Attention grammar nazis

[Shadow Conception]

"The roots of mankind?s historical problems have always been epitomized by solutions either tranquil and passive or volatile and aggressive."

or

"The roots of mankind?s historical problems have always been epitomized by solutions either tranquil and passive, or volatile and aggressive."

or

"The roots of mankind?s historical problems have always been epitomized by solutions, either tranquil and passive, or volatile and aggressive."

I can't figure out which one. This is also the first sentence of my essay, so screwing it up would look pretty bad.

 

[IronWing]

"The roots of mankind?s historical problems have always been women."

 

[ElFenix]

using passive voice as the first sentence?


edit: wtf are you trying to say? the solutions to mankind's historical problems have caused later problems?

 

[Crono]

3rd option. I is not no nazi tohugh.

I would use a colon after "solutions" instead of a comma.

 

[ChaoZ]

None of them make sense to me.

 

[daveshel]

None of the above.

"The roots of mankind?s historical problems have always been epitomized by solutions, either tranquil and passive or volatile and aggressive."

Be nicer to those of us who bothered to learn grammar!

 

[Shadow Conception]

Originally posted by: daveshel
None of the above.

"The roots of mankind?s historical problems have always been epitomized by solutions, either tranquil and passive or volatile and aggressive."

Be nicer to those of us who bothered to learn grammar!

I should've put a none of the above option, I suppose. Thanks a lot!

 

[Crono]

It sounds like you are being overly fancy with your words. "Mankind's problems throughout history have been either tranquil and passive, or volatile and aggressive".
And I could probably simplify it more without losing any of the meaning.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

That sentence is complete nonsense. Do you know what the word epitomize means? It means to serve as the typical or ideal example of. Your sentence indicates that the solutions have turned the roots of problems into ideal examples. That doesn't honestly make any sense.

 

[Passions]

Originally posted by: Crono
It sounds like you are being overly fancy with your words. "Mankind's problems throughout history have been either tranquil and passive, or volatile and aggressive".
And I could probably simplify it more without losing any of the meaning.

WRONG! No comma needed before or.

 

[Crono]

Originally posted by: Passions

Originally posted by: Crono
It sounds like you are being overly fancy with your words. "Mankind's problems throughout history have been either tranquil and passive, or volatile and aggressive".
And I could probably simplify it more without losing any of the meaning.

WRONG! No comma needed before or.

Read the sentence out loud

 

[Polish3d]

Scrap that whole sentence, it's nonsensical.



Mankind's problems have always been solutions passive or aggressive?

 

[Passions]

Originally posted by: Crono

Originally posted by: Passions

Originally posted by: Crono
It sounds like you are being overly fancy with your words. "Mankind's problems throughout history have been either tranquil and passive, or volatile and aggressive".
And I could probably simplify it more without losing any of the meaning.

WRONG! No comma needed before or.

Read the sentence out loud

The comma only goes before or if it is linking two independent clauses.

"COMMA RULE #3 ? THE COMMA IN A COMPOUND SENTENCE: Use a comma before and, but, or, nor, for, so, or yet to join two independent clauses that form a compound sentence. "

http://www.towson.edu/ows/ModuleCOMMA.htm

"volatile and aggressive" cannot stand on its own as an independent clause.

 

[imported_Imp]

Both sentences are awkward.

Small observation, just say 'demonstrated/illustrated/shown by/etc in place of epitomizes. I had a professor in Sociology whom made us read one of his papers, my god, we know you're smart, stop trying so hard. Another example was an article in Time by Sarah Powers. Geez, tone it down a notch.

 

[daveshel]

Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy
That sentence is complete nonsense. Do you know what the word epitomize means? It means to serve as the typical or ideal example of. Your sentence indicates that the solutions have turned the roots of problems into ideal examples. That doesn't honestly make any sense.

You're right. I didn't notice that.

 

[Adam8281]

None of the above. Besides the problem with "epitomized," you're essentially saying nothing because you're saying everything. You're saying that mankind's problems have been either tranquil or volatile (passive/aggressive). Well duh - what else is there? Unless you're about to go the Goldilocks route and say that there's something in the middle that's "just right," then I think you're better off without the sentence because it covers all the bases, and therefore doesn't mean anything (like saying, "today when I left the house, the bedroom light was either on or off")

 

[ruu]

People have already pointed out the nonsensical meaning of the sentence in question, but as far as the grammatical correctness of the original is concerned, I would say that the first option is the most classically correct.

