Mea Culpa: Vasco da Gama didn’t go that far

Words, phrases and usage in this week’s Independent

John Rentoul
Friday 02 March 2018 06:58 EST
Comments
The Portuguese explorer reached Calicut, which isn't Calcutta
The Portuguese explorer reached Calicut, which isn't Calcutta (Morgan Library & Museum)

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.

We wrote this week of when Vasco da Gama (above) “discovered” India “and reached Calicut (Calcutta) on 20 May 1498”. That has now been corrected, thanks to Kanika Datta, who wrote from New Delhi: “Calicut is located in the southern state of Kerala and Calcutta is the capital of the eastern state of West Bengal. It may interest your readers to know that the textile known as calico owes its origins to Calicut. Moreover, Calicut is now known as Kozhikode, and Calcutta as Kolkata.” The article now has “Kozhikode” in brackets.

On the bench: We got our substitutes back to front again in an editorial about the university lecturers’ strike. We said it was unfair to tell people that the pension on which they thought they could rely “will instead be substituted for an inferior provision”.

Thanks to Bernard Theobald for pointing it out. If you substitute a fresh player for a tired one, you hope to improve your team’s performance. The fresh player, the substitute, replaces the one who is limping.

So we appeared to be saying that the lecturers’ existing generous scheme would replace the inferior version, which makes no sense. The phrase now reads “will be replaced with an inferior provision”.

It’s multiplying: When you are sensitised to something, you notice it more. I thought the spreading tide of “multiple” was overwhelming. I was prepared to declare that resistance was useless and that we might as well accept that the word has become a synonym for “several”.

But I checked and, although we used multiple to mean several 25 times last week, “several” was five times as common, with 133 uses. So I say, fight back. We can turn the tide. Multiple is an ugly word, and there is no excuse for it in phrases such as “multiple locations across the globe”, “multiple flights” being cancelled and the consumption of “multiple sugary drinks daily”.

Nearly only: We tripped up by qualifying uniqueness a couple of times this week. A comment article about Brexit expounded on “the richness and diversity of languages and cultures that make the EU so unique in the world”. We could simply have deleted the “so”.

And in a review of Jake Bugg at the London Palladium we praised his “almost unique blend of country, blues and indie”. Unique means the only one of its kind, so “almost” unique means “not unique”. This is not just a matter of logic-chopping, because I think “almost unique” sounds like faint praise, whereas “rare”, which is what we probably meant, sounds more favourable.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in