In today's Wall Street Journal (June 12, 2008), a front-page story titled "On the Lam and Living Large: Comverse Ex-CEO Parties in Namibia"
The subject of the story is introduced this way:
Jacob "Kobi" Alexander, the Israeli-born, former chief executive of Comverse Technology Inc., a New York Software company, who is wanted in the U.S. on stock-options backdating charges.
The point of interest to me is that comma--the one right after "Israeli-born."
I would not have used it. ". . . the Israeli-born former chief executive of . . ."
Because, those adjective phrases are not in any way similar. They not like "short, stout," which both describe appearance.
This sort of comma--the one between adjectives--is giving me fits lately. I feel almost as though I've lost my bearings. At work, in other publications--I see other copyeditors who have put it in between adjectives where I would never have placed it. Or I wonder where it is, in text that I *know* has been reviewed by a copyeditor.
(In fact, I'm so troubled by this, and so weirded out at seeing commas in strange places--or not seeing them where I'd want them--that I started an e-mail group w/ the people whose copyediting judgment I trust most--I call it "Comma No Comma")
What about you--comma after Israeli-born, or not?
None. Commas separate descriptors. Anything so separated ought to be able to function as the only descriptor. But surely no one would say "Jacob "Kobi" Alexander, the Israeli-born, who is wanted in the U.S. on stock-options backdating charges". Would they?
ReplyDeleteHmm, that's a great test. I've been having trouble articulating how to tell when to use it.
ReplyDelete