Parenthesis

Hi,

Which parenthesis is more natural?

Both seem to me a bit mannered and uncommon. The common thing to say would be

If his confession is true, she is innocent. (Or with the If clause at the end)

(1) She, if his confession is true, is innocent.

(2) She is, if his co

I see. So they are both natural.

Long time ago, I also asked a question about parenthesis here:



and they said one was more natural than the other. So I wondered if the same thing might also apply to the example I gave here.

I agree with Clive.

They both strike me as awkward and unnatural. I would go with Clive's recommendation:

If his confession is true, she is innocent.

CliveIn terms of nuances, to my mind #1 stresses 'she, not someone else', while #2 stresses the innocence. Clive

I agree completely.

#1 - SHE might be innocent, but I'm still not sure about that guy or the other gal. I still think they were in on it.

I don't find it so unnatural -- just, as Clive says, uncommon. It's a very deliberate word or

Thank you for the comments, Phillp and GG (GG, haven't seen your participation in my discussions for a long time! How have you been?)

GG, you said before 'Ken, having an alibi, is innocent' was more natural than 'Ken is,

Hmm. Yes, I do. In this older example, "having an alibi" modifies Ken, not the situation, so it has to be positioned next to Ken. In "She is innocent" the parenthetical phase doesn't modify "She."

That's "native speaker instinct" and not a grammar rule I can point out to you, but let's take another example.

Mike, knowing the folks around here as he does, is the best person to ask

OK. Thanks, GG!