[QUOTE=Ellis Aponte Jr.] groman,
Mind you I’m no grammarian, but the verb forms from those headlines are not imperatives simply because they sometimes coincide with the imperative form. Context makes clear that they are third-person verb forms with their subject omitted.
In the case of FINGERS PTA BOARD IN NAIL RAP, “fingers” doesn’t even coincide with any imperative form. Why any reader would be confused by any of these headlines I can’t see
[/QUOTE]
The reason people are complaining is because it’s a wholly unnatural construction for pretty much everyone except New York tabloid readers, it seems. Abbreviated noun-verb-object forms are unobjectionable because they simply make sense. If I saw the headline “FINGERS PTA BOARD IN NAIL RAP” in my newspaper, I honestly would have no clue what it meant if I had never read this thread. And I still stumble over it, because I cannot understand how anybody would have decided third-person present-subject-object (noun phrase, whatever) makes any sense whatsoever. To me (and apparently most of the readers of this thread), it looks like a jumbled headline.
Likewise, I think “COLLARS DRIVER IN FATAL HIT RUN” is vastly inferior to “DRIVER COLLARED IN FATAL HIT-RUN” or “FATAL HIT-RUN DRIVER COLLARED.” I would guess–and I’ve been wrong before as evidenced by this thread–that if you took the three headlines to a broad cross-section of American readers, a vast majority would mark the first as confusing or ungrammatical.
[QUOTE=groman]
GET ANY MAN YOU WANT
SWEEP MESS AND STRESS OUT OF YOUR LIFE
[/QUOTE]
Sorry, groman, that can’t be a real “Cosmo” cover, because there isn’t a headline about “sex secrets.” Every “Cosmo” I’ve ever seen has an article about the latest sex secrets to come out.
[QUOTE=pulykamell]
The reason people are complaining is because it’s a wholly unnatural construction for pretty much everyone except New York tabloid readers, it seems.
[/QUOTE]
Exactly. I suppose it could be regional. Whatever it is, it should be stopped, because those headlines aren’t meaningful. That editor should indeed go to work at the Daily News, and he should stay there.
[QUOTE=pulykamell]
We were basically given a count of how many lines and a point count (I’m not exactly sure whether it was called a point count or something else).
[/quote]
Headline count.
I have used CompuGraphic, DiscNet, and Atex. I believe these were all common.
[QUOTE=pulykamell]
And I’m still scratching my head over “SLAY RAP IN 1974 SHOOTING”. What does that mean???
[/QUOTE]
My WAG:
“Slay(ing)” = killing
“Rap” = blame
So,
“Slay rap” = culpability for murder
So, the headline is saying that (Someone) is being blamed for a shooting and killing someone in 1974.
[QUOTE=pulykamell]
The reason people are complaining is because it’s a wholly unnatural construction for pretty much everyone except New York tabloid readers, it seems. Abbreviated noun-verb-object forms are unobjectionable because they simply make sense. If I saw the headline “FINGERS PTA BOARD IN NAIL RAP” in my newspaper, I honestly would have no clue what it meant if I had never read this thread. And I still stumble over it, because I cannot understand how anybody would have decided third-person present-subject-object (noun phrase, whatever) makes any sense whatsoever. To me (and apparently most of the readers of this thread), it looks like a jumbled headline.
[/QUOTE]
pulykamell,
If your local paper this morning carried the headline BEARS WIN CHAMPIONSHIP would you be confused? Would you think it was an imperative statement urging the team to win? Of course not. Well this headline is grammatically identical to FINGERS PTA BOARD with the exception of the omission of the subject in the latter. (I’ve left out the NAIL RAP part - even I don’t know what that means). All of the fuss about these unusual headlines boils down to the fact that they omit the subject, leaving it implied. Furthermore, the implied subject is almost always “police” or “citizen” so it’s hardly a difficult thing to figure out. As the OP pointed out a while back, this is standard practice in Spanish-language newspapers and it doesn’t make Spanish headlines less “meaningful.” Present tense for past event is common practice in headlines (BEARS WIN CHAMPIONSHIP; MAN BITES DOG) and in speech ("So then I say to the guy…). So that can’t be the problem. All headline style is a contrived version of English. Conventions fluctuate, but you get used them. The “tabloid form” may be a regional practice now, but it wasn’t always, as the headlines from Chicago and Detroit indicate. And hey “Hollywood dingbat,” have you ever read the headlines in Variety? They must make you apoplectic.
