As we approach the Hudson-Champlain observances in
2009, there is a question of historians' writing style that has me
intrigued. I find myself slightly annoyed when I read a phrase that seems
to me trite and hackneyed in otherwise good historical writing. Am I being
oversensitive, or is this a valid gripe? The phrase is this: In
1609 Hudson/Champlain "explored the river/lake which bears his name."
This gets written in this way over and over. Shouldn't this worn-out,
stale phrase be avoided by good writers? I guess once one begins to notice
it, the more annoying it gets.
Paul Huey