comma or no comma

[bertietheblue]

Which is correct?

The French Ministry of State for Foreign Trade, Anne-Marie Idrac, acknowledged that ...

or comma in first instance or no commas at all?

Or is it a case of preference? (PS: I know it would be 2 commas if the person's name came first.)

If 2 commas, you would then say:

The President, Barack Obama, acknowledged ...

but that sounds like you're telling the audience the name of the President, doesn't it?

I'm leaning towards one but if anyone has any other ideas I'd appreciate it.

Thanks
Bertie

 

[Allen165]

Which is correct?

The French Ministry of State for Foreign Trade, Anne-Marie Idrac, acknowledged that ...

or comma in first instance or no commas at all?

Or is it a case of preference? (PS: I know it would be 2 commas if the person's name came first.)

If 2 commas, you would then say:

The President, Barack Obama, acknowledged ...

but that sounds like you're telling the audience the name of the President, doesn't it?

I'm leaning towards one but if anyone has any other ideas I'd appreciate it.

Thanks
Bertie

NOT A TEACHER.

"The French Ministry of State for Foreign Trade, Anne-Marie Idrac, acknowledged that ..."

That's correct, but I'm not sure I can explain why. Isn't "Anne-Marie Idrac" an appositive? Appositives are always set off with commas.

 

[corum]

Appositives: Restrictive and Non-restrictive - Grammar, Punctuation, and Style - kwizNET Math/Science/English Homeschool/Afterschool/Tutoring Lessons/Worksheets/Quizzes/Trivia

 

[bertietheblue]

Appositives: Restrictive and Non-restrictive - Grammar, Punctuation, and Style - kwizNET Math/Science/English Homeschool/Afterschool/Tutoring Lessons/Worksheets/Quizzes/Trivia

Thanks, Corum. Very interesting. From article: 'The capital of Michigan, Lansing ....'

So my hunch was right - one comma in the first instance then?

 

[corum]

With appositives, it is either zero commas or two commas.

The French Ministry of State for Foreign Trade, Anne-Marie Idrac, acknowledged that...

The French Ministry of State for Foreign Trade = Anne-Marie Idrac

--> non-restrictive --> set of commas

----
This is a good example to illustrate comma usage:

Suppose I have two brothers : Peter and Paul

My brother Peter is good.

my brother ≠ Peter
my brother = Peter + Paul

--> In 'My brother Peter', 'Peter' restricts the reference from 'Peter + Paul' to 'Peter'. Restrictive apposition --> no comma

On the other hand,

My brothers, Peter and Paul, are smart.

my brothers = Peter and Paul --> no restriction --> set of commas around 'Peter and Paul'
:up:

 

[TheParser]

Which is correct?

The French Ministry of State for Foreign Trade, Anne-Marie Idrac, acknowledged that ...

or comma in first instance or no commas at all?

Or is it a case of preference? (PS: I know it would be 2 commas if the person's name came first.)

If 2 commas, you would then say:

The President, Barack Obama, acknowledged ...

but that sounds like you're telling the audience the name of the President, doesn't it?

I'm leaning towards one but if anyone has any other ideas I'd appreciate it.

Thanks
Bertie

***** NOT A TEACHER *****

Good morning, Bertie.

(1) May I ask: is that a typo?

(a) Of course, Ms. Idrac is not the "ministry."

(2) Thus should it not be:

The French Minister of State for Foreign Trade, Anne-Marie Idrac,

acknowledged that ....

or

French Minister of State for Foreign Trade Anne-Marie Idrac

acknowledged that .... (P. S. I think -- only think -- that our

famous TIME magazine "invented" that kind of title.)

or

Anne -Marie Idrac, the French Minister of State for Foreign Trade,

acknowledged that ....(I think that this was long the "correct"

way until TIME magazine came along with its much shorter and

snappier style.)

Have a nice day!

 

[Allen165]

With appositives, it is either zero commas or two commas.

The French Ministry of State for Foreign Trade, Anne-Marie Idrac, acknowledged that...

