quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter However, in rare circumstances it can actually create ambiguity where none would exist if it weren't present. In these cases, it is best to omit the serial comma.

I'm curious as to what circumstances where the inclusion of the comma would create ambiguity. I was always taught to include the comma. The case that was presented for this rationale (I'm not sure if it's true or not ... probably not) was an instance where a legal document, a will, stated that the the deceased's belongings should be divided up equally between "peter, paul and dumbass." The intent was to divide the will 33% evenly between all three sons. However, as the story goes, Peter disputed that and put forth the argument that gramatically, the will states that the money should be divided as such: Peter (50%) (Paul (25%) and Dumbass (25%)). The story sounds somewhat farfetched, but that does seem like something a lawyer would do so I dunno. Generally I'm accustomed to including the comma.

___________________
Retro ...

quote:

Originally posted by occrider I'm curious as to what circumstances where the inclusion of the comma would create ambiguity. I was always taught to include the comma. The case that was presented for this rationale (I'm not sure if it's true or not ... probably not) was an instance where a legal document, a will, stated that the the deceased's belongings should be divided up equally between "peter, paul and dumbass." The intent was to divide the will 33% evenly between all three sons. However, as the story goes, Peter disputed that and put forth the argument that gramatically, the will states that the money should be divided as such: Peter (50%) (Paul (25%) and Dumbass (25%)). The story sounds somewhat farfetched, but that does seem like something a lawyer would do so I dunno. Generally I'm accustomed to including the comma.

Actually you have a valid point. Not including the comma does connect the two. People will argue anything in court and that situation could definitely be argued.

quote:

Originally posted by occrider I'm curious as to what circumstances where the inclusion of the comma would create ambiguity. I was always taught to include the comma. The case that was presented for this rationale (I'm not sure if it's true or not ... probably not) was an instance where a legal document, a will, stated that the the deceased's belongings should be divided up equally between "peter, paul and dumbass." The intent was to divide the will 33% evenly between all three sons. However, as the story goes, Peter disputed that and put forth the argument that gramatically, the will states that the money should be divided as such: Peter (50%) (Paul (25%) and Dumbass (25%)). The story sounds somewhat farfetched, but that does seem like something a lawyer would do so I dunno. Generally I'm accustomed to including the comma.

Consider the following sentence:

I had breakfast with John, my brother, and Mary.

I could either be emphasizing the fact that John is my brother, or John and my brother could be two seperate individuals.

candy ravers.

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter Consider the following sentence: I had breakfast with John, my brother, and Mary. I could either be emphasizing the fact that John is my brother, or John and my brother could be two seperate individuals.

Hmmm but in such an instance, should not one maintain contextual consistency by stating: I had breakfast with John, my brother, and Mary, my friend.?

___________________
Retro ...

Ah, the joy of Transhumanism.


Okay here's another one I'd like to learn something about.

When a noun ends with s, do I put the standard apostrophe WITHOUT another "s" following it or not? Such as:

Davy Jones' Locker

vs.

Davy Jones's Locker

And what about the usage of the semicolon? Still relevant? And em dashes? 'Cause I use those a lot -- like this

Ellipsis? Two or three dots... or however many you feel like it, varying with the intended pause.... ?

___________________
Hi, my name's Torley. I'm here at TA to learn, share, and have fun!

get hooked, click here to listen to "The_Autistic_World_of_Torley.mp3" | dialup version
more @ torley's techno music and anti-techno music blog

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter Consider the following sentence: I had breakfast with John, my brother, and Mary. I could either be emphasizing the fact that John is my brother, or John and my brother could be two seperate individuals.

In my opinion, the best way to say this would be, I had breakfast with my brother, John, and my sister, Mary.

Incidentally here are a couple more issues that may hit closer to home:
"The Rave Act II",
Copyright protections

quote:

Originally posted by occrider Hmmm but in such an instance, should not one maintain contextual consistency by stating: I had breakfast with John, my brother, and Mary, my friend.?

Yes, there are quite a number of ways to simply rephrase it to fix the problem, but depending upon context restating that Mary is my friend could be redundant which would be stylistically undesirable. Ambiguity can always be resolved by the addition of more information. The important thing is to realize that the use of the serial comma doesn't prevent all ambiguities so that they can be caught and reworked.

Tony Blair's complete inability to listen to any members of the ENTIRE public :S

___________________
How can sound exist if there's no one there to hear it?

quote:

Originally posted by Ang ' ela_ie How about the Bush/Cheney relation to the families of terrorists... or hell, just write about Haliburton in general.

i just watched Fahrenheit 9-11..

___________________
http://e.imagehost.org/0737/99adecdb530cb87ee219925830e259.gif

***Sig Edited - Image Size***