It used to be the printers who had the last word. Those little OUP printers'
manuals of difficult words were always good. Keith Waterhouse's guide to
newspaper writing was a favourite of mine, too, but I don't suppose it's
still in print. We are now in the hands of the net for such matters, I
imagine - and things could change more.
bw
SallyE
on 12/11/03 10:03 am, Merritt, Matt - Leic. Mercury at
[log in to unmask] wrote:
> Sally,
> I work as a sub-editor on a provincial daily paper and I'm afraid the use of
> "image" rather "picture" or "photo", in newspapers at least, is just another
> example of how managers in this industry seem determined to use anything
> other than plain, straightforward English.
> It's also possibly because the software we use calls them images, but I
> still don't see why we have to.
> Matt
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sally Evans [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 12 November 2003 06:11
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Comments please.( Helen and Gary)and Sue
>
>
> THIS EMAIL HAS BEEN SWEPT FOR VIRUSES BY THE NORTHCLIFFE GROUP MAILSWEEPER
> SERVER.
>
> Sue, I am referring to the use of image for photo or other visual image in a
> paper, website, or anywhere else where we would quite naturally have said
> picture a couple of years ago - certainly in UK - so Carlos Williams was not
> catalyist of that though he may provide an early authority.
>
> bw
> SallyE
>
> on 11/11/03 9:51 pm, Sue Scalf at [log in to unmask] wrote:
>
>> Sally, I think what has happened is that image has become intertwined
>> with the word imagery, which in poetry refers to everything involving
>> the senses, i.e., sight, sound, touch, taste, smell. Also imagery can
>> be a pattern set up in the poem that takes on symbolic value. Sue
|