The French Ministry of State for Foreign Trade = Anne-Marie Idrac

--> non-restrictive --> set of commas

----
This is a good example to illustrate comma usage:

Suppose I have two brothers : Peter and Paul

My brother Peter is good.

my brother ≠ Peter
my brother = Peter + Paul

--> In 'My brother Peter', 'Peter' restricts the reference from 'Peter + Paul' to 'Peter'. Restrictive apposition --> no comma

On the other hand,

My brothers, Peter and Paul, are smart.

my brothers = Peter and Paul --> no restriction --> set of commas around 'Peter and Paul'
:up:

The link you provided suggests that both of these sentences are correct:

"The French Ministry of State for Foreign Trade, Anne-Marie Idrac, acknowledged that ..."

"The French Ministry of State for Foreign Trade, Anne-Marie Idrac acknowledged that ..."

The difference between the two sentences might be that in the first "The French Ministry of State for Foregin Trade" is the subject, while in the second it's "Anne-Marie Idrac."

 

[bertietheblue]

With appositives, it is either zero commas or two commas.

The French Ministry of State for Foreign Trade, Anne-Marie Idrac, acknowledged that...

Still not sure. Look at the example from the reference you provided:

'The capitol of Michigan, Lansing is home to Michigan State University.'

One comma. How is my example different?

Oh and TheParser - yeah, sorry, 'Minister ...'

 

[bertietheblue]

The link you provided suggests that both of these sentences are correct:

"The French Ministry of State for Foreign Trade, Anne-Marie Idrac, acknowledged that ..."

"The French Ministry of State for Foreign Trade, Anne-Marie Idrac acknowledged that ..."

The difference between the two sentences might be that in the first "The French Ministry of State for Foregin Trade" is the subject, while in the second it's "Anne-Marie Idrac."

Jasmin165 - we were thinking the same thing at the same time, it seems!:up:

 

[corum]

The link you provided suggests that both of these sentences are correct:

I did not read the link. I was thinking it says the same thing as that which I already know.

Notice that when the appositive comes first in a sentence, it is followed by a comma.

Yeah, as I understand it, only one comma when the second noun phrase is the subject, irrespective of whether we have restrictive or non-restrictive apposition.

I understand the idea but can't accept it. I do not see the logic in it. In apposed NP's, the order does not matter if there is no restriction.
I think the link is confusing. Forget the one-comma option and you will remain a happy person.

 

[TheParser]

Still not sure. Look at the example from the reference you provided:

'The capitol of Michigan, Lansing is home to Michigan State University.'

One comma. How is my example different?

Oh and TheParser - yeah, sorry, 'Minister ...'

***** NOT A TEACHER *****

Hello again, Bertie.

The typo demon has been very busy: the capitOl (!!!) of Michigan, ...

For shame!

 

[corum]

Also, in RK diagramming, we never put the NP that serves to redefine or rename on the left side of the subject. This established practice is congruous with the idea that it is always the first noun phrase before the verb that functions as the subject.

An apposition renames or redefines. When a noun phrase that serves to redefine or rename the subject introduces a sentence, what does 're-' mean? 'Re' means once again. How can we name the subject once again once it has not been named yet.

 

[Allen165]

Is it a new rule about subject distribution? I have never seen this rule before? Where has this been hiding so far?
The subject in the sentence is the thing that the sentence is about.
When the two noun phrases have the same reference, something begins to smell fishy with this theory.

I was not putting forward a rule; I was just trying to explain why using only one comma might also be correct.

 

[corum]

I was not putting forward a rule; I was just trying to explain why using only one comma might also be correct.

Proposing such rules has several repercussions that break down a well-established grammar.


REad this again:

Also, in RK diagramming, we never put the NP that serves to redefine or rename on the left side of the subject. This established practice is congruous with the idea that it is always the first noun phrase before the verb that functions as the subject.

An apposition renames or redefines. When a noun phrase that serves to redefine or rename the subject introduces a sentence, what does 're-' mean? 'Re' means once again. How can we name the subject once again once it has not been named yet.

 

[corum]

Peter and Paul, the light of my life are... :tick:
Peter and Paul, the light of my life is... :cross:

The light of my life, Peter and Paul are... :cross:
The light of my life, Peter and Paul is... :tick:

As you can see, it is always the first NP that assigns number and person to the verb. Subjects have this duty. The one-comma rule does not stand on firm legs apparently.

Also note the intonation break around the second NP. Always two breaks or none --> two commas or none

 

[bertietheblue]

***** NOT A TEACHER *****

Hello again, Bertie.

The typo demon has been very busy: the capitOl (!!!) of Michigan, ...

For shame!

Not me, this time. I copied and pasted without reading closely.:-D