Hcfyk

Why did the Drakh emissary look so blurred in S04:E11 "Lines of Communication"?

How can I separate the number from the unit in argument?

Ising model simulation

Direct Implications Between USA and UK in Event of No-Deal Brexit

Could you use a laser beam as a modulated carrier wave for radio signal?

How should I connect my cat5 cable to connectors having an orange-green line?

A hang glider, sudden unexpected lift to 25,000 feet altitude, what could do this?

Is it OK to decorate a log book cover?

Could a dragon use its wings to swim?

Is there a rule of thumb for determining the amount one should accept for a settlement offer?

Why can't we say "I have been having a dog"?

Strange use of "whether ... than ..." in official text

Is a linearly independent set whose span is dense a Schauder basis?

Salesforce opportunity stages

Which acid/base does a strong base/acid react when added to a buffer solution?

How dangerous is XSS

Can Sri Krishna be called 'a person'?

Small nick on power cord from an electric alarm clock, and copper wiring exposed but intact

Can a PhD from a non-TU9 German university become a professor in a TU9 university?

Are British MPs missing the point, with these 'Indicative Votes'?

pgfplots: How to draw a tangent graph below two others?

MT "will strike" & LXX "will watch carefully" (Gen 3:15)?

Gauss' Posthumous Publications?

Is the offspring between a demon and a celestial possible? If so what is it called and is it in a book somewhere?

Defining relative clause followed by comma when clause ends with negation & is followed by verb?

0

Whilst writing my dissertation I wrote the following line: 'Many of the features which Kotlin has that Java does not come at the cost of strange, seemingly erroneous drawbacks to, in particular, understanding the program.'

I'm tempted to insert a comma after 'does not' because a part of me is tempted to read that part of the sentence as 'does not come'; and had I not read that sentence several times already and been aware of its true meaning perhaps I would read it as such. How did you read it the first time round?

In essence: for the sake of readability can a comma be inserted after a defining relative clause when that clause ends in negation and is immediately followed by a verb? Yes this separates the subject from the verb: however the alternative is a sentence that on first reading might be misread.

verbs commas negation relative-clauses subjects

share|improve this question

asked Mar 21 at 22:38

MarcMarc

1

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I don’t think you can have a comma. The convention to have no commas for defining relatives is stronger than avoiding potential garden paths. But when I read the sentence I was indeed confused at first. It’s not very elegant. Rewrite? E.g. “features which are possessed by Kotlin but not by Java come” or something like that?
  
  – Richard Z
  Mar 21 at 22:55
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Thank you @RichardZ for your suggestion. Even when just saying it aloud my initial wording seems a bit awkward; though using the passive voice in the clause makes the sentence too much of a mouthful. Perhaps the sentence as a whole is just too wordy. As it happens I'm just going to exclude the sentence altogether.
  
  – Marc
  Mar 21 at 23:24
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @RichardZ and Marc- I think you are confused about where the defining relative really is. Try this: Many of the features that Kotlin has, which Java does not, come ... (you could also omit the pronoun before Java and replace it with 'but')
  
  – AmI
  Mar 22 at 0:33
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @Aml BOTH the “that” and the “which” relative clauses are restrictive. You cannot paraphrase this as “the features that Kotlin has, which - by the way - Java does not...” At least that’s not the most natural meaning. So, no commas!
  
  – Richard Z
  Mar 22 at 13:00
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

0

Whilst writing my dissertation I wrote the following line: 'Many of the features which Kotlin has that Java does not come at the cost of strange, seemingly erroneous drawbacks to, in particular, understanding the program.'

I'm tempted to insert a comma after 'does not' because a part of me is tempted to read that part of the sentence as 'does not come'; and had I not read that sentence several times already and been aware of its true meaning perhaps I would read it as such. How did you read it the first time round?

In essence: for the sake of readability can a comma be inserted after a defining relative clause when that clause ends in negation and is immediately followed by a verb? Yes this separates the subject from the verb: however the alternative is a sentence that on first reading might be misread.

verbs commas negation relative-clauses subjects

share|improve this question

asked Mar 21 at 22:38

MarcMarc

1

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I don’t think you can have a comma. The convention to have no commas for defining relatives is stronger than avoiding potential garden paths. But when I read the sentence I was indeed confused at first. It’s not very elegant. Rewrite? E.g. “features which are possessed by Kotlin but not by Java come” or something like that?
  
  – Richard Z
  Mar 21 at 22:55
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Thank you @RichardZ for your suggestion. Even when just saying it aloud my initial wording seems a bit awkward; though using the passive voice in the clause makes the sentence too much of a mouthful. Perhaps the sentence as a whole is just too wordy. As it happens I'm just going to exclude the sentence altogether.
  
  – Marc
  Mar 21 at 23:24
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @RichardZ and Marc- I think you are confused about where the defining relative really is. Try this: Many of the features that Kotlin has, which Java does not, come ... (you could also omit the pronoun before Java and replace it with 'but')
  
  – AmI
  Mar 22 at 0:33
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @Aml BOTH the “that” and the “which” relative clauses are restrictive. You cannot paraphrase this as “the features that Kotlin has, which - by the way - Java does not...” At least that’s not the most natural meaning. So, no commas!
  
  – Richard Z
  Mar 22 at 13:00
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

Whilst writing my dissertation I wrote the following line: 'Many of the features which Kotlin has that Java does not come at the cost of strange, seemingly erroneous drawbacks to, in particular, understanding the program.'

I'm tempted to insert a comma after 'does not' because a part of me is tempted to read that part of the sentence as 'does not come'; and had I not read that sentence several times already and been aware of its true meaning perhaps I would read it as such. How did you read it the first time round?

In essence: for the sake of readability can a comma be inserted after a defining relative clause when that clause ends in negation and is immediately followed by a verb? Yes this separates the subject from the verb: however the alternative is a sentence that on first reading might be misread.

verbs commas negation relative-clauses subjects

share|improve this question

asked Mar 21 at 22:38

MarcMarc

1

share|improve this question

asked Mar 21 at 22:38

MarcMarc

1

share|improve this question

asked Mar 21 at 22:38

MarcMarc

1

asked Mar 21 at 22:38

MarcMarc

1

asked Mar 21 at 22:38

MarcMarc

1