Business as usual this morning: “Inaugurate bridge in east region” - not only did I do that story over the weekend and headlined it correctly, the individual who inaugurated the bridge in question is the president, so leaving that out of the headline makes even less sense!
[QUOTE=Ellis Aponte Jr.] pulykamell,
If your local paper this morning carried the headline BEARS WIN CHAMPIONSHIP would you be confused? Would you think it was an imperative statement urging the team to win? Of course not.
[/quote]
Of course not is right. BEARS, WIN CHAMPIONSHIP would be the imperitive
And that’s a BIG omission that I and almost everyone else here objects to. We are simply not used to seeing or hearing the third-person verb heading a sentence without a subject.
[QUOTE=pulykamell]
Of course not is right. BEARS, WIN CHAMPIONSHIP would be the imperitive
And that’s a BIG omission that I and almost everyone else here objects to. We are simply not used to seeing or hearing the third-person verb heading a sentence without a subject.
They are not analogous examples.
[/QUOTE]
That almost everyone here objects to it is neither here nor there. The fact remains that this declarative style of newspaper headline both existed in the past (as shown by the 1920s Chicago press headlines) and remains currently in usage (witness the NY examples). It’s simply another means of saving precious space and is no more wrong than any other form of newspaper telegraphese.
[QUOTE=aldiboronti]
That almost everyone here objects to it is neither here nor there. The fact remains that this declarative style of newspaper headline both existed in the past (as shown by the 1920s Chicago press headlines) and remains currently in usage (witness the NY examples). It’s simply another means of saving precious space and is no more wrong than any other form of newspaper telegraphese.
[/QUOTE]
That’s your opinion. I would beg to differ. Language changes and people’s expectations change. The examples may not be “wrong” for readers of the New York Daily News, but for readers of most newspapers around the country, they would be sufficiently confusing enough (as evidenced by nearly everyone in this thread) that a good editor would avoid them. A newspaper’s job is to communicate information clearly and if headline conventions change over time a good newspaper should abide by those changes. If a headline is causing intelligent readers to stop in their tracks and think “WTF is this?” then I suggest rewriting the headline, unless you live in 1920 or present day New York.
That everyone objects is not “neither here nor there.” It is the very foundation of how communication and language works.
Hypothetically, I am the editor of a national newspaper. I decide to start running 1920s and New York Daily News-style headlines that read “SLAY COP KILLER” and “FINGERS PTA BOARD” instead of “cop killer slayed” and “PTA board fingered” or (preferably) something more informative and punchy. I then ask my readership about these headlines and get responses similar to what’s been posted here on the Dope. Almost everyone except for a few NYC locals and perhaps newspaper historians object to the construction.
Now, do I tell my readers that they’re wrong, “look, by golly, it’s good enough for the 1920s and NYC tabloids, it’s good enough for you!” or do I rewrite the headlines and stick with the more well-understood headlines that cause no problems for anybody?
It’s not friggin rocket science to rewrite a headline, so why cause readers outside the NYC tabloid market headaches by running them? In the interests of clarity, go with the less awkward and more universally understood construction.
Why is it necessary to stamp out any form of marginal quirkiness? I don’t endorse this stuff for a national newspaper… it’s you and likeminded posters who want to banish it from publication anywhere.
[QUOTE=pulykamell]
We are simply not used to seeing or hearing the third-person verb heading a sentence without a subject.
[QUOTE=Ellis Aponte Jr.]
