1

Different traders and poultry and fish farms located across the country comprise the client-base of the business. In the above sentence, two 'and'were used to separate two groups of clients; one is different traders and other one is different farms of poultry and fish. Could anyone suggest me if there is any better way to write this sentence without using two 'and'?

  • 3
    The business's client-base consists of poultry farms, fish farms, and traders, all located throughout the country. – Jim Nov 2 '16 at 7:08
  • There isn't really. Not unless you want to go down the ungainly road of slashes, and that isn't even logically better: “poultry/fish farms” is just as ambiguous, if not more so. – Janus Bahs Jacquet May 31 '17 at 13:12
  • Note that "suggest me" is not English. You can't use an indirect object like that with that particular verb. – tchrist Aug 30 '17 at 1:53
  • I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it's writing advice. – AmE speaker Jul 29 '18 at 11:47
-1

The best answer is to repeat the word farms to make the meaning clear and then separate the items in the list with commas in the normal way. This would give you "Different traders, poultry farms and fish farms ... comprise the client-base of the business"

  • 2
    I disagree. That means something different. The original version separates the client base into two distinct groups, each of which presumably shares a number of characteristics; your version separates it into three groups. – Janus Bahs Jacquet May 31 '17 at 13:11
  • @JanusBahsJacquet: While you are correct from an analytical point of view, it does not change the meaning one bit. The original statement still lists three distinct options (traders, fish farms, poultry farms). You're alluding to the omission of "farms", which, while it does bundle poultry and fish together, does not change that the full list consists of 3 elements. The outcome of 1 + (1 + 1) is still the same as that of 1 + 1 + 1, even if the order of operations is changed. Also note that the sentence continues: "comprise the client-base". Therefore, it makes a big bundle of three. – Flater May 31 '17 at 14:20
  • 1
    @Flater That's where I disagree: the original lists two distinct elements, not three. One of those elements is divided into two subgroups, but that doesn't make it two elements. – Janus Bahs Jacquet May 31 '17 at 14:23
  • @JanusBahsJacquet: Unless there is a specific distribution happening (e.g half of the budget goes to the trader department, half to the fish and poultry farms department), it does not change the meaning. There is no distribution mentioned in any way here, it is simply a summary. Like I said, you're right from an analytical point of view; but that's doesn't mean there's an actual difference in meaning. Unless a single farm handles both poultry and fish, but again this is not specified and not implicitly expected. – Flater May 31 '17 at 14:25
-1

Different traders as well as poultry and fish farms located across the country comprise the client-base of the business.

-1

a punctuation (,) before the first 'and' can help too to serve the purpose of separating two groups of clients such as: Different traders, and poultry and fish farms located across the country comprise the client-base of the business.

  • 1
    Welcome to English Language & Usage. I think you should take a look at your answer and edit, so it says what you mean. – J. Taylor Feb 27 '18 at 10:22

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.