I saw this ad in the local paper, and was quite puzzled for a while as to why that would be good incentive:

"Advertise your car till it sells for only $20"

I'd put the much needed comma after "car", rather than before "for". Oops. But it was funny- and quite handy when I realized what it really was trying to say.

From: [identity profile] nuqotw.livejournal.com


Odd. I made the same comma error. Do we naturally parse at the first available opportunity?

From: [identity profile] debka-notion.livejournal.com


It's more that we connect any snetence bit to the closest thing that it can be attached to most easily. [livejournal.com profile] tirerim below has a good explanation, actually having real instruction in these things, versus my one intro class, from which I'm forgetting the appropriate terminology right now.

From: [identity profile] tirerim.livejournal.com


I think the problem is that it really doesn't need a comma for the first interpretation, in which "for only $20" is modifying "sells" rather than "advertise". It's a genuine ambiguity, but we naturally tend to parse it as attaching at the closest place, rather than farther up the tree.

From: [identity profile] debka-notion.livejournal.com


THanks- I didn't know how else to explain it understandably. ALthough darn it, I took intro linguistics this last term, and we talked about this, and I knew the terminology then...

From: [identity profile] thevortex.livejournal.com


Actually, I do not see where a comma would fit into the sentence at all. I would recommend the edit to replace "for" with an em-dash (en-dash? -- I always mix them up).

And, tirerim, is not the English language designed that way (e.g. antecedents)?

The Vortex
.

Profile

debka_notion: (Default)
debka_notion
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags