[projectaon] Re: 01HH
- From: "Jonathan Blake" <blake.jon@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 13:44:37 -0700
On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 10:27 AM, Simon Osborne <outspaced@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> (er) 31: File or -> File, or [jb: Serial comma only required in lists
> of three or more.]
>
> (er) 53, 128, 281: weapon and -> weapon, and [jb: Compound verb does
> not require a comma.]
>
> (er) 116, 290: If you possess a missile weapon -> If you possess a
> missile weapon, and sufficient ammunition to use it [jb: Serial comma only
> required in lists of three or more.]
>
> (er) 347: Binoculars or -> Binoculars, or [jb: Serial comma only
> required in lists of three or more.]
>
> I still think these commas should be implemented. They weren't reported as
> instances of serial comma use, they are for consistency with other similar
> phrasing in the books (e.g. If you possess the Kai Discipline of Hunting, or
> a Torch, . . . ; If you posses a Hunting Horn, and wish to use it, . . .).
> The commas set off a potentially parenthetical statement from the main flow
> of the sentence, e.g. If you possess x (and wish to use it), turn to xxx.
> Instead of parentheses, commas are quite properly used in the books, and
> should therefore be implemented in these instances. IMHO, of course. ;-)
I'm a sucker for consistency, but my personal preference is to avoid
commas when unneeded. ("Yeah right!" says the serial comma dissident.)
I hadn't noticed how often commas are used this way in the books. It
doesn't seem like all of them are truly parenthetical statements. Most
of them seem be a misuse of a comma.
--
Jon
~~~~~~
Manage your subscription at //www.freelists.org/list/projectaon
Other related posts:
