I've seen those English dramas too, they're cruel

[venta]

I avoided all the BBC frothing about bad grammar the other day. Much as I like a well-placed apostrophe, the sort of people who say "I think you'll find you mean 'fewer'" are, largely, arses (up with whom one should not put).

However, a nice grammar quiz? oh yes, that sounds like fun. I can answer it and feel all smug. Except, of course, I disagreed with it.

Question 3: Read this sentence carefully. "I'd like to introduce you to my sister Clara, who lives in Madrid, to Benedict, my brother who doesn't, and to my only other sibling, Hilary." Which of the following is correct?

1. Hilary is male
2. Hilary is female
3. It's impossible to know from the context

Now, the BBC's answer is that Hilary is male, because there isn't a comma after 'brother'. Benedict is described as "my brother who doesn't [live in Madrid]", so there must also be another brother, and thus that brother must be only-other-sibling Hilary.

I claim the answer is morally 3: it's impossible to tell. Because I, for one, got so lost among the commas of that god-awful sentence that I was frankly quite bewildered enough by the end without worrying about whether Hilary was a boy or a girl. Good grammar aids clarity, it doesn't reduce English to a puzzle of whether you knew the rules well enough to divine the writer's intent correctly. If your reader has to count commas to understand your statement, you've already got it monumentally wrong.

Bah.

Comments

[ewx.livejournal.com]

Sorry, I didn't intend to imply that anyone was fictional. My point is that there is a constant barrage of ill-informed pedantry, and it's really wearing.

[bopeepsheep.livejournal.com]

It's pretty wearing being on the parental end of discussions like "but why does English work like this, Mummy?" too, I admit. Working towards reasonably good/standard style and grammar is much harder work than one realises from a grown-up learned-it-already perspective.

[venta.livejournal.com]

I think[*] that I have a reasonable grasp of grammar, but have no memory of really learning it. Which is a shame, because it might make it easier to teach (should I be in a position to do such a thing).

Doubtless the mother will be along in a minute to tell me that I, too, asked relentless questions about it. Possibly resulting in a series of occasions where "just because" actually is the correct answer.

(Actually, since you seem fairly grammatically informed, may I hear your opinion on the relative correctness/pleasantness/etc of the following two sentences:

1. In the evening, I headed out to the pub.
2. In the evening I headed out to the pub.

Other people who read this comment are also invited to have opinions too, of course.)

[*] Possibly wrongly.

[bopeepsheep.livejournal.com]

Instinctively, I'd plump for 1 as a better reflection of how we'd say it (commas indicating breaths, etc). There's no real ambiguity or confusion introduced if you omit the comma, though, and it's a very short sentence so you can get away without it.