Debating an element of style
Longtime Daily News reader Bob Van de Walle of Granada Hills phoned Wednesday morning to complain about the way our sportswriters use the English language.
Bob admitted his specific complaint isn't about a big thing, but he warned that when it comes to grammar, mighty oaks from little acorns grow.
He doesn't like the way we tend to write phrases such as Dodgers manager Joe Torre (Dodgers with an "s"), or Lakers history, or Trojans fans. He'd prefer Dodger manager Joe Torre (no "s"), Laker history, and Trojan fans.
"You wouldn't say Dodgers Stadium," Bob said.
I love conversations like this, so when I called Bob back, we talked for about 15 pleasant minutes. I told him I know some newspapers do it his way, including our rival the Los Angeles Times, and our way might sound clunky if you aren't used to it. But I said the Daily News' editors set this style for the sports section years ago, and they did it after some careful thought.
Yes, there are many examples of common phrases in which team names go without the "s" -- Dodger Stadium, Dodger Blue, Raider Nation, Yankee Stadium, and the Bruin Family (as UCLA refers to past and present football players, not to Goldilocks' friends).
But there also are cases where you need the "s" -- Nationals Park (home of the Washington baseball club, not Team USA), Giants Stadium (otherwise it sounds like a really huge arena), Browns quarterback (since he's probably pasty-white), Reds shortstop (unless he's a communist), and Cubs scout (unless he's very young)
We try to avoid unfortunate puns. Thus, a St. Louis goalie is a Blues netminder. Only after giving up a few bad-luck goals does he become a blue netminder.
Basically, when you say Dodgers manager Joe Torre, it's a punchy way of saying manager Joe Torre of the Dodgers. The team's name is the Dodgers, not the Dodger.
Anyway, that's the Daily News' style, and we're probably sticking to it. But as the reader I spoke with this morning will attest, there's room for argument.
1 Comments
Leave a comment
About this blog
Kevin Modesti watches sports from a new angle since his promotion from sports columnist to sports editor for the Los Angeles Newspaper Group. In his new blog, Modesti not only comments on the big sports stories of the moment-- he talks about what makes them big. Think of it as a conversation with readers about how these stories should be covered.
It's nice to see an issue like this getting play in the blog.
As a copyeditor myself, it's too easy to let the style control you, rather than controlling the style (... grasshopper ... wax on, wax off, etc).
And we need to remember that the reason a rule comes under the domain of "style" is that there is more than one way to do it and still be correct, but that what we are seeking is a style that enables us to do it the same, consistent way each and every time.
It's all about consistency while remaining reasonable in our choices. If something conforms to style yet looks or reads ridiculously, then it's time to re-examine how we do it and change the style if necessary.
Taking your example above, I think you're right to use the plural as the adjective. Take the L.A. Kings, for example. Saying "King manager" wouldn't sound right, but "Kings manager" does. But to me, "Laker guard" sounds OK, but "Lakers guard" does as well. But you can still have this style and say, "He's a Laker, through and through," and not have to say "He's a Lakers player."
Style cuts through the confusion on the one hand (while creating some confusion as collateral damage), but the consistency is usually worth it.