The thought, time and energy that go into editing have not increased exponentially on Yahoo! Sports:
More thought, time and energy might have led to correcting the mismatched plural subject and singular verbs.
The writer and editor at Yahoo! Style — neither of whom is a grammatical genius — thought this was correct:
In general neither, used as a pronoun, is grammatically singular and takes a singular verb like is, not are. Some experts are OK with neither taking a plural verb when it is followed by of and a plural, like: Neither of us know much about grammar.
Is the writer for Yahoo! Style being serious? Did she really think this paragraph was ready for the big time?
Didn’t she notice that the title of the book is “Debutante Divorcée”? How are we supposed to interpret “big hair sprayed hair”? I’ll guess it’s supposed to be “big hair, sprayed hair.” Or maybe “big hairsprayed hair.” But I have no firsthand (Note: It’s one word) knowledge of that.
I also have no firsthand knowledge of the writer’s reasoning for using need instead of the correct needs. Or for using both but and yet together. Is she being serious?
This might just be a new record for number of errors in a single sentence:
It’s unimaginable to me (and to most English speakers) how the writer could think that sentence is okie-dokie for publication. She didn’t notice that prices starts is a grammatical horror? Or that prices can start at $700 and also go up to $1500. But there’s only one starting price for any item. And prices … is sold? That one made me spit out my sugar-free, nonfat vanilla latte. That’s so bad, I almost didn’t notice the random and totally unnecessary at.