Eggcorn Forum

We have had a number of cases where a structure has been used which means the opposite of what was intended. (Kem is probably keeping better track of these than the rest of us are.) The following was in the news today:

A man wading in the waters off the coast of Florida had a close encounter with a hammerhead shark. Fortunately, the large animal apparently lost interest in the man, but not after appearing to charge towards him.

The accompanying video clearly shows the shark charging rapidly towards the man, then veering ( verging? ) away in apparent disinterest.
.
A blend of only after with not before or perhaps with not without , I suppose. ( Not until probably fits in there too, but it collocates better with other kinds of complement; I at least wouldn’t say not until appearing to charge , but not until it had appeared to charge .) How people might say it I sort of understand, but to write it, and then for copy-editors to pass it, is noteworthy.
.
I had documented something similar a couple of times before, and there are quite certainly more out there:

Caroline turned towards the front but not after giving Elizabeth a very nasty glare

Apparently, he was in the military for a brief stint, but he was injured in battle, but not after receiving medals for his bravery in battle.

(That second one has to have meant “not without” rather than “not before/after”. The injury indeed happened before the medals, not after, but it would be pretty odd to emphasize that fact.)
.
This is an independent attestation-and-analysis that basically comes to the same conclusion about what is happening. Is it spreading, becoming more standard for some?

Last edited by DavidTuggy (2021-07-20 09:40:43)