[Robert Stokes]

I have just bought the February issue of British Railway Modelling. Inside the cellophane cover is a small card insert that offers money off the gate price for the Harrogate show but it has as its headline "25 truly aspirational layouts in this issue".

I aspire to produce a good model railway but in a magazine I want to see layouts that inspire me to do better. Therefore I think that the writer meant to say "25 truly inspirational layouts in this issue". Now we all, including me, make the occasional error of spelling, punctuation, or grammar, but should a professional writer (I assume it was done by someone paid by the magazine) mix up 'inspirational' with 'aspirational'?

If I am correct in this analysis of the situation then I think that things have come to a pretty pass. Or am I just a grumpy old man concerned about standards that no longer apply?

 

[Doug]

Sounds wrong to me. Even if it is right in some weird use of the language, it is controversial so shouldn't be used. You would think that they had the staff to check these sort of things.

 

[7113]

unfortunately this sort of thing is becoming all to common. In my professional role I frequently have to decide what the writer actually means. (as opposed to what they have apparently written.)

Regards

 

[alastairq]

I think the current attitude is one of ''so what?''...''get a life??''

'standards' are seen as ''so much irrelevance'' these days?

 

[dwb]

Once upon a time magazines had sub-editors....

David

 

[7113]

QUOTE (dwb @ 16 Jan 2008, 19:54) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Once upon a time magazines had sub-editors....

And printers had proof readers.

Regards