Confusing headlines and other trips down the garden path

[hwhatting]

Upon reading this, my reaction was, "Why do they want to see the underwear of children under 3 years of age?"

No, you got it wrong. It's an exception to the "nobody wants" part - it means "Children under 3 years want to see people's underwear".

[linguoboy]

Pakistani Christian Accused of Blasphemy in Canada

Wait--Canada has blasphemy laws? And they apply to things besides maple syrup and hockey?

[clawgrip]

Well maybe this Pakistani Christian insisted that "ice hockey" is the correct term for the sport.

[Qwynegold]

"Rosacea treatment symptons cures prevention remedy"

Whaaat?

[linguoboy]

China awards labour camp mother

WTF, BBC?

[Salmoneus]

China awards labour camp mother

WTF, BBC?

That's not confusing at all. The awards being handed out by China are hard work for homosexual women with children (who presumably are having to hand out the awards).

Well, there's always the alternative - that China is now giving out mothers from labour camps as prizes.

[Risla]

Isn't it obvious? They're giving a mother to a labor camp.

[ol bofosh]

China awards a mother of a labour camp, is my interpretation (she's done something good, though what she gets isn't specified).

[Click]

China awards a mother of a labour camp, is my interpretation (she's done something good, though what she gets isn't specified).

Giving birth to a labor camp was surely difficult.

[Salmoneus]

China awards a mother of a labour camp, is my interpretation (she's done something good, though what she gets isn't specified).

Trouble with that is that I don't think 'award' works like that. You can award somebody something... but can you just award somebody? No, you award something. George Clooney isn't awarded - though he can be awarded an Oscar. It's the Oscar that's awarded.
It's like saying "China gives mother". Doesn't work!

Maybe it's a typo for 'rewards'?

[Drydic]

Sal, the mother was sent to a labor camp for complaining about something. The headline is about her being awarded damages by a Chinese court for this.

[ol bofosh]

China awards a mother of a labour camp, is my interpretation (she's done something good, though what she gets isn't specified).

Giving birth to a labor camp was surely difficult.

Mother in/from a labour camp.

Trouble with that is that I don't think 'award' works like that. You can award somebody something... but can you just award somebody? No, you award something. George Clooney isn't awarded - though he can be awarded an Oscar. It's the Oscar that's awarded.

Then I don't think I've ever understood that word like that. Perhaps I've mixed it up with to reward or something.

[jal]

Mandela granddaughter voices hurt
(Not the actual article title, but the link on the home page)

EDIT: I also like this one: 'Badger was fox' lie Cumbria men's convictions upheld

JAL

[linguoboy]

One of my friends posted this: "I need help getting deeply baked on cooking oil (rather thick) from stainless steel" and had me wondering for a sec how you could possibly use ordinary cooking oil (however thick) to get high.

[Drydic]

One of my friends posted this: "I need help getting deeply baked on cooking oil (rather thick) from stainless steel" and had me wondering for a sec how you could possibly use ordinary cooking oil (however thick) to get high.

You KNOW that someone, somewhere, has tried it. You also know that that was not an isolated attempt.

[----]

If this was a bigger forum I'd say somebody may have tried it after reading that.

[Ars Lande]

One of my friends posted this: "I need help getting deeply baked on cooking oil (rather thick) from stainless steel" and had me wondering for a sec how you could possibly use ordinary cooking oil (however thick) to get high.

You KNOW that someone, somewhere, has tried it. You also know that that was not an isolated attempt.

And now I'll let you work out the additional implications of Rule 34 as applied to that case.

[Salmoneus]

One of my friends posted this: "I need help getting deeply baked on cooking oil (rather thick) from stainless steel" and had me wondering for a sec how you could possibly use ordinary cooking oil (however thick) to get high.

Donchyaknow, 'cooking oil' is a street argot word. Presumably because it fries your brain.

Of course, the real mystery is how you get cooking oil (either real or metaphorical) from stainless oil...

[Viktor77]

This one is confusing if you mis-identify one of the noun phrases as an object. This would make more sense in a language with a developed case system or a language which requires written subordinators.

"Woman Flattered Complete Stranger Would Say Something So Nice About Her Tits"

[Drydic]

This one is confusing if you mis-identify one of the noun phrases as an object. This would make more sense in a language with a developed case system or a language which requires written subordinators.

"Woman Flattered Complete Stranger Would Say Something So Nice About Her Tits"

I'm not seeing anything confusing, since reading Complete Stranger as an object leaves the subclause without any subject...

[clawgrip]

This one is confusing if you mis-identify one of the noun phrases as an object. This would make more sense in a language with a developed case system or a language which requires written subordinators.

"Woman Flattered Complete Stranger Would Say Something So Nice About Her Tits"

I'm not seeing anything confusing, since reading Complete Stranger as an object leaves the subclause without any subject...

Of course. That's exactly what a garden path sentence is. As you read the sentence you are likely to interpret "complete stranger" as the object of "flattered", but when you encounter "would" you realize you have likely misinterpreted the function of "complete stranger" and start again from the beginning. It's confusing not because it is ambiguous but because it is phrased in such a way that a reader is likely to parse it improperly.

Although in this case, because it's a headline, some readers may recognize "flattered" as representing the passive voice, so they will parse it properly.

[Drydic]

This one is confusing if you mis-identify one of the noun phrases as an object. This would make more sense in a language with a developed case system or a language which requires written subordinators.

"Woman Flattered Complete Stranger Would Say Something So Nice About Her Tits"

I'm not seeing anything confusing, since reading Complete Stranger as an object leaves the subclause without any subject...

Of course. That's exactly what a garden path sentence is. As you read the sentence you are likely to interpret "complete stranger" as the object of "flattered", but when you encounter "would" you realize you have likely misinterpreted the function of "complete stranger" and start again from the beginning. It's confusing not because it is ambiguous but because it is phrased in such a way that a reader is likely to parse it improperly.

Although in this case, because it's a headline, some readers may recognize "flattered" as representing the passive voice, so they will parse it properly.

Fair point. I was mostly objecting to the 'confusing' part, since a competent speaker of English wouldn't parse it wrong for more than a few seconds, likely.

[Viktor77]

Fair point. I was mostly objecting to the 'confusing' part, since a competent speaker of English wouldn't parse it wrong for more than a few seconds, likely.

Well I didn't but for a few seconds, but the fact I did read "complete stranger" as an object and "would..." as an incomplete phrase for a moment is why I posted it here.

[Salmoneus]

More morbidly, "Dubai jails rape woman".

[Salmoneus]

This completely baffled me: "BBC radio stations hit record Rajars"