Why is it necessary to stamp out any form of marginal quirkiness? I don’t endorse this stuff for a national newspaper…
[/quote]
After being presented with the facts that the New York Daily news does do headlines this way as a matter of style or quirk, did I say anywhere not to allow it with New York newspapers where the readers apparently are familiar with the convention? I don’t even know how you got that impression, especially since I specifically stated:
Did you perhaps think that’s why, in my example, I specifically said “I am the editor of a national newspaper”?
Thanks for putting words in my mouth. That’s exactly what I said. :rolleyes:
[QUOTE=Ellis Aponte Jr.]
I don’t endorse this stuff for a national newspaper…
[/QUOTE]
Also, remember that the OP is talking about a Latin-American publication that has, presumably, a wide swath of English readers, most who probably would not be familiar with NYC tabloid headlinese. With your statement, you are basically agreeing with the majority of what has been said in this thread.
[QUOTE=Ellis Aponte Jr.] pulykamell,
If your local paper this morning carried the headline BEARS WIN CHAMPIONSHIP would you be confused? Would you think it was an imperative statement urging the team to win? Of course not. Well this headline is grammatically identical to FINGERS PTA BOARD with the exception of the omission of the subject in the latter. (I’ve left out the NAIL RAP part - even I don’t know what that means). All of the fuss about these unusual headlines boils down to the fact that they omit the subject, leaving it implied. Furthermore, the implied subject is almost always “police” or “citizen” so it’s hardly a difficult thing to figure out. As the OP pointed out a while back, this is standard practice in Spanish-language newspapers and it doesn’t make Spanish headlines less “meaningful.” Present tense for past event is common practice in headlines (BEARS WIN CHAMPIONSHIP; MAN BITES DOG) and in speech ("So then I say to the guy…). So that can’t be the problem. All headline style is a contrived version of English. Conventions fluctuate, but you get used them. The “tabloid form” may be a regional practice now, but it wasn’t always, as the headlines from Chicago and Detroit indicate. And hey “Hollywood dingbat,” have you ever read the headlines in Variety? They must make you apoplectic.
[/QUOTE]
For the first time in my life I’ve just read Variety, and this is what I’ve found, in the TV section headlines:
[QUOTE=Variety]
Top Stories: Producers pick ‘Sunshine’ “Little Miss Sunshine” is beaming. DirecTV, CBS ink on hoops CSTV to be offered to over 8 mil subscribers CBS, Fox score big with football finals Fox Sunday game is best in 10 years Woodruff back at PBS Anchor left ‘NewsHour’ in '93 to join CNN Liguori looking over shoulder Fox boss says FCC decisions ‘chilling’
Inside Move: Reilly cameos on ‘Office’ NBC boss gets airtime on hit comedy ‘Sopranos’ sees ratings dip on A&E ‘Idol’ takes over 9-o’clock time period Colbert-O’Reilly crossover scores Both hosts’ shows see ratings boost De Mol scotches Disney rumors Dutch mogul denies pair will bid for Endemol Variety staff seen, heard on Reelz Paper to provide content for ‘Dailies’ Star India chiefs resign Aiello named as acting CEO ‘Crowned’ heads to CW Net orders episodes of pageant-style contest ‘Ugly Betty’ gets big Kiwi welcome Premiere tops ratings in New Zealand BSkyB dismisses Murdoch rumors Reports claim Mockridge will take reins in U.K. Versus climbs into cage Sports network pacts with WEC BBC sets to expand
World Brief Channel 4 board to quiz Duncan Broadcaster criticized for ‘Big Brother’ coverage’ MOMI lauds Lauer, Lee Black-tie salute to be held April 26 ABC picks up ‘Suspect’ Fox leads ‘Apostles’ with cop drama Mogul Gonzalez buys 80% of Canal 9 Exec takes stake of Argentine broadcaster
[/QUOTE]
Every one of these headlines has a subject. I’ve also gone through today’s NY and LA Times and found the same thing.
