Why does the New Yorker routinely misspell focused as focussed and add extra consonants to other words in the past tense?

Answer 1

This issue has been bothering me as well for some time. The New Yorker persists in adding an unnecessary, and somewhat jarring "s" to "focused" and "focusing". I don't see this usage anywhere else in print. One would think, since the emphasis is on the first syllable, that the extra "s" is unnecessary. Take, for instance, the verb "labor". Nobody, not even the New Yorker editors, would write "laborring". My computer won't let me do it without my overriding. On the other hand, there is a sort of precedent for the doubled consonant in the verb "travel". As in " focus", the stress is on the first syllable. Yet the extra "l" is added when writing "traveling". The English language is full of exceptions to the rule, as in "'I' before 'e", except after 'c'". Still usage should trump here, and usage has hitherto not accepted the extra "s" in "focused" or "focusing". I do wish the New Yorker would quietly give up this crusade to modify the language of Milton and Shakespeare all by themselves. Reminds me of the abortive Simplified Spelling ukase by President Theodore Roosevelt just over a hundred years ago. As stubborn as he could be, he had the pragmatic sense to realize that his governmental edict was a loser. I simply see red, and reach for a pen every time I see these words misspelled. It is especially rankling to note that the magazine appears to go out of their way to insert such words, when other, less objectionable substitutes, such as "emphasizing" , are readily available! James K. Weber dr5jkw@msn.com