Seemingly trivial things that elicit an emotional response of some kind

[briantrumpet]

Comma or no comma that is, the question.

Commas for Clarity.

 

[PurplePenguin]

Commas for Clarity.

Were you confused? If not, don't ask for clarity.

 

[briantrumpet]

Were you confused? If not, don't ask for clarity.

If I have to backtrack to check, it's not immediately clear, and that's what I expect from good writing.

Obviously I wasn't indulging in pedantry for its own sake to make a cheap joke.

 

[briantrumpet]

I'm sure I've quoted this case before, where a missing comma cost $5m

https://www.transitionword.com/rules-confusions/oxford-commas-legal-case-examples/

 

[First Aspect]

I'm sure I've quoted this case before, where a missing comma cost $5m

https://www.transitionword.com/rules-confusions/oxford-commas-legal-case-examples/

And then there was the libel case brought by the Panda accused of being an assassin who left a restaurant without paying.

(Eats shoots and leaves.)

 

[briantrumpet]

And then there was the libel case brought by the Panda accused of being an assassin who left a restaurant without paying.

(Eats shoots and leaves.)

Truss you to quote that.

 

[PurplePenguin]

And then there was the libel case brought by the Panda accused of being an assassin who left a restaurant without paying.

(Eats shoots and leaves.)

I read the book hoping to be persuaded how important punctuation is. I was disappointed. There's not much more to it than the title.

 

[Rusty Nails]

Trek

(Eats shoots and leaves.)

She sits among the cabbages and peas.


I know it’s not quite the same issue but I just like saying it.
‘

 

[Ian H]

Are the road plans going to destroy any family owned businesses, such as newsagents?

Most active travel initiatives destroy at least one person's life in that way, because cyclists don't smoke or read the Daily Mail.

I can assure you that there are many ageing cyclists (especially of the CTC variety) who would find the Daily Heil far too liberal.

 

[briantrumpet]

I read the book hoping to be persuaded how important punctuation is. I was disappointed. There's not much more to it than the title.

It's actually not a great book even if it does have its humorous moments.

I think a $5m fine is rather more persuasive.

And before you say something about there being no punctuation in spoken language, a benefit of written language is that we can read *much* more quickly than it's possible to speak it or take it in aurally, but we know that deviations from correct/standard norms (punctuation, grammar, spelling etc.) cause the reader to hiccup and to backtrack. At best, it's fluency lost, or at worst, a $5m fine.

 

[First Aspect]

It's actually not a great book even if it does have its humorous moments.

I think a $5m fine is rather more persuasive.

And before you say something about there being no punctuation in spoken language, a benefit of written language is that we can read *much* more quickly than it's possible to speak it or take it in aurally, but we know that deviations from correct/standard norms (punctuation, grammar, spelling etc.) cause the reader to hiccup and to backtrack. At best, it's fluency lost, or at worst, a $5m fine.

It wasn't a fine, it was a contractual dispute. And the absence of a comma didnt cost one party $5m any more than it's inclusion would have cost the other party $5m.

A cursory look at the case suggests that the inclusion of a comma would still have left the issue open to interpretation.

The only solution to resolve the ambiguity would have been a list of actions required of one of the parties, but even that would have risked inadvertently excluding certain combinations of actions.

Welcome to the law. It is an entirely unsatisfactory place.

 

[briantrumpet]

It wasn't a fine, it was a contractual dispute. And the absence of a comma didnt cost one party $5m any more than it's inclusion would have cost the other party $5m.

A cursory look at the case suggests that the inclusion of a comma would still have left the issue open to interpretation.

The only solution to resolve the ambiguity would have been a list of actions required of one of the parties, but even that would have risked inadvertently excluding certain combinations of actions.

Welcome to the law. It is an entirely unsatisfactory place.

Fair enough. But I suspect that it's a good idea to get as much clarity as possibly in the first place, and that that might include punctuation.

 

[First Aspect]

Fair enough. But I suspect that it's a good idea to get as much clarity as possibly in the first place, and that that might include punctuation.

Trust me the utopian clarity you seek via judicious application of punctuation simply does not exist.

My point is that the fact a dispute arose was not because of the comma or it's absence, it was because it's presence or absence was available to support a monetary claim.

 

[briantrumpet]

Trust me the utopian clarity you seek via judicious application of punctuation simply does not exist.

My point is that the fact a dispute arose was not because of the comma or it's absence, it was because it's presence or absence was available to support a monetary claim.

Fair point - it was probably some supercilious arse like me who spotted an opportunity to put pedantry into profitable use.

But that doesn't undermine the point that punctuation can change meaning.

(FWIW, I usually reserve my online pedantry for 'humour' those who will know what the hell I'm on about. You can take that as a compliment, if you wish.)

 

[First Aspect]

Fair point - it was probably some supercilious arse like me who spotted an opportunity to put pedantry into profitable use.

But that doesn't undermine the point that punctuation can change meaning.

(FWIW, I usually reserve my online pedantry for 'humour' those who will know what the hell I'm on about. You can take that as a compliment, if you wish.)

You would have made a good lawyer.