![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
walkitoutI was recently reading a really fascinating story at the WSJ about someone with a photographic memory who figured out that there was an insider at the British Museum selling off Roman gems and similar out of the collection.
If you want to read it, here it is: https://www.wsj.com/style/british-museum-ittai-gradel-heist-efec0847
Just to be clear: WSJ is a really problematic operation and I do not endorse.
I posted on FB about some commenters who wanted to correct this sentence in the article:
“The Roman cameo owned by Hay was chipped, indicating it may have cracked while being prized out of a ring mount.”
The two commenters believed it should have been “pried”. And it _could_ have been pried, altho you would have lost a subtle additional layering of meaning that the writing of the article clearly indicates the writer intended.
I was then informed, by the husband of someone who has worked as an editor, that “prized” really is incorrect. “Prised” is fine, but “prized” means something different.
*sigh*
I pointed him at the Cambridge dictionary entry for “prized” and told him he’d better get right on telling them, then, and screen shotted it for anyone unwilling to follow the link or who maybe struggles with scrolling down to the fourth meaning.
Still a great story with wonderful reverberations of stuffy institutions unwilling to accept input from outsiders who are trying to warn them about a problem. I just hadn’t really anticipated I was _also_ going to be exposing a lot of “correct the already correct” types out there.
If you want to read it, here it is: https://www.wsj.com/style/british-museum-ittai-gradel-heist-efec0847
Just to be clear: WSJ is a really problematic operation and I do not endorse.
I posted on FB about some commenters who wanted to correct this sentence in the article:
“The Roman cameo owned by Hay was chipped, indicating it may have cracked while being prized out of a ring mount.”
The two commenters believed it should have been “pried”. And it _could_ have been pried, altho you would have lost a subtle additional layering of meaning that the writing of the article clearly indicates the writer intended.
I was then informed, by the husband of someone who has worked as an editor, that “prized” really is incorrect. “Prised” is fine, but “prized” means something different.
*sigh*
I pointed him at the Cambridge dictionary entry for “prized” and told him he’d better get right on telling them, then, and screen shotted it for anyone unwilling to follow the link or who maybe struggles with scrolling down to the fourth meaning.
Still a great story with wonderful reverberations of stuffy institutions unwilling to accept input from outsiders who are trying to warn them about a problem. I just hadn’t really anticipated I was _also_ going to be exposing a lot of “correct the already correct” types out there.