In an earlier post, I gave the example of a woman walking into a new hair salon, and walking out with a disaster on her head. This particular woman did not do what I think the average person would do e.g. demand money back, demand remedial work, never go back, complain on social media.
Instead, this is what she posted to the salon’s testimonial page:
“I am defiantly going back” .
How brave! The courage of the woman!
Barge Poles
Perhaps she will be asking for a discount when she goes back, but most people I know who have had a terrible experience at a hair salon would never go there again, wouldn’t touch it with a barge Pole.
Although, what they could possibly have against barge Poles is beyond me. (That expression always did seem a bit too specific for my liking, with a little bit of racial profiling thrown in for good measure.)
Several months ago, maritime workforce company Cuneus aimed to redress the balance by seeking specifically to employ barge crew members who were Polish, i.e. barge Poles, and for that I applaud them.
Incidentally, on their home page now, they say they also employ short sea officers and Filipino geriatric care workers. Both of which categories seem to me somehow discriminatory and inclusive at the same time. (Filipino care workers, as long as they’re old? What’s wrong with tall sea officers?)
Barge hairs
Speaking of barges reminds me of a construction project I was involved with in the 2000s. I was on site to inspect the reinforcing steel prior to the concrete pour, and I remember telling the builder to make sure they placed the required thickness of concrete over the top of the reinforcing steel. I said it was best to install “bar chairs” – devices made specifically for that purpose.
Later that same day, the builder emailed to say the pour had been postponed until they could install the “barge hairs”.
Barge hairs!
Clearly, it was the first time the builder had ever needed to write those words, and when he did he committed a human spell-check error.
He will not remember he wrote that email, but it has stayed with me for over a decade.
The wood for the trees
Reading a geotechnical report several years ago, I found an error that spell check would not have picked up. The author was writing about driven wooden poles as a foundation system.
The author, Mr Woodward, wrote that the wood would have to be “tantalised”.
(The word should have been “tanalised”, which refers to treating wood with chemicals to protect against rot.)
I pointed out to Mr Woodward that he should correct his “tantalising” mistake. He came back explaining why the poles needed to be treated, so I explained to him that it was the misspelling that I was highlighting.
He’d missed it the first time, even though it had been staring him in the face.
In his own play on words, he told me he “couldn’t see the wood for the tanaliths”.
(“Tanalith” is a brand name for a wood preservative typically used on timber poles, which started their lives as tree trunks.)
Special treatment for poles. Short sea officers. Aging Filipino care workers. What is this world coming to?
Whenever I see a unique spelling mistake, or – in the case of the barge hairs – I hear or see a mondegreen or oronym, it tends to stick in the memory.
Typos that tell stories
Are there any crazy typos that you can’t forget? Typos with a backstory, or crying out to tell their story? I’d love to hear from you.
Be First to Comment