Grammar Moses: You're a sight for sore eyes

"What a sight!" I exclaimed as I gazed across the Cliffs of Moher on the west coast of Ireland. "I've never seen anything like this."

A higher-up in the Chicago Bears organization might have stood on the site of the former Arlington Park racetrack and exclaimed, "What a site! I've never seen anything like this."

We'd both be right.

Of course we would, because "sight" and "site" are homophones, so you'd hear no difference. But for the purposes of a written word column, we simply have different perspectives on what we're looking at.

I was looking at the raw natural beauty of the cliffs, while the Bears muckety-muck was salivating over the developability of the 326 acres site and the gazillions of dollars that would flow from it.

"I read a Daily Herald article last week about the welcome removal of an abandoned Schaumburg building," reader Eric Singer wrote. "I wondered about the article's opening sentence: 'It was a sight for sore eyes Thursday morning in Schaumburg, as a longtime eyesore marring a key entrance to the community finally vanished from view.'

"I thought that 'eyesore' was a correct description but wondered whether the removal of an eyesore is properly described as a 'sight for sore eyes.'"

It took me a while to unspool that.

Eric wanted to know the history of the idiom and the origins of "eyesore."

The idiom sprung from the mind of satirist Jonathan Swift in his 1738 work, "A complete Collection of Genteel and Ingenious Conversation."

"The sight of you is good for sore eyes," he wrote.

That's pretty straightforward. It defines something or, more likely, someone, who is pleasing to the eye after a long absence. It's an expression of relief.

So, I'd say the removal of an eyesore qualifies as a relief.

You might tell your teenager upon his return from his first semester at college that he's a sight for sore eyes. But then the state he leaves your house in after 24 hours will remind you why birds push their young out of the nest.

As for "eyesore," the modern usage, meaning something that is offensive to the eye," has been in used for 500 years.

Before that, an eyesore was more literally defined as a stye or more than likely sand that got stuck in your eye.

Over what?

I received a news release from the Lake County Sheriff's Office with the happy news that canine officer Axel (that's the dog, not the human partner) had received a body armor suit that makes him less susceptible to bullet or blade injuries.

The donation came through the nonprofit Vested Interest in K9s Inc. and was sponsored by ELCO Mutual Life and Annuity in Lake Bluff.

A wonderful cause, to be sure.

In the release, it notes the nonprofit "has provided over 5,289 vests to K9s in all 50 states."

So, how many is "over 5,289?" Is it 5,300, 7,263 or 2 million?

All of those could be the answer. But using such a precise number suggests something else.

Granted, this information was lifted directly from the nonprofit's website, so I'm sure the good people at the sheriff's office couldn't be more precise, either.

For the umpteenth time, I remind PR people and advertisers that if you know you've handed out 5,289 of something, writing "more than 5,289" or "over 5,289" doesn't make that number sound more impressive. It makes what you're saying less clear or sound overblown.

Better to provide the exact number or, if you don't want to update your website after you equip each cop dog, write "at least 5,289."

Write carefully!

• Jim Baumann is vice president/executive editor of the Daily Herald. You can buy Jim's book, "Grammar Moses: A humorous guide to grammar and usage," at

grammarmosesthebook.com. Write him at jbaumann@dailyherald.com

and put "Grammar Moses" in the subject line. You also can friend or follow Jim at facebook.com/baumannjim.