Hot answers tagged

3

If the adverb applies to the verb specifically, as in I loved her passionately then no comma is required. If the adverb applies to the adjective from which it is separated (in your examples, many and long), a comma would be preferable. Your first example means How many employees work here, roughly? and without the comma, the sense is that the ...


2

First of all, punctuation is a matter of style, and you will find the rules for that style in the style guide that your employer has adopted. Which guide governs your edits, and what does it say? Different guides have different rules, but the good ones will emphasize that fiats must be tempered by the recognition of exceptions and the role of the good ...


1

Your paragraph correctly punctuated: I find an airplane's symbolic freedom appealing - whether it is soaring through the sky, industriously filling and disgorging passengers(,) or exultantly defying gravity on take-off, it remains independent and far-reaching in all of its manoeuvres. In English, semi-colons are only used as a way to separate linked ...


1

A few things. First, the past tense is broadcast, you don't need the ...ed. If you use a comma you don't need the first or. I would change the second or to nor, and place a comma in front of it. So I would write the sentence: It shall not be published in any document, broadcast, nor transmitted in any way.


1

Sentence 1: "I will give you two apples and two pears, which were picked from my garden, this afternoon when I meet you." Is preferable, as there's no confusion about when the picking or the meeting happens. Even so, the time line is bumpy: 'I will give' (future), 'were picked' (past), 'when I meet' (future). Suggested revision: "This afternoon ...


1

You are correct: it is better to add a comma between a clause and a non-defining participial phrase, i.e. a participial phrase providing some extra information (rather than limiting what the noun refers to, as my participle "providing" does here). I'm not sure I'd call that comma compulsory, but it is certainly a great improvement


1

I suggest you reword the sentence as follows: I think the reason for the financial crisis is the greediness of bankers. Or, I think the cause of the financial crisis . . .. Or, In my way of thinking, the reason for the financial crisis . . .. Or, I suggest the reason for the financial crisis is . . .. Or, According to Milton ...


1

Your sentence as written is just fine, as long as you change the plural verb "act" to the singular acts, since "the essential destruction" is one thing and therefore needs a singular verb. The words within the commas function as a kind of afterthought (technical term: non-restrictive clause): The essential destruction of the human species, and the state ...


1

Nouns of address -- those naming the person or thing to which the sentence is addressed -- should always be set off from the rest of the sentence by commas. This applies whether they appear at the beginning of the sentence, English sufferer, pay attention! in the middle, You, English sufferer, should make a note of this. or at the end. Have ...


1

I think that's exactly what it is saying. As you say, nobody currently alive is therefore eligible. What this demonstrates is that the consititution is not the laws. Instead, the laws are derived from the constitution, in a common-sense way, to attempt to capture the important aspects of the constitution. The finer details of what exactly is meant by ...


1

Joseph Story served on the Supreme Court from 1811 to 1845. In 1833, he explained the meaning: It is indispensable, too, that the president should be a natural born citizen of the United States; or a citizen at the adoption of the constitution, and for fourteen years before his election. This permission of a naturalized citizen to become president ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible