Tuesday, July 21, 2009

Comma, No Comma?

Karen brought me an entire set. 

And apparently, I'm being wishy-washy, for one thing, and for another, she doesn't quite agree w/ me.

Here's what I apparently signed off on, after reading the proof (and adding a couple of commas):

a soft, French washed-rind cheese
a buttery, French washed-rind [cheese]
a hard Dutch Gouda
a crumbly, French goat cheese

So why didn't I put a comma after hard? That's completely parallel to the others.

And, I think the comma after crumbly is stupid.

So what was I thinking w/ the comma after soft and buttery?

Karen says: no commas on any of them; Morgan routed it w/o commas.

I apparently put them in. Inconsistently.

Perhaps the presence of the "washed-rind" is affecting me?

[washed-rind cheese] and [Dutch Gouda] and [French {goat cheese}] all equal one base noun (cheese/Gouda/goat cheese) plus one descriptor (washed-rind, Dutch, French).

No, that's not making any sense--not unless I make [Dutch Gouda] the base noun. Then, each base noun gets "one free adjective," and any extras require a comma to join the party?

I don't know.  Like I said the first time I ever did a "Comma, No Comma" post, sometimes I wonder if I know what I'm doing w/ these commas. Or I worry that I'm crazy.

What do you think?

(I think I'm going to bow to Karen's wisdom and tell her to take them back out. Two of them are really stupid w/ commas, even to me, and so since the others are parallel, I'm going to blindly trust the "math.")