Bay Area Sweet Digs

August 8, 2008

SF and Daly City: Realtorspeak: Obscure, Lazy, or Complete Nonsense? You be the Judge

We Redfin bloggers are no longer allowed to review properties, but nothing can stop us from reviewing property ads, right? I mean, even if I wasn’t a college English teacher, I could fairly say that a great quantity of these write-ups need some serious help.

The Front Steps has been proofreading too, it seems. Here’s a particularly mysterious ad they found for 485 Eucalyptus Dr, in SF:

Huge reduced!Elegant column front gate & stepping stones lead to this gorgeous &      quality rmdled Merced Manor hme. Hugh Gourmet chef & #700;s ktchn w/ island, hi-end stnless steel applnces, granite cntr, chrry cbnts & blt-in wineculr. 3bd/2.5ba upstairs w/ jaccz & shwr. Downstairs hugh & bright fmly rm w/ deck plus 2br/2ba & lndry rm. All 5 br are M suites, 2 jaccz. All nu windws, 2 S/S pkg grages. Near great schools, Stonestown Galleria, YMCA, MUNI, EZ access to Freeway. This great detched home almost has it all!

Jeez, what do you have against vowels? Or standard abbreviations, for that matter?

Active Rain lists some of the more common, and in some cases, gross, typos:

  • a sinking living room (vs. sunken)
  • walking closet (where is it walking to?)
  • wreck room (rec. room)
  • stainless steal appliances
  • contract fell threw
  • hardware floors (hardwood floors)
  • remolded bathrooms (yikes!)
  • two full bedrooms (as opposed to what?…half bedrooms?)
  • No Job Road (vs. No. Jog Road… had to be a joke!)

Curbed SF also spotted a mistake, one which has them opining “Refreshing Bit of Broker Honesty Probably Just a Typo”:

SF and Daly City: Realtorspeak: Obscure, Lazy, or Complete Nonsense? You be the Judge

And finally, I found this extremely unfortunate typo in this ad for 691 Keith St. in Daly City, in which I am promised a  ”$479000 Fully Remolded Single House.”

I know Realtors are human and thus subject to making mistakes. But frankly, as a seller, I would expect my agent to check and double check my listing and would be FURIOUS if such work made it online. Sure, it’s comical enough in the abstract, but practically speaking, it’s sloppy as hell.

Posted by anna.hibble on August 8, 2008 6:45 PM | del.icio.us | Digg

  • Anna this post just made my day :)
  • Grammar guy
    Subjunctive is subjective, to suggest a mood. The author here can argue a logical case for using conditional as opposed to subjunctive. Can anyone argue logically for a "specious" rather than "spacious" home?

    Ironic, can you?
  • Ron
    Thank you Lula for your comments. You expressed my feelings regarding the above far better than I. Perhaps, MS Hibble should offer a class to Realtors for what she has presented here proves the need-further I think Ironic should sit in to ensure that no verbs are slaughtered. Ironic I would ask you to save your adroit questioning for an event that warrants your voice.MS Hibble thank you for your service.
  • David
    Ok, I use both the subjunctive and "whom."

    But there are certainly grammatical and spelling errors that amount to felonies (i.e. the agents' listings) as opposed to misdemeanors (i.e. using "who" instead of "whom").

    What I really love though, are people correcting other people's grammar when it clearly doesn't need it. For example, being of German extraction, I commonly use the phrase "Throw me the ball." (me is the indirect object, ball is the direct object). Perfectly correct, however, many people insist that the only correct construction is "throw the ball to me."

    Anyway...
  • Lula
    As I sit here in my dinning room, in a house that is slopped up from the street, I can't help but think that these specious debates on grammatical minutiae are taking away from the greater point that the first commenter made, which is that these typo's convey sloppiness on the part of the realtors and that those whom they are representing should probably say so. But much better to get into a debate on a debatable (and minor) grammar point that somebody wrote on a blog than to critique shoddy work. Frankly, for me these house listings would not inspire confidence in the realtor's competence and that would be a person I probably would choose not to work with.

    *(Wanna get into a dangling participle smackdown, Iro-? Language is malleable and constantly changing and you're not going to see people writing or speaking like what we're used to 25, 50 or a 100 years out, yah? Do you really think I would write "That is a person with whom I would probably not choose to work." Whom is all but dead; let it go. Sheesh, the fact that any of you are coherent is light years away from what most folks on the web publish, so relax Iro- and look at the big picture. I'm just sayin' is all....)
  • Frolic
    Ironic, I'm going to call it a mood, since that's what it is. Nouns get case, not verbs. If one chooses to nitpick, one should do so correctly.

    As far as whether or not the clause in question should take the subjunctive mood, as with many grammatical debates, I think a case can be made either way. The proposition is counterfactual, which would require the subjunctive, but the statement is factual, which would require the indicative.

    But in common English usage, the subjunctive mood is sufficiently esoteric as to obviate the question entirely.
  • David
    Don't make me call Sister Consuela to diagram that.
  • Anna
    since we know it is not true, and I am also not wishing that it were true, then the indicative is called for. And frankly, it hardly obscures the point I was making, unlike the home ads included here.
  • ironic
    Frolic, Call it a mood instead of a case, but the sentence is still not correct.


    Anna, your explanation actually makes my point.

    Your sentence has a statement you know to be untrue, that's exactly why the subjunctive should have been used

    Second, subjunctive is used with past or present tense clauses.

    To be correct, its the subordinate "If..." clause with a statement that is untrue that triggers the use of "were" instead of "was".

    Frolic - care to weigh in?
  • Anna
    Yes, as Frolic alludes to, The subjunctive has two forms. I used one, not the other.

    EXAMPLE:
    If she were coming, she would be here by now.
    If I were rich, I would be able to afford that house.

    These sentences all contain verbs in the subjunctive mood, which is used chiefly to express the speaker’s attitude about the likelihood or factuality of a given situation. If the verbs were in the indicative mood, we would expect she was coming in the first sentence and that I was in fact rich in the second. For those forms, employing present (or past) tense as opoosed to subjunctive is proper.

    I do some tutoring, Ironic, is you ever feel you need a brush up. (*Wink!*)
  • Frolic
    Further irony? The subjunctive isn't a case, it's a mood.
  • Ironic
    see anything wrong with the sentence below from the post? It is the subjunctive case, so it should be even if I **were** not an college English teacher

    Thanks for providing a perfect example of irony - making grammar mistake in a post where you tout your prowess with language.


    "I mean, even if I wasn’t a college English teacher, I could fairly say that a great quantity of these write-ups need some serious help."
blog comments powered by Disqus

Share

Redfin Blogs

San Francisco Real Estate

Inventory Trends
House $/Sq.Ft.

More Bay Area Homes and Condos

Bay Area New Listings

close