rhu: (Default)
[personal profile] rhu

From The New York Times "City Room" blog:

Although it would seem likely that Senator Clinton might capture the lioness’s share of voters in her stronghold state....

OK, so it might seem weird at first blush to award Mrs. Clinton the "lion's" share, but the whole point of the idiom is that the lion, who hasn't done much in the way of hunting, gets first pick at the carcass and the largest portion, while the lioness, who has actually felled the prey, has to wait for the leftovers.

Or maybe the Times is subtly trying to say that they expect Sen. Obama to win New York even though Sen. Clinton deserves it....

ETA: I posted the same comment on the blog entry there, and they have now changed the wording to "... capture the larger share ..." (12:36pm)

(no subject)

Date: 2008-02-01 05:26 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] introverte.livejournal.com
Yes, but Mrs. Clinton is actively engaged in tearing down the tradition of male-dominated power structures. Perhaps the metaphor is a bit too self-aware, but I would hesitate it to call it wrong.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-02-01 08:16 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] michelel72.livejournal.com
Garner warns against "tweaking" cliches for purposes other than punning. Based on this example, I see his point -- rephrasing lion's share is primarily going to jolt the reader out of the article and into consideration of what the paper means, exactly, by the new phrasing. Given the NYT's reputation for erudition, a reader could be excused for thinking the new phrase is the subtle interpretation you suggest.

I'm glad you mentioned something, and I'm pleased that they heeded the feedback. News articles should prize clarity over attempted cleverness.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-02-01 08:40 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] introverte.livejournal.com
Well, I took it for an ironic statement on gender roles; but as we all know, irony in print is dangerous.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-02-01 09:39 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] rubrick.livejournal.com
Wait... what exactly did you mean by that?

(no subject)

Date: 2008-02-02 11:17 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] introverte.livejournal.com
I mean that it's so hard to interpret irony when it's in written form - the reader may take an ironic statement seriously and get upset about it, or simply miss the intended second meaning.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-02-03 02:46 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] vettecat.livejournal.com
Very clever... it's cool that they changed it!

Profile

rhu: (Default)
Andrew M. Greene

January 2013

S M T W T F S
  12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags