(VERY late! Sorry, I've been tied up with other stuff...)
This is one I come across frequently in my editing. “Tom and wife, Giselle, and son, Jet, live in the Boston area.” I mentioned last time that I’m more conservative than many when it comes to commas, and this is a prime example. I would edit this to read: “Tom, wife Giselle and son Jet live…” or “Tom, his wife, Giselle, and his son, Jet, live…”. My absolute preference would be “Tom, his wife Giselle and his son Jet live…”
The first version mistreats the names-as-parentheticals rule. The first edit treats Giselle and Jet as if “wife” and “son” are their titles or something, and I don’t like that. It is concise, though… abrupt, really. Edit #2 is way too comma-happy to suit me. But Edit #2 also shows how one can add additional information through comma-bound parenthetical phrases – in this case, the wife’s and son’s names, treated as objects here ("HIS wife," etc.). Personally, I don’t like that because it suggests to me that both wife and son are insignificant in relation to Tom.
Edit #3 clearly identifies Giselle and Jet in relation to Tom, but grants them a more equal footing in a subtle way. It also uses fewer commas, which in my mind makes it more readable.
The kicker is that all four sentences – the original and the three edits – are technically correct. Deciding which to use is a matter of personal style and preference. That’s the fun thing about the English language. You can create many impressions just by making small changes in punctuation. And it’s not wrong – it’s just what you prefer to do.
Next time: more on commas and style
No comments:
Post a Comment