Type O? Negative. Typo!

Regular readers of this blog will know I have a fondness for discovering random spelling and grammatical errors, particularly if they are found in unexpected places or if they take on unintended meanings. So no, the Internet, therefore, does not generally qualify. But, packaging, signs, major publications -- all things you want to be sure to have edited thoroughly before going to print -- do. Under the caveat, of course, that we all make mistakes. My personal best included writing an editorial in which I referred to a "research-insensitive (rather than intensive) university." Spell check isn't enough, folks. Of course, sometimes, neither is a team of editors with sharpened pencils.

This week (no, not weak), we have two blunders to add to the pantheon. The box to the right is for a milk foamer, the directions for which indicate "Skin milk works best". Is that the same kind of milk that goes into soap?

The other came from a Canadian Press story, running on the front page of the newspaper on Friday, about the Royal Canadian Mint's issue of a $3-million gold coin. In the story, the writer referred to one side of the coin having "three maple leafs". And I don't think he was referring to the hockey team, despite how central it seems to be to many people around these parts. MLSE marketing at its finest, ingrained in our psyches. Wouldn't it be great if they paid Mats Sundin's salary with a few of the tire-sized coins?

When I pointed this out to a colleague, he contacted CP -- pretty much the definitive source for grammar in our industry -- to see if we were somehow missing something. The editor in charge said he would let us know if there was some anomaly in the grammar; otherwise, if we didn't hear back, they had simply made a mistake. We never heard back. In fact, subsequent versions of the story have run with the correct use of "leaves". Which of course would segue nicely with the noted grammar book, "Eats, Shoots & Leaves", by Lynne Truss. But that's another whole monologue.

Yes, grammar = important. A cartoon I saw a few years ago demonstrated the importance of comma usage. In it, the sentences, "Get me the paper boy" and "Get me the paper, boy" led to two very distinct actions by the family dog. And of course, hilarity ensued. Maybe less so for the paper boy.