[Info-vax] Long uptime cut short by Hurricane Sandy

[Bob Koehler]

In article <5f03a382-d15e-42a7-ae3b-9db648788138 at r8g2000vbj.googlegroups.com>, AEF <spamsink2001 at yahoo.com> writes:
> Omission of serial comma disambiguating:
> 
>     I thank my mother, Anne Smith, and Thomas. =96 could be either my
> mother and Anne Smith and Thomas (three people) or my mother, who is
> Anne Smith, and Thomas (two people)
> 
>     I thank my mother, Anne Smith and Thomas. =96 The writer is thanking
> three people: the writer's mother and Anne Smith (who is not the
> writer's mother) and Thomas.

   Since I learned that the comma is never used when only two objects
   are listed, I cannot parse the first example as aything other than
   three.  It has the form "x, y, and z", IIRC the form "x, and z" is 
   always wrong.

   But I find the second form ambiguous, it can be read as "x and z"
   with a modifying phrase in front of x, or as "x, y and z", an
   accepted form.

   That's probably why I don't like dropping "," in front of "and" for
   more than two objects.

   And so I disagree with Wiki.  But I would probably alter the sentence
   to remove the ambiguity.  Either "my mother, Anne Smith, and Thomas"
   which I do not find ambiguous, or "my mother (Anne Smith) and
   Thomas".