it was a heart attack, right?

5

Not necessarily. My father died of an apparent heart attack, even though the autopsy showed no specific cardiac blockage. His death was ultimately ruled to be due to “the effects of heart disease”, an ambiguous and inconclusive determination at best.

6

remember that usage rules are not prescriptions, but descriptions. They evolve as the language evolves. If you’re writing/saying something and you have the opportunity to make the meaning more clear and less ambiguous, go ahead and do it, regardless of the “rules.”

Or should I say, irregardless?

7

No, as evidenced by the definition I supplied.

8

Along these lines… I always thought it was absurd that when someone dies the news people say, " He died of a MASSIVE heart attack."

Seems to me if the heart atttack was sufficient to kill the guy, it’s absurd and redundant to describe it’s magnitude as… MASSIVE.

Think of the alternative… “He died of a fairly MINOR heart attack.” or “he died of an average magnitude heart attack.”

9

Massive heart attack: Lots of dead heart muscle. The heart fails because of this, eithr because the dead muscle ruptures, or the remaining living muscle just can’t pump effectively. Death occurs
Minor heart attack: Knocks off just a tiny bit of muscle, which in and of itself doesn’t affect pumping capacity, but the dead area can disrupt electrical conduction and cause a fatal arrhythmia. Small heart attack, big consequences.

10

  1. there’s nothing under “apparent” in the AP Style guide (at least the 2000 edition).

  2. I don’t have a problem with it. It is completely grammatically defensible (snake-hip’s definition seems fine), and much more importantly, gets across the desired information in a quick, but absolutely clear way. I mean, can anyone take it to mean anything else than what it’s intended to, and does it take any time to figure out?
    No, and no, so it’s a good sentence.

11

The use of “apparent” is in the interests of accuracy. Until there’s an autopsy, the cause of death is not officially determined. A doctor might call it a heart attack, but it may turn out he was, say, poisoned. So by saying “apparent,” the newspaper is acknowleging the most likely cause of death, while covering their bases if it turns out that the original diagnosis was wrong.

12

[pet peeve]Newspaper stories and news anchors who put word such as allegedly and apparent in the wrong place. (e.g., “The suspect who committed the alleged armed robbery.”)[/pet peeve]

13

So he could still be alive, but look like he died of a heart attack? (OK, unlikely :))

14

Thanks, all. I guess I’m being too picky.

15

"We need a holdup note. Okay, I have a pencil, I’ll write it. …‘This is a holdup.’ "
“Well, you can’t say ‘this is.’ The use of the present tense implies an act which is already in progress when, palpably, it is not.”
" ‘A holdup is about to commence.’ "
“But, but the act, the act usually begins with the note.”
“Um… ‘A holdup is commencing?’”
“Iffy. Iffy. I mean, surely not. ‘Is commencing,’ that’s use of the present continuous tense, which implies an act that can continue for some time. You can’t keep commencing, can you? Commence commence commence!”
"All right! All right all right all right! ‘A holdup … commences.’ "
“Wonderful!”

  • Royal Canadian Air Farce, “Literary Holdup Note”