You can't escape them.
That Disgraceful, Disreputable, (Wonderful) Form of Punctuation: The Parenthesis
21–29 of 29 posts
Re: That Disgraceful, Disreputable, (Wonderful) Form of Punctuation: The Parenthesis
#22I just had thw thought: aren't parentheses just punctuation denoting an inline footnote?
In legal writing, an inline footnote begins with the word "see" in italics, e.g.,"football-related prayer in public schools is now permitted, see ,Kennedy v. Bremerton School Dist., 597 U.S.507 (2022)." It's just as easy to make this a footnote but some judges have objected to "excessive" footnotes in legal submissions. Keeping them inline avoids this criticism. ps On another note, AI legal hallucinations are a solve…
> those with control of the materials [...] won't share the list with AI companies.
These are definitely claims I would make if I was an AI legal company that hadn't solved hallucinations.
Re: That Disgraceful, Disreputable, (Wonderful) Form of Punctuation: The Parenthesis
#23Re: That Disgraceful, Disreputable, (Wonderful) Form of Punctuation: The Parenthesis
#24Endnotes maximize disruption, the reader has to turn to the back of the book to find the end note, then return to what they were originally reading. These are best reserved for citations or similar items where the added information is irrelevant to normal reading. Endnotes can have their own endnotes.
Footnotes aren't quite as disruptive as endnotes, but they're close. Footnotes can themselves have footnotes.
Surrounding an interlocution with two copies of the same character, whether a comma or a dash, reduces clarity —or makes the work ugly— when there's more than one interlocution in a sentence.
Parentheses allow nesting, don't disrupt the flow of reading the way footnotes or endnotes do, and don't reduce clarity with multiple interlocutions. It's generally much better to not have multiple interlocutions, as they inherently make the work hard to read. It's especially difficult to read nested interlocutions. But sometimes nested interlocutions are used to good effect, such as Terry Pratchett's humor involving footnotes of footnotes. Parenthetical interlocutions to define the first use of an acronym or initialism are also a good exception to the rule of avoiding multiple interlocutions in a sentence.
Re: That Disgraceful, Disreputable, (Wonderful) Form of Punctuation: The Parenthesis
#25The (small business) owner. The small (business owner).
or
((Buffalo buffalo) ((Buffalo buffalo) buffalo)) buffalo (Buffalo buffalo).
Re: That Disgraceful, Disreputable, (Wonderful) Form of Punctuation: The Parenthesis
#26Parentheses, commas, em-dashes, footnotes, endnotes, and starting new sentences can all be used for interlocutions. Endnotes maximize disruption, the reader has to turn to the back of the book to find the end note, then return to what they were originally reading. These are best reserved for citations or similar items where the added information is irrelevant to normal reading. Endnotes can have their own endnotes. F…
This is why Tufte-style margin notes are so nice. It is effortless to scan them and choice to read or skip. I wish more blogging software included it as a sort of standard styling option.
Re: That Disgraceful, Disreputable, (Wonderful) Form of Punctuation: The Parenthesis
#27Five comments here write "parenthesis" where they mean "parentheses" ... weird.
Re: That Disgraceful, Disreputable, (Wonderful) Form of Punctuation: The Parenthesis
#28I've always wanted to use parentheses in prose the way we do in math, to make grouping explicit: The (small business) owner. The small (business owner). or ((Buffalo buffalo) ((Buffalo buffalo) buffalo)) buffalo (Buffalo buffalo).
Your second formulation doesn't work. Words in parentheses should be able to be omitted without loss of grammaticality.
Instead,
The small (business) owner
would be a better contrasting formulation to the first one.
Re: That Disgraceful, Disreputable, (Wonderful) Form of Punctuation: The Parenthesis
#29"He was certainly a flamboyantly creative writer and inspired teacher; yet one can take him seriously here: “Pricks” performed “tricks” as punctuation became a vehicle to think about the technological revolutions of the time, gender relationships, and literary genres reflecting social and historical concerns like kingship or geographical exploration." absolute trainwreck.
It's a pity because the material she is covering, the fever of Elizabethan rhetorical inventiveness, including in the written form, is so rich & interesting.
She pulls out useful detail & quotes but then links it together with her own overwritten & eccentric prose.