TEACHERS DISCUSSION FORUM
View Thread · Previous · Next Return to Index › Re Panama Papers
paul fox - 2016-04-11
In response to Re Panama Papers (amused)

Whilst I am happy to argue the point here, I am not going to argue with Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semicolon

A direct quote from their page is as follows:-

Applications of the semicolon in English include:
• Between items in a series or listing containing internal punctuation, especially parenthetic commas, where the semicolons function as serial commas. This is by far the most frequent use currently.
o The people present were Jamie, a man from New Zealand; John, the milkman's son; and George, a gaunt kind of man.
o Several fast food restaurants can be found within the following cities: London, England; Paris, France; Dublin, Ireland; Madrid, Spain.
o Here are three examples of familiar sequences: one, two, and three; a, b, and c; first, second, and third.

This is almost exactly the same as my previous example that you said is grammatically wrong.

Another citation, this time from https://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/semicolons.asp says, and I quote :-

Rule 3. Use a semicolon to separate units of a series when one or more of the units contain commas.
Incorrect: The conference has people who have come from Moscow, Idaho, Springfield, California, Alamo, Tennessee, and other places as well.
Note that with only commas, that sentence is hopeless.
Correct: The conference has people who have come from Moscow, Idaho; Springfield, California; Alamo, Tennessee; and other places as well. (Note the final semicolon, rather than a comma, after Tennessee.)

I went and found the above examples AFTER you told me I was grammatically wrong, so I would be most interested to hear your reasons why.

Messages In This Thread
Panama Papers -- Caring -- 2016-04-04
Re Panama Papers -- Caring -- 2016-04-08
Re Panama Papers -- amused -- 2016-04-04
Re Panama Papers -- paul fox -- 2016-04-10
Re Panama Papers -- amused -- 2016-04-10
Re Panama Papers -- Paul Greene -- 2016-04-11
Re Panama Papers -- paul fox -- 2016-04-10
Re Panama Papers -- San Migs -- 2016-04-10
Re Panama Papers -- Dubius Maximus -- 2016-04-05
Re Panama Papers -- amused -- 2016-04-05
Re Panama Papers -- paul fox -- 2016-04-11
Re Panama Papers -- amused -- 2016-04-11
Re Panama Papers -- Caring -- 2016-04-11
Re Panama Papers -- paul fox -- 2016-04-11
Re Panama Papers -- Dubius Maximus -- 2016-04-11
Re Panama Papers -- paul fox -- 2016-04-12
Re Panama Papers -- amused -- 2016-04-11
Re Panama Papers -- Dubius Maximus -- 2016-04-07
Re Panama Papers -- amused -- 2016-04-07
Re Panama Papers -- Dubius Maximus -- 2016-04-11
Re Panama Papers -- Caring -- 2016-04-08
Re Panama Papers -- amused -- 2016-04-09
Re Panama Papers -- Paul Greene -- 2016-04-09
Re Panama Papers -- San Migs -- 2016-04-12
Re Panama Papers -- Caring -- 2016-04-14
Re Panama Papers -- amused -- 2016-04-09
Re Panama Papers -- Paul Greene -- 2016-04-10
Re Panama Papers -- Bleh Blah -- 2016-04-09
Re Panama Papers -- Paul Greene -- 2016-04-10
View Thread · Previous · Next Return to Index › Re Panama Papers





Go to another board -