Skip to main content

punctuation - How should one properly punctuate layered argument?


In my writing, I sometimes deal with complex concepts, some of which - if they are to be properly expressed (by which I mean precisely expressed) to a reader new to the concept - are dealt with in a sentence which consists of three layers; as is this one. Here, the brackets are the inner layer, dashes the intermediary, and the outer is the sentence itself.


Sometimes I have found it convenient to further complicate matters by conveying two concepts - already embedded in the intermediary layer; necessary because of depth of argument - which are divided by a semicolon, within dashes.


For the first time in my life, I saw - yesterday (in ELL) whilst browsing - someone use double brackets. They expressed a thought (and then another thought ((interrupted by another thought)) which was bracketed) which was well worth reading about.


I don't find any of this at all difficult to digest, myself.


But my question is, does any of it conform to normal expectations of punctuation ?



Answer



Even at risk of being accused by some members of writing an inexpert answer, may I suggest that punctuation is best kept simple and unambiguous. I should recommend the use of just one pair of brackets (or one pair of dashes) at a time, and feel it is better not to mix both in the same sentence: especially not dashes within brackets!


This sentence is not so easy to decode with a single reading:



I sometimes deal with complex concepts, some of which - if they are to be properly expressed (by which I mean precisely expressed) to a reader new to the concept - are dealt with in a sentence which consists of three layers



Moreover, multiple breaks in the form of brackets and dashes interrupt both the flow of the reading and the expression of your ideas.


Part of the problem is that the proper interpretation of a multi-layered complex sentence may be very clear to us -- especially if we wrote it -- but it can potentially confuse readers, which is not what we want, is it! Some great author said, "if it looks likely your reader would lose his way and need to read the sentence again from the beginning, then it is always better to rewrite your sentence."


My English writing goal this year is to write as clearly as I possibly can, and absolutely minimize ambiguity, for which I frequently try to mentally re-read my sentences from the point of view of the general reader. I should recommend this practice to polish our syntax and punctuation for maximum clarity, whenever the option is available.


Two notable closely-related previous questions that have some good answers for your situation are


(Parentheses (inside parentheses))


Is it acceptable to nest parentheses?


I shall also try to update this answer with style guide references that give authoritative guidelines on how to approach punctuation in such cases.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.