‘Life & Property’:

THISDAY Front Page of March 7 welcomes us today after a long break with these three incongruences: “He explained that the visit of the security chiefs to the scene was to enable them deploy additional security men to (in) the school and the community to forestall future attack.” You cannot forestall past or present attack! So, once you employ ‘forestall’ in whatever context, it means an attack yet to take place. In other words, ‘forestall future attack’ is a phrasal incongruence.

“…safeguarding lives and properties of people in the state….” Truth and reason: life and property in the state. This is a stock phrase not subject to pluralism. Would it have been property of whom else, if not people? Maybe cows! The phrase, ‘life’ and ‘property’, is a fixed/ stock expression. In a few other exceptional or classical contexts (particularly ‘property’), both words admit pluralism. If it were a case of safeguarding of lives and prevention of arson, we could talk of ‘lives and properties’—not just property which would be uncountable in the contrary circumstance.

This is no more news because phrasal verbs abhor hyphenation: “CJN swearsin (swears in) Justice…” Wrong: eye service Right: lip-service “Minimum wage: NLC gives Bauchi Govt (Govt.) 21 days (days’) ultimatum to resume negotiations”

“EFCC to issue criminal summon (summons) against (on) Diezani” (News around the city, March 11) Please note that ‘summons’ is singular and summonses (plural). Most times, some people think that ‘summon’ is the right context as excerpted here, just as they believe that ‘summons’ is the plural. And this: you issue a summons on, not against, somebody.

“2023: Buhari will handover (hand over) to Igbo—NUF” (South East News, March 11)

Let us welcome ‘Lookout’ to this column.