In a Tribune article today, they used that dreaded word (for writers): sic. Do you think it's fair?

"The Catholic hierarchy are (sic) only part of the Catholic Church, and on this issue they don't speak for the Catholic people."

I do not. Hierarchy, I think, can be used as a plural noun, can't it?

I agree

According to Longman, hierarchy can be countable or uncountable, depending on its use.

hier‧ar‧chy plural hierarchies

1 [uncountable and countable] a system of organization in which people or things are divided into levels of importance:

* A rigid social hierarchy
* She worked her way up through the corporate hierarchy to become president.


2 [countable] the most important and powerful members of an organization:
* the church hierarchy

So the Catholic hierarchy would seem to be a countable use and therefore the quote is correct and the [sic] is not.

Doesn't it depend on whether we're using UK standard or US standard? In the UK it's normal; in the US it may seem odd.

I agree with Geoff (OMG!).
It's either UK or Canadian usage.

But don't our 2 UK members think the [sic] is not correct? However, I wasn't sure what Bob was agreeing to so maybe not.

I was agreeing that the "sic" is not required.

quote:

Originally posted by Kalleh:
But don't our 2 UK members think the [sic] is not correct? However, I wasn't sure what Bob was agreeing to so maybe not.

I believe that the passage is correct and therefore the [sic] is not required

Oh, now when I reread Geoff's post, I think he means that "hierarchy" in the plural may seem odd in the U.S (the "it" confused me). Is that true, Geoff? If so, it surely didn't seem odd to me or Shu. However, maybe it does to others?