Our English is not that bad; we just tend to be careless

We often mess up our otherwise good stories, not because we are poor in English, but rather because we tend to be reckless. The trouble for us is, readers don’t care the least about our irresponsibility. They simply conclude your presence in the newsroom is a grave mistake!

That is bad for your reputation. Which is why I never tire of advising colleagues on the immeasurable importance of reading and re-reading their pieces before they pass them on. More so if you are aware that editors consider you someone whose work doesn’t deserve much scrutiny since “you are a veteran”.

Enough of lecturing, so let me move on to share gems collected over the past week. Here we go…

In the May 21 edition of the tabloid closely associated with this columnist, there is a Page 3 story entitled, ‘What next for Mengi’s widow on inheritance?”. In Para 4, the scribbler purports to quote a High Court Judge and writes:

“There ARE sufficient EVIDENCE that the deceased suffered a stroke since (sic!) October, 2016 and he never recovered FULL till he met his death…”

I am certain that if the scribbler took a little more time to revise his article, his sentence would have read: “There IS sufficient evidence that the deceased suffered a stroke IN (not since) October 2016 and he never recovered FULLY till he met his death…”

Further on in his story, the scribbler writes: “She told the court that her two children with the LATER Mengi were born prior to their marriage.”

The later Mengi? Certainly, no! Our colleague must have set out to write, “…the LATE Mengi…”

From the same newsroom, the Saturday, May 22 edition has a Page 4 story entitled, ‘So, who killed that Ugandan lady?’ and therein the scribbler says in Para 10:

“Records show that Mr Ndababonye until mid October 2012 was staying at the farm of Mr Justus Bahati John at Businde Village, Kyerwa District in Kagera Region for free as he assisted him in some shamba WORKS.”

Shamba works? Nope! It is just shamba work, even if the story is about “kazi ZA shamba”.

In Para 12, the scribbler writes further: “…Selestine later informed him that the woman had a lot of money and therefore wanted his assistance to kill her and ROB THE MONEY.”

It is embarrassing that I have to point it out again, that we don’t rob things; rather, we ROB PEOPLE or INSTITUTIONS OF their things. Or, STEAL their things.

Our scribbling colleague writes on in Para 16:

“The accused was then arrested at a church and charged with murder while his COLLEAGUE Selestine has since not been seen.”

I have cautioned scribblers a zillion times before in this very column that criminals don’t execute their anti-social activities with the help of colleagues!

Let me restate it: Criminals have ACCOMPLICES, not colleagues. However, if you are, say, a journalist, fellow journalists are your colleagues.

On Saturday, May 22, Bongo’s senior-most broadsheet had a story on Page 1 entitled, ‘TZ, Burundi eye enhanced ties’, in which the scribbler says in Paras 1 and 2:

“President Samia Suluhu Hassan has assured her Burundian counterpart, Evariste Ndayishimiye, of full cooperation…

“President Samia MADE the assurance yesterday in Dar es Salaam during a meeting with a special envoy from President Ndayishimiye…”

Made the assurance? Nope! Ms Hassan GAVE the assurance…Or maybe, she could have MADE a STATEMENT. People also MAKE speeches; they GIVE them as well. Tricky, isn’t it?

In Para 6 of the same story, our colleague writes:

“ON his SIDE, the special envoy who is also Minister for East African Affairs, Youth, Sport and Culture, Mr Ezechiel Nibingira, said…”

“On his side” is a product of direct translation from Kiswahili’s “kwa upande wake”, but this doesn’t pass muster when it is thus converted to English. We ought to say: “FOR HIS PART (not on his side), the special envoy ….said…”

Ah, this treacherous language called English!