Mea Culpa: A fawning comparison for Audrey Hepburn
Questions of style and spelling in this week’s Independent
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.A charming error in an article looking back at the career of Audrey Hepburn, 25 years after her death. We quoted Alec Guinness on her appearance in The Lavender Hill Mob in 1951: “She only had half a line to say and I don’t think she said it in any particular or interesting way, but her faun-like beauty and presence were remarkable.”
As John Schluter pointed out, a faun is a lustful rural god, a man with a goat’s horns, ears, legs, and tail. The word comes from the name of the Roman pastoral god Faunus. Mr Tumnus in the Narnia books is a faun.
Guinness was referring to a fawn, a young deer in its first year. The difference in spelling is arbitrary, but there it is.
(And neither has anything to do with fawn as a verb, meaning “make a display of servile devotion”, which comes from Old English fagnian “make or be glad”, related to fain, an archaic word meaning pleased or gladly – “the traveller was fain to sleep” or “I would fain get a little rest”.)
Quotidian: We used the dread phrase “on a daily basis” a couple of times recently. Last week we wrote about the anxiety of Thomas Markle, the Duchess of Sussex’s father, “at being ‘harassed’ on a daily basis by paparazzi”. This week we referred to “those of us who engross ourselves in football on a daily basis”. In both cases I think “every day” would be preferable.
Has it come to this? Talking of the difference between plodding language and the poetry of plain English, we had a few examples of “when it comes to” as well this week.
One was in a fascinating story about the frequency with which speakers of different languages say “thank you” (the Cha’palaa of Ecuador, for example, never thank one another). It began: “When it comes to manners, Britain is as famed as it is mocked for its unrelenting penchant for politeness.”
Better, I think, to go straight into it: “Britain is as famed…”
Another was in our guide to wedding makeup, in which we said “getting married also creates a lot of pressure, particularly when it comes to looking your very best”. No comment on the content, naturally, but the style could be improved by cutting out the dead phrase thus: “Getting married also creates a lot of pressure, particularly to look your very best.”
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments