h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Wazu,

Your sentences should be written as:

It is present in other European countries, Morocco, and Iceland, either having spread from the UK or having originated from birds imported to those countries.

and

The beech tree was not found in the UK before 600BC, the horse chestnut was introduced in the seventeenth century. It is difficult to imagine the country without either.

or

The beech tree was not found in the UK before 600BC, the horse chestnut was introduced in the seventeenth century; it is difficult to imagine the country without either.


Mostly

and the comma before "and Iceland" is a matter of style, not grammar. There are arguments either way for putting it in or leaving it out.

Talk about horrible advice...

The comma before "and Iceland" is only a question of style if your style is to be deliberately incorrect. The comma can only be left off of a list if the two nouns *belong* together for some reason, like:

Gin and tonic
Heckyl and Jeckyl
Sonny and Cher

An example sentence using this rule: I went to the bar and ordered a round for my table: a gin and tonic, a whiskey and soda, and a draft beer. Or: Three couples shared a table at the restaurant: Johnny and Martha, Clint and Mary, and Dirk and James (to be politically correct ).

Since Morocco and Iceland are not a couple, and do not *belong* together for any particular reason, they should be seperated by a comma.

The comma before "and Iceland" is called a Harvard comma and according to the English major/professional editor I consulted, it should be there.

Wazu, the editor I talked to said she never uses the grammar checker. She said it comes up with stuff she's never heard of.

Mostly

Despite the protestations of Colonel Sellers and Mostly Harmless, grammar as taught in schools in Ireland and Britain always insisted that there should not be a comma before that "and". If Joe, Mick and Paddy go out for a drink, you say Joe, Mick and Paddy, not Joe, Mick, and Paddy. This was one of those rules that was never explained.

So you can see that there are arguments either for putting it in or leaving it out!

According to my 'Good Punctuation Guide', use of commas in a list depends on the items in the list. Gnomon is right with no comma between 'Mick' and 'and' in his list, because none of the items are 'pairs'. However, if you were writing a list of old comedy stars, and the list included 'Laurel and Hardy', the list would look something like: "Charlie Chaplin, Buster Keaton, and Laurel and Hardy". This is because 'Laurel and Hardy' are a paired item. The book also says that commas should also be used to clarify meaning. As the list 'European countries, Morocco and Iceland' was found to be confusing in its original form, I think a comma is appropriate between 'Morocco' and 'and'.

I have to agree that Gnomon's post 25 fits with what little I remember learning (mainly in the UK) of punctuation but I do like the comma after Morocco. It does read more clearly to me. If I can choose I'll put it in . It looks as if there maybe Brtitish English / American English differences on this. Or a change in usage.

Please thank your wife for me, Mostly. I use the grammar check with more caution now. It does at least make me look at the word structure in more detail than I otherwise would .

The Harvard comma (aka the serial comma) is merely a pale imitation of the original Oxford comma. Both terms derive from the house styles of OUP and HUP when it comes to lists, where it was presumably decided that absolute clarity outweighs aesthetic considerations.

On a similar topic, I'd like to introduce the world to the serial ampersand so as to deal with the confusion caused by lists of lists:

Crosby, Stills, and Nash, and Ellis, Beggs, and Howard will be performing at...

seems impossible to punctuate clearly just with ands and commas, and semicolons seem to be overkill for just two items, so I propose

Crosby, Stills & Nash and Ellis, Beggs & Howard will be performing at...

Wazu

Gramatically corect or not, you first example is certainly confusing people. At least two respondents believe you think Morocco is in Europe !!!.

(-:

From Distant Shores

It's confusing but there's nothing semantically preposterous about thinking that Morocco's in Europe: that's exactly why the sentence needs to be clearer. Morocco has been pressing for EU membership for several years.

Yes, yes - don't rub it in...

Somebody made a comment about the comma before 'and' being incorrect unless usage has changed. Of course usage changes. Language is a living thing. It adapts as people's needs change. I used to know someone who taught English who reckoned that a comma should *never* be used before 'and'. Now it's acceptable because it's often needed for clarity. Even the dreaded 'split infinitive' is becoming acceptable, in certain circumstances.

When I was *much* younger, I used to grouse about the fact that Americans don't speak 'proper' English. That was a long time ago. Now, not only do I accept that they speak it differently, I take their side against anybody that complains about the way they speak. Different influences and needs produce different use of language. Even in England.

A Eurorail railpass certainly includes Morocco (who, having been educated in an ancient British grammar school, would leave that comma out)

If we have any questions on ancient British grammar, we'll certainly remember to give a call!

Wazu,

Mrs. Mostly says your MOST welcome.

Mostly

I'm jumping in here with an answer to the original question which is probably no longer relevant in this position, but I am only halfway through the thread.

My question is: in the first sentence, after about the fourth reading, I realised that "other European countries", "Marocco" and "Iceland" are supposed to be three different entities. If Iceland is not in Europe, what is it - America?

Mostly, thats *most* kind .

Is being part of Europe at all necessary for EU membership? (Or even to enter the Eurovision song contest?) I'll confess I was reluctant to label Iceland as part of Europe but I'm convinced now, after finding this; 'Leifur Eiríksson, who was the first European to set foot on the American continent, was born and raised in Iceland.' on a search. Indisputable I think .
So I have changed my original sentence to read 'It is present in many Western European countries, ranging from Iceland to Spain, and in Morocco in Northern Africa.'

That sounds a lot better to me! If you don't mind me asking, whatis it for?

I don't mind at all. Its for a guide entry I've been writing - what better purpose could this be for .

I know the sub eds will sort out the grammar mistakes but I was curious about the grammar check comma splice comment and I would quite like to improve my grammar too - hence the question here.