Clause attachment ambiguity

« previous post | next post »

The newspaper headline interpretation confusion problem is usually associated with noun piles: "Coin change 'skin problem fear'", ""Ben Douglas Bafta race row hairdresser James Brown 'sorry'", "China Ferrari sex orgy death crash", and so on.

But here's one that depends on ambiguity in the attachment of a pile-up of three headline-final subordinate clauses — Richard Spillett, "Family's agony over when to tell mother her premature babies died while she was in a coma after she woke up", Daily Mail 11/18/2014.

Reader pj, despite being an experienced consumer of British headlinese, sent in the screenshot with this remark:

I'm still a bit slack-jawed when I actually try to read it… How the… what were… somebody thought that was a good way to express that?

And though it's not strictly relevant, I can't resist re-posting the Daily Mail song:



6 Comments

  1. Ginger Yellow said,

    November 19, 2014 @ 7:55 am

    Mail Online has lots of headlines like that, which seem to be trying to pack the entire story into one sentence. I assume it's for SEO reasons.

  2. markonsea said,

    November 19, 2014 @ 2:13 pm

    It may be for SEO, but one thing's for sure – it's not "British headlinese".

    You'd never see a headline a quarter of that length in the hard-copy Mail. I've always imagined the headline length is because Mail Online's readership is mainly overseas and that's what Americans are used to.

    [(myl) Right — I'd expect "Baby Death Coma Revelation Agony" or similar."]

  3. Jonathon Owen said,

    November 19, 2014 @ 3:32 pm

    Isn't the "after she woke up" part pretty superfluous? You don't usually tell people things while they're in a coma (at least not with an expectation that they'll hear and understand), and anyway it already says that she was in a coma, which implies that she's not anymore.

  4. Brett said,

    November 19, 2014 @ 6:13 pm

    Yeah, is the "after she woke up" part that is the problem. I had the meaning before I got that part; all it did was make the whole thing confusing.

  5. Ginger Yellow said,

    November 20, 2014 @ 7:41 am

    I've always imagined the headline length is because Mail Online's readership is mainly overseas and that's what Americans are used to.

    Conceivably, but I doubt it. Not least because it's not American headlinese either – it's just one interminable clause, not the "In X, Y" style beloved of the NYT and Boston Globe etc. There's a distinct rhythm to American broadsheet headlines and the Mail Online style does not conform to it at all.

  6. Adam said,

    November 20, 2014 @ 5:41 pm

    newspaper headline interpretation confusion problem

    Thanks for this!

RSS feed for comments on this post