Does THIS ad work for you?

Mr. Improbable directed me to this beauty of a … typo? Freudian slip? Unintentional honesty?

Whole story here. Let’s just say, Mr. Glodis, hiring a good copyeditor is never a waste of money.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Does THIS ad work for you?

  1. Maria says:

    That’s hysterical. An extra letter, and the entire meaning of the sentence changes. The sad thing is, most people won’t notice the typo, and so it doesn’t really matter.

  2. Rubiatonta says:

    When my late Grand-dad, a lifelong newspaper man, used to see errors of this sort, he’d always contact the source to let them know they’d goofed. I’ll never forget him going into a Wendy’s just to tell them about an errant apostrophe on the sign outside. No burger, thanks.

    Those of us who wield red pencils for a living will never be out of a job, at least not in the English-speaking world.

  3. Ajay says:


    Then the illustration further confuses. Never mind REINS; now we see a BELT tightened around the statehouse, creating a visual pun on (WAIST)ful spending!

    Homophones gone wild!!

  4. Shulamuth says:

    I am speechless.

  5. Carolyn says:

    Rubiatonta, I can usually restrain myself, but I did once drop a note to the Katharine Gibbs School about a stray apostrophe (on an ad in the subway)–something the school’s graduates would have been expected to know.

  6. EA Week says:

    God, it drives me NUTS when people can’t get ‘rein’ and ‘reign’ straight. The results here, though, are hilarious. I also grind my teeth when people mix up ‘faze’ and ‘phase.’

    And don’t get me started on apostrophes! They serve an acutal purpose; they’re not just there for decorative purposes!

    If you really want to see me foam at the mouth, though, get me talking about the rampant incorrect use (or non-use, as the case may be) of the Latin plural. Arrrghh!

  7. Robin says:

    EA Week, is there a good online resource where I can learn what Latin words to pluralize, um, Latinly and which ones not to? I’m from that insecure socioeconomic status that says things like “processEEZ.” (Although I will never regret eagerly telling a friend, “So this bar I went to last night, there were two women dressed in leather and it turned out they were professional dominatricies!”)

    And an update for non-Massachusetts residents: Mr. Glodis lost, and his rein of error is over before it began. (Mistake intentional.)

  8. Rubiatonta says:

    Oh, EA Week, you’d love it here in “Vo’ Dilan,” where people (as in people on the television news) say things like, “Patrice and myself will be right back.” Makes my retired teacher mother and teacher/editor me froth at the mouth every time.

  9. EA Week says:

    Robin, I’m sorry I can’t offer any sources; I usually just check a dictionary if I’m not sure. Believe it or not, I attended a high school that 1) offered four years of Latin, if you wanted, and 2) drilled all students twice a year with something called a “usage test,” which covered everything from punctuation to irregular verbs to the complexities of sit/set/sat and lay/lie/laid, and included questions on, yes, the Latin plural, although we never had to pluralize “dominatrix” (a shame, too).

    So I would never refer to myself as an “alumnus” because I graduated from a Seven Sisters college and therefore am an “alumna,” and I periodically get together for college reunions with my fellow “alumnae.”

    But the biggest crime against the Latin plural is the recent adoption of “millenniums” as common usage. Why, God, why? What’s wrong with “millennia,” which not only rolls so regally off the tongue, but looks so much prettier on the page? I’ve resigned myself to “stadiums,” mostly because people look at you really oddly if you say “stadia,” but have the standards of written language fallen so low that even Time magazine is using “millenniums”? I just want to curl up in a corner and cry.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *