I disagree with Sars on a grammar question.
She fielded this in Tuesday's Vine and ... (whisper) I think she's wrong.
First of all, according to Chicago (and AP for that matter), you put a comma after state names when used after city names. Even Garner agrees that the state is parenthetical and so would take a comma after it. It doesn't have anything to do with whether the city name is universally understood.
Secondly, her construction, "The History of Ogden, Utah's First Settlement" changes the meaning of the title. The original, with the comma after "Utah's", makes it clear that the topic is the first settlement in Ogden. Sars' version changes "Utah's first settlement" to an appositive, making it sound as if Ogden was the first settlement in Utah.
*frets* Do you all still love me? Or am I hereby banished from the Tomato Nation?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
You know, that bothered me, too. It totally reads (in Sars' version) like Ogden IS Utah's first settlement. Maybe something like A History of the First Settlement of Ogden, Utah would be more clear and still ok. (And avoid the problem entirely.)
Ok. I am in NO way an English guru. I barely know the language. Well, maybe better than our president, but that's not saying much. And, even then I would agree with with Ms. Huis as well. It sounds like, with Sar's version, that Ogden is Utah's first settlement. It makes no sense/changes the meaning. Booo Sars. I would totally send her a comment if I knew anything about grammar.
Considering that you, not Sars, have always been _my_ grammar maven, I'm not kicking.
And you should've seen that last sentence before I read through it once....
Yes, Ms. Huis has the best answer: just rewrite the damn thing to avoid the problem!
Mixologist, your English is SO MUCH better than the President's! Just because you hooked up with a language geek doesn't mean your use of the language isn't better than most.
Temp, Aaaaawwww! I feel so loved.
No worries, Pusher :)
Post a Comment