English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Example:

"You have no idea how (messed) up this is getting," said Morris

"I think it's possible to come up with something, but it's not going to happen until the last minute in the (legislative) session," Hooser said.

The second example seems obvious that the writer is clarifying what the speaker is saying but in many examples the speakers sentance would be incomplete or make no sense without the parenthesiesed word. So what is the deal?

2006-08-11 05:46:01 · 8 answers · asked by periwinkle 4 in Education & Reference Higher Education (University +)

8 answers

That's the point of them. To insert words that the speaker may have left out when they were talking and to draw attention to the fact that the speaker did not actually say the words in parenthesis.

Ex:
If you interview Bob about his cow and ask "Bob, what kind of milk does your cow produce?" and Bob answers "My cow makes white," that particular quote might not fit exactly how you need it to fit (for flow and logic reasons) into the article. In print, that quote may appear as "My cow makes white (milk)," Bob said.

Sometimes, as in the first example you provided, it could signify an explitive that was deleted. I'm sure you could come up with a few words that would fit where (messed) is that might not be fit for print. That, however, depends on the general policy of the newspaper/magazine/whever you found it. Some print it no matter what it says, some replace it with "nicer" words, and some will just paraphrase a quote instead of using a direct quote.

2006-08-11 05:53:44 · answer #1 · answered by Jessica 2 · 0 0

That's the editor's voice coming through.
In your first example, it's more than likely that Morris used a slightly stronger expletive than 'messed up' in his comment. The editor has Bowderlized it. That's a four-bit word that means cleaned it up.
In the second example, the writer/editor/proof reader could have been explaining just which session Hooser was talking about.
At least, that's the usual role of the parenthesized word in quotes or elsewhere in newspaper copy.

2006-08-11 05:54:07 · answer #2 · answered by old lady 7 · 0 0

I usually assume that they are taking an important fragment away from a particular set of comments. Or in the first example, the speaker may have used profanity and the writer chose to simplify it.

2006-08-11 05:50:04 · answer #3 · answered by KD 3 · 0 0

paranthesis are to clarify things such as in the session, in the legislative session is clearer than in the session. when an interview, some people may not say legislative as in the second example. when they do not say it, the reader has no idea what, which session they are talking about. in order to clarify the session even though the interviewee did not say it, the journalist puts a clarifying word in parantheses...hope that helps

2006-08-11 05:54:17 · answer #4 · answered by dreamer 2 · 0 0

the part in parenthesis is not part of the direct quote. The parentheses indicate that the writer inserted that part, either to cover up what was probably a curse word (in the first example), or to make it clear to the reader what is being talked about.

2006-08-11 05:50:35 · answer #5 · answered by nuclear_science 3 · 0 0

i think it means that speakers says the sentence without the parenthesis, but it would make more sense to the reader if the particular word was in there.

2006-08-11 05:53:20 · answer #6 · answered by Amanda V 3 · 0 0

the speaker has left out a word that was intended.

2006-08-11 05:51:20 · answer #7 · answered by cyanne2ak 7 · 0 0

thanks for 2 point

2006-08-11 05:48:09 · answer #8 · answered by Sindebad 3 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers