<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 1/10/2022 9:49 AM, Will Martin
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:9498D0A1-385E-4E34-9F7E-B907185FD97F@mac.com">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">We know that Klingon speakers are not bothered by repetition of words for clarity, so it occurs to me that you could say {be’ Huchmo’ be’ paqmo’ je…} as a way of disambiguating that the woman owns both the money and the book.</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>This is also what I would suggest.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:9498D0A1-385E-4E34-9F7E-B907185FD97F@mac.com">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">We probably use commas between items in a list of nouns joined with “and” because this probably evolved from saying “A and B and C and D” and we got tired of repeating the “and” and decided to just briefly pause for the omitted “and”s and indicate the pause with commas: “A, B, C and D”, and then some professor at Oxford decided that there should be another comma added in front of remaining “and”, even though nothing is omitted there.</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>Er... no, naming lists was a thing long before English existed. I
daresay that naming lists probably existed before conjunctions
did. Certainly the Oxford comma, also called the serial comma,
doesn't exist just because "some professor at Oxford" decided it
should. The term <i>Oxford comma</i> didn't exist until 1978. It
was so named because the author was referencing the <i>Oxford
Style Manual.</i><br>
</p>
<p><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.scribendi.com/academy/articles/oxford_comma_importance.en.html#:~:text=The%20Oxford%20comma%20has%20been,employees%20working%20at%20the%20press">https://www.scribendi.com/academy/articles/oxford_comma_importance.en.html#:~:text=The%20Oxford%20comma%20has%20been,employees%20working%20at%20the%20press</a>.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:9498D0A1-385E-4E34-9F7E-B907185FD97F@mac.com">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">By fiat, we now have to say, “A, B, C, and D”.</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>It's not by fiat, and it's not required. There are other styles.
Some style guides argue against the serial comma. Sometimes you
want to emphasize the conjunctions by including them between every
term. There are all sorts of ways this can be said. You're making
the situation sound like it has been ordered by a dictator.</p>
<p>Individual publications may and should have rules as to what
style they require, but this is not the same thing as freely
writing to, say, a mailing list. If you're writing for a
publisher, you follow the publisher's rules. If you're not writing
for a publisher, you write how you want to write.<br>
</p>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:9498D0A1-385E-4E34-9F7E-B907185FD97F@mac.com">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">So, the less you rely on punctuation in written Klingon to clarify your meaning, likely the greater your authority on getting it right.</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>I wholeheartedly disagree. Use punctuation liberally to clarify
your meaning, because text lacks the cues that one adds to speech.
Use punctuation because your words will often be ambiguous even if
they are the absolute best way to express something. Use
punctuation because a wordsmith who does not use every tool in his
or her bag crafts an inferior product.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
SuStel
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://trimboli.name">http://trimboli.name</a></pre>
</body>
</html>