"REFUSED TO STOP MAKING FILMS"

[cateycloggs]

Does no one care if what they are saying is what they mean? Just watching Janina Ramirez on BBC4 introducing some short films made by women who (in her repeated words) , "refused to stop making films".

Presumably it is supposed to be inspiring for International Women's Day and has been written into a script, rehearsed and edited before broadcast but her words still contradict her actual meaning. Why? How?

I understand typos in hastily written messages but this is supposed to be a serious promotion of skilled meaningful work by women that in my opinion is scuppered by the careless introduction.

This happens so often in so many areas of communication. Readers and listeners are forced to deduce meaning from context as though the words and syntax and grammar mean nothing in themselves.

Does anyone else notice this or care?

Thanks GettingUntrapped, but on reflection, I don't think 'sloppy' is fair. I think I have misunderstood and leapt to a conclusion and then taken that as a basis for a rant about something that is a bit of a private obsession. I will have to watch the introduction to the programme again when it is repeated to check my understanding.

@GettingUntrapped

I get you. Don't worry op. You are right. The best I can call it is sloppy.

How is it sloppy? There is nothing wrong with it at all.

Is English not your first language, OP?

"She/he refused to stop doing X" is a pretty clear and well-understood sentence in the English langage.

He refused to stop eating the pizza.

The dog refused to stop chewing the shoe.

Standard English.

Language! Ha, spotted it too late.

OhforaRainyDay, yes English is my only spoken language, I have confused myself by over concentrating on the 'stopping' part. Thanks for your explanation which shows where I was going wrong.

I think the topic is done now but does answering draw attention back to it?