I'm quite interested in the punctuation. In Czech, it is totally
different, so I cannot rely upon what I know from my native language.
I think I've heard that the American rules differ from the British
ones. Could somebody possibly make a summary of those differences?
Thanks a lot in advance!
Best wishes,
Petr
P.S.: One example: I'd like to know, for instance, why sometimes
there's a comma before 'too' at the end of a sentence, and sometimes
not. Is that a matter of different traditions (e.g. British vs.
American) or different contexts? Thank you.
2007/4/10, splay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Hello--
>
> On Apr 9, 8:43 pm, "Hou Pei" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi, everybody
> > I read the following sentences in a newspaper but I don't think they
> > are grammatically correct.
> > Would you write me some suggestion?
> >
> > 1Their omnipresence means that their problems have stronger impact on
> > consumers than smaller firms,
> > and therefore, deserve more scrutiny.
> > My version:
> > Their omnipresence means that their problems have stronger impact on
> > consumers than smaller firms'
> > and therefore, deserve more scrutiny.
>
> You are right about the apostrophe. It's really "stronger impact ...
> than the problems of smaller firms," and that puts "firms" in what
> some call the genetive and I call the possessive case. You are also
> right about the comma. A comma is needed before "and" only when it
> introduces an independent clause, although there are cases where to
> omit it would create ambiguity or worse. This is not one of those
> cases.
>
> I would delete the other comma, too. You can't have the comma after
> "therefore" unless you have one right before it to make it
> parenthetical ("than smaller firms and, therefore, deserve"), and I
> think it's cleaner with no commas at all. One comma is wrong, anyhow.
>
> > 2They should ensure they operate ethically and without double standards.
> > My version:
> > They should ensure they operate ethically exclusive of double standards.
>
> Nope. Wrong word. "Exclusive of" here means that they can employ
> double standards because double standards are an exception to the
> principles of ethical operations.
>
> The sentence is faulty, though, in the way that you detected. If I had
> been the copyeditor, I'd have told him to rewrite it keeping in mind
> that double standards are unethical. Maybe, "They should ensure they
> operate ethically, without double standards." This pushes the comma
> almost to the breaking point. Some would use a colon, but I think a
> colon would be too strong.
>
> > Thank you
> >
> > Best Regards
> > Hou Pei
>
>
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Correct my English" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/correct-my-english
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
