Yahoo! Celebrity reveals that Kelly Rowland is expecting a hermaphrodite:
While many pregnant women know their baby’s gender, she’s the first I’ve heard of who knows her baby genders.
Sometimes, when I read something on Yahoo! Celebrity, I can’t help wondering if the writer is familiar with basic English idioms, like this:
Actually, the Kardashians have been renting a home; the owner of the home has been renting out the home.
There are some mistakes I can overlook. Still, I can’t help noticing the typos:
and the missing apostrophe in what should be Kardashians’:
and at least one word too many here:
Can you overlook errors like these?
Even if the writer for Yahoo! Beauty had used an apostrophe in the idiom “arm’s length,” I think this would still be wrong:
The idiom “arm’s length” means “a distance that physical or social contact is discouraged” (American Heritage Dictionary). So what would it mean to keep something “within arm’s length”? I think the writer meant “within easy reach.”
I’m sorry to say it, but it’s hard to believe that this article from Yahoo! Shine was produced by a professional writer. Heck, it’s hard to believe it was written by a middle school graduate.
There are a few minor problems, like needlessly capitalizing a word. “Sorry” doesn’t get a capital letter unless it’s at the start of a sentence or you’re writing about the board game:
This is a sorry attempt at making a possessive out of women:
(To form the possessive of a plural noun not ending in S, just add an apostrophe and S: women’s, men’s, children’s.)
Things get a little sorrier with an error-filled paragraph, which includes a subject-verb mismatch (the subject study takes the verb has identified):
A “verbal tick” sounds like a talking, bloodsucking arachnid. If the writer meant an idiosyncratic and habitual behavior, that would be a tic. Then there’s the issue of the pronoun they, which has no antecedent. Just who is they? The rest of the sentence is just a mess. If you’re still reading that article at this point, I feel sorry for you.
I don’t usually hang around Yahoo! Autos. It’s not because I don’t like cars; it’s because I’m not really interested in reading about cars. And now that I’ve seen the home page of Autos, I think I may be mousing around there, looking for some gems for Terribly Write.
I didn’t have to look very far to see this mismatch of subject and verb. Nor to find the outdated reference to Czechoslovakia, which hasn’t existed in over 20 years:
This is one of those typos that defies explanation. Wouldn’t a spell-checker have alerted the writer that parnetship isn’t really a word?
I guess no one at Yahoo! knows how to use punctuation. You have to wonder why the writer didn’t think to include the apostrophe in harm’s way and why he or she thought a semicolon (and not a comma) was correct here:
Yahoo! Autos: It’s not just for car enthusiasts.
The writers at Yahoo! are having a devil of a time figuring out where to stick the apostrophe when forming a possessive.
At Yahoo! News, the writers seem to think there was more than one bomber whose friends are about to go on trial:
They’re wrong. It was one bomber’s friends who requested a change of venue.
Ya’ gotta give the writer for Yahoo! Finance credit for at least including an apostrophe, even if it’s in the wrong place:
That’s more than I can say for the writer at Yahoo! Shine, who missed the apostrophe in what should be people’s
Good days work. Bad days don’t. What does that have to do with the talks surrounding the situation in Ukraine? You’d have to ask the writer for Yahoo! News responsible for this:
OK, so we all know that the writer meant: Good day’s work. That’s what the Associated Press calls a quasi possessive. Other examples include: three years’ experience, two weeks’ pay, and a good night’s rest.
I don’t know what happened to the S that supposed to be on the Yahoo! front page. Maybe it slipped out when no one was looking. If someone had seen it, I wonder what the witness’s claim would be:
I bet the writer thinks that’s correct: That you form the possessive of a singular, common noun ending in S by adding just an apostrophe. A lot of authorities, including the Associated Press and the Chicago Manual of Style, would disagree. They say that the plural of a singular, common noun ending in S requires an apostrophe and an S. The only exception AP makes is when the possessive is followed by a word that starts with S, because the would be just too many S’s (so, it’s witness’s claim, but witness’ story).