Pedestrian critical after NDG smash
A pedestrian is in critical condition after being hit by a car in NDG Friday morning. There’s little detail how it came about, but Decarie and de Maisonneuve has always been a nasty corner for cyclists and pedestrians.
Update: the man has died. He was 89.
PO 09:03 on 2019-11-15 Permalink
When they started the Turcot work and were building the MUHC, they said they’d permanently close vehicle access to Upper Lachine from that intersection. I can’t figure out why it hasn’t been mentioned since.
Kevin 11:13 on 2019-11-15 Permalink
@PO
I went through my notes, and found that in 2012 Peter McQueen said turning Upper Lachine into a park was a bad idea.
soundbyte 11:53 on 2019-11-15 Permalink
Pet peeve of mine, but it should be “pedestrian….hit by driver of a car”….can never understand why agency is rarely assigned when a crash occurs between a driver of a vehicle and another road user.
Kate 13:20 on 2019-11-15 Permalink
soundbyte, we’ve discussed that issue a lot here. But it’s bizarre to say “hit by the driver of a car” as well, since it suggests the driver got out and clobbered the victim in person.
We don’t really have an accurate form of words here that doesn’t take several sentences to write, so we’ve arrived at “hit by a car” as a phrase that we mostly understand as the descriptor of an incident, even if agency gets a bit fudged. This may have to change as driverless cars become more usual.
Blork 13:49 on 2019-11-15 Permalink
I agree with Kate. Saying “hit by driver of car” is ambiguous for the reason stated above, and it’s essentially personal indignation (anti-car sentiment) interfering with clear communication. We expect that sort of indignation-laden talk from Fox News and the like, but not from regular news that at least tries to remain impartial.
After all, if a construction crane drops a palette of bricks on a worker we don’t say “Worker crushed by construction crane operator.”
Patrick 14:01 on 2019-11-15 Permalink
I get the issue of agency, but isn’t it conventional in news writing to mention the victim first? For example, “a man was murdered last night,” or to use Blork’s example “a worker was crushed.” One reason for this, of course, is that, initially at least, the degree of culpability of the “suspect” is still to be determined. It isn’t a matter of minimizing the agency of the criminal.
Kate 14:10 on 2019-11-15 Permalink
As I wrote above, “a pedestrian was hit by a car.” Passive voice. Focus on victim.
qatzelok 19:36 on 2019-11-15 Permalink
Kate et al, if you’re going to assign blame to the vehicle, then you should also say that “the car hit the clothing of someone,” since we’re trying to avoid mentionning any human involvement in the manslaughter.
Perhaps if the pedestrian had simply jumped out of his clothing, the car would have done no damage, and then both of the non-complicit/non-involved humans could simply get on with their…
Kate 20:21 on 2019-11-15 Permalink
qatzi, you are not helping.