0
Anonymous Posted 17 years ago
Grammar
A comma or no comma?
Hi. In the Collins COBUILD Advanced Learner's English Dictionary, it has this definition for the word "enzyme," and I wonder if a comma before the word (pronoun?) "which" would be correct. Please help. I also think that the word in capital letters "TECHNICAL" (in brackets) means the word is technical in terms of its use.
An enzyme is a chemical substance that is found in living creatures which produces changes in other substances without being changed itself. [TECHNICAL]
An enzyme is a chemical substance that is found in living creatures which produces changes in other substances without being changed itself. [TECHNICAL]
Top answer
-- No; the following clause is a critical part of the definition of 'enzyme'. I also think that the word in capital letters "TECHNICAL" (in brackets) means the word is technical in terms of its use. except that it's really not terribly technical.
- -- No; the following clause is a critical part of the definition of 'enzyme'.
- I also think that the word in capital letters "TECHNICAL" (in brackets) means the word is technical in terms of its use.
- except that it's really not terribly technical.
- Many laymen know what enzymes are.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
8 Answers
0
I wonder if a comma before the word (pronoun?) "which" would be correct.-- No; the following clause is a critical part of the definition of 'enzyme'.
I also think that the word in capital letters "TECHNICAL" (in brackets) means the word is technical in terms of its use. -- That's right...except that it's really not terribly technical. Many laymen know what enzymes are.
I also think that the word in capital letters "TECHNICAL" (in brackets) means the word is technical in terms of its use. -- That's right...except that it's really not terribly technical. Many laymen know what enzymes are.
00
Hi. Thank you. I think comma would be correct (or possibly optional in this case) before the word "which" in the definition I found in the Collins COBUILD Advanced Learner's English Dictionary. I feel/think the part "that is found in living creatures," which seems to identify the sort of chemical substance an enzyme is -- in this case, that that is found in living creatures --might cause misunder
00
No, they won't. The verb is 'produces', so 'creatures' cannot be its subject.
00
Hi. Thank you again.
Do you think the placement of commas for these is correct? I think what I am trying to ask is if some words or phrases or clauses (possible?) exist and if those can leave a possibility of readers of the sentence with them not getting clear meaning of the sentence, would putting a comma before what seems to be a dependent clause (or what seems to be a clause (another
Do you think the placement of commas for these is correct? I think what I am trying to ask is if some words or phrases or clauses (possible?) exist and if those can leave a possibility of readers of the sentence with them not getting clear meaning of the sentence, would putting a comma before what seems to be a dependent clause (or what seems to be a clause (another
00
Anon, I think you might be missing the point. An enzyme is not a chemical substance that is found in living creatures because there are many chemical substances found in living creatures that are not enzymes. However, by adding a comma you would define it that way --- and, by the way, they also happen to produces changes in other substances without being changed itself. That is not right.
00
1. *** are toys that can be used by dogs, (comma) which can be healthy, too.
2. *** are toys that can be used by dogs, (comma) which can help them get exercise.
Ambiguities are resolved by revising one's writing:
2. *** are toys that can be used by dogs ( no comma) to help them get exercise.
2. *** are toys that can be used by dogs, (comma) which can help them get exercise.
Ambiguities are resolved by revising one's writing:
2. *** are toys that can be used by dogs ( no comma) to help them get exercise.
00
Hi. Thank you.
If the phrase "living creatures" were happen to be (for the illustration purpose of asking this question) "a living creature" in the singular, would you say placing a comma before the pronoun "which," although the part that follows (including it), which is "which produces changes in other substances without being changed itself" is correct eventhough the part is retrictiv
If the phrase "living creatures" were happen to be (for the illustration purpose of asking this question) "a living creature" in the singular, would you say placing a comma before the pronoun "which," although the part that follows (including it), which is "which produces changes in other substances without being changed itself" is correct eventhough the part is retrictiv
00
Then you would have to recast the sentence, since both the restrictive and non-restrictive forms would ambiguously refer to 'creature':
An enzyme is a chemical substance that is found in a living creature and which produces changes in other substances without being changed itself.
An enzyme is a chemical substance that is found in a living creature and which produces changes in other substances without being changed itself.
0
Related Questions