I don’t read the New York Daily News, so perhaps this is a tradition of that paper, and maybe a few others. The fact that Spanish allows for dropped subjects doesn’t make this a helpful practice to reduce the length of English news headlines. Spanish-language news headlines follow completely different conventions. But even in Spanish-language papers, if the agency is important, it’s communicated. In English, most papers will use passive constructions when the agency is either not known or unimportant.
And BTW, do you know how few people who actually live in Hollywood actually read Variety? Probably about three. I guess I now make it four.
[QUOTE=guizot]
I’ve also gone through today’s NY and LA Times and found the same thing.
[/QUOTE]
Okay, in Todays LA Times, this:
[QUOTE=LA Times] Saving the ER for real emergencies
Costly ‘frequent fliers’ are being encouraged to visit clinics in L.A. test.
[/QUOTE]
In this case, I think they’re doing what the NY Daily News does, but using a gerund rather than base form or conjugated verb. This usage refers to something that has been happening repeatedly for a while, rather than one event.
[QUOTE=guizot]
And BTW, do you know how few people who actually live in Hollywood actually read Variety? Probably about three. I guess I now make it four.
[/QUOTE]
If you are in “the industry” you read Variety more than the Times. Outside the industry, you couldn’t care less.
[QUOTE=guizot]
Okay, in Todays LA Times, this:In this case, I think they’re doing what the NY Daily News does, but using a gerund rather than base form or conjugated verb. This usage refers to something that has been happening repeatedly for a while, rather than one event.
[/QUOTE]
There is a distinct difference between imperative and gerund.
“Saving the ER for real emergencies” - a headline which, to me, implies an article about measures being taken to prevent frivolous ER use.
“Save the ER for real emergencies” - a possible headline which, to me, implies an article that is probably an opinion piece urging readers to avoid frivolous ER use.
[QUOTE=Martha]
This headline style does appear to be a convention in the national Spanish language press, so that goes some way to explain it, especially as this editor advocates the use of online translators to produce English versions of local Spanish news items, which is a problem in itself.
“Insisten en parar transporte” for example, is a headline in one of today’s national newspapers. “(Unions) insist on stopping transport” is the literal translation. I don’t think this is as bad in Spanish as it is in English, because Spanish drops the subject noun or pronoun which is implied in the verb: “Voy al parque” = “(I) go to the park” without it sounding like an imperative.
[/QUOTE]
I was going to say, before I even finished the OP, that these headlines sound like they were written by Spanish speakers who learned English as a second language. It’s like some bizarre mash-up of English and Spanish headline convention. In English, I have never seen the construction and agree fully with the other mystified English speakers.
As a journalist and headline writer, I think the examples from the NYC tabloids are little more than matters of style. They have created a distinctive way of writing headlines that saves space and that their readers, over time, have come to understand, even expect.
I’d like to mention a point that everyone else here seems to have missed about virtually all of the tabloid examples presented above: the absent subject of the sentence is almost always either the police or some other entity to whom the verb applies almost exclusively. For instance, the police are the only ones who arrest, bust, or nab (a criminal). So what appears on its face to be an imperative is understood by tabloid readers to be a declarative statement with an understood subject that 95% of the time will be the police. The rest of the time it will be the government or one of a small number of other candidates that the verb narrows to near exclusivity.
Under this style, I wouldn’t expect a headline like: SLAY BAD SPELLER, instead of BAD SPELLER SLAIN, since there’s no telling who might commit such a crime. (There must be at least a dozen suspects in this thread alone, and I don’t exclude myself.) The “understood” missing subject can’t be understood.
In this sense, this unusual usage is much like the special Variety speak that that publication has developed over the years: e.g. prexy for president, ankling for leaving a job, helmer for director, etc. It’s perplexing to the uninitiated, but it’s useful shorthand that saves space and establishes a style distinctive to the publication. (Variety uses this jargon throughout its copy, not just in headlines.)
Now if the headline writers of the OP’s publication are studiously applying these principles (which seems possible from the examples in the OP), I might say they are simply adopting a style. But if these headlines are in fact the product of a poor understanding of English (which seems more likely from the OP’s later posts), the writers should be corrected.