The word "some" at the beginning of the headline would have been a perfectly acceptable qualification of the phrase which also would've better described the actual findings of the study.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I disagree. It doesn't say "all". "Some" is kind of meaningless because it implies it's something that has happened ever. Like most things within the realm of possibility.

Not having the qualifier implies it's a trend -- neither a certainty nor a rarity.

[–] Syntha@sh.itjust.works -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I don't even disagree that it's a fine headline, but this community shits its pants everytime an article isn't extremely accurate in it's headline, so it's funny to suddenly have an army of people descent upon this comment section to defend specifically this one.

"Some" would be more useful in this instance, as it would distinguish it from the general case. That's pretty standard behaviour for news headlines too, right? This study does not concern itself with iron age populations in general but specifically celtic communities between 100 BC and 100 AD in Britain.

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Who would understand it to mean "every single man" just because it doesn't explicitly say "some"? That would be a pretty strange way to read it.

[–] Syntha@sh.itjust.works -3 points 1 year ago

I never implied that it would mean "every single man". That's a pretty strange way to read my comment.