The second one doesn't work because you don't need a comma to separate two items in a list, and the third one doesn't work because the way you have syntactically arranged the sentence indicates that the phrases "tranquil and passive" and "volatile and aggressive" are supposed to be essential adjective clauses, not non-essential. Only non-essential clauses get commas.

In other words, the second is totally incorrect, and the third is correct but changes the (apparently intended) meaning.

 

[Turin39789]

Originally posted by: ruu
People have already pointed out the nonsensical meaning of the sentence in question, but as far as the grammatical correctness of the original is concerned, I would say that the first option is the most classically correct.

The second one doesn't work because you don't need a comma to separate two items in a list, and the third one doesn't work because the way you have syntactically arranged the sentence indicates that the phrases "tranquil and passive" and "volatile and aggressive" are supposed to be essential adjective clauses, not non-essential. Only non-essential clauses get commas.

In other words, the second is totally incorrect, and the third is correct but changes the (apparently intended) meaning.

The first one is correct.
The second one is incorrect.
The third one is also incorrect.

"The roots of mankind?s historical problems have always been epitomized by solutions, either tranquil and passive, or volatile and aggressive."


The easy sniff test is you should be able to remove the area between the two commas completly.

"The roots of mankind?s historical problems have always been epitomized by solutions or volatile and aggressive." = fail

 

[ruu]

Originally posted by: Turin39789
The first one is correct.
The second one is incorrect.
The third one is also incorrect.

"The roots of mankind?s historical problems have always been epitomized by solutions, either tranquil and passive, or volatile and aggressive."


The easy sniff test is you should be able to remove the area between the two commas completly.

"The roots of mankind?s historical problems have always been epitomized by solutions or volatile and aggressive." = fail

Oops, my bad, you're right. I had thought that the item-in-a-list comma wasn't there in the third one, but I guess it is.

I thought that it read:

The roots of mankind?s historical problems have always been epitomized by solutions, either tranquil and passive or volatile and aggressive.

 

[HumblePie]

Originally posted by: Passions

Originally posted by: Crono

Originally posted by: Passions

Originally posted by: Crono
It sounds like you are being overly fancy with your words. "Mankind's problems throughout history have been either tranquil and passive, or volatile and aggressive".
And I could probably simplify it more without losing any of the meaning.

WRONG! No comma needed before or.

Read the sentence out loud

The comma only goes before or if it is linking two independent clauses.

"COMMA RULE #3 ? THE COMMA IN A COMPOUND SENTENCE: Use a comma before and, but, or, nor, for, so, or yet to join two independent clauses that form a compound sentence. "

http://www.towson.edu/ows/ModuleCOMMA.htm

"volatile and aggressive" cannot stand on its own as an independent clause.

If it was a compound sentence. It's a list. You use commas in a list such as shown in the sentences below.

My grocery list today is pickles, peas, carrots, and tuna. Dessert today could be ice cream, cake, or pudding.

Notice you can use commas in many more instances than a compound sentence.

Now, if you are joining two compound sentences or using multiple lists, you need to use a semi colon to separate them out. While technically correct, very rarely is using a semi colon the proper thing to do. It's a pain in the butt to read that way. Much better to rewrite the sentence to get your point across instead of trying to sound "hoity-toity."

 

[Trey22]

Here's your solution.

 

[dullard]

Just break it down to a simple sentence. Why does ATOT always make things so complicated?

1) I want either milk and cookies or bread and cheese.
2) I want either milk and cookies, or bread and cheese.
3) I want, either milk and cookies, or bread and cheese.

Only one answer should jump out as the correct answer. If not, make it even more simple.

1) I want either cookies or bread.
2) I want either cookies, or bread.
3) I want, either cookies, or bread.

Still just one answer is correct. I hope you can see the correct answer. Then use that punctuation in your own sentence.

That said, your sentence sucks.
1) It looks like you are on the verge of a run-on and no one likes run-on sentences because they are too hard to read making your eyes hurt and give you a headache which will lead to lower grades and you don't want that do you because you shouldn't want it.
2) It furthermore materializes analogous your thesaurus is being implemented too frequently.
3) You've got a redundant "historical" in a sentence that is in the past tense. For example, would I say that "I historically grew up in diapers." No. The "historical" part is redundant. You've already said that. You don't need to say it again. Saying things over and over and over and over again is too much. So, the "historical" part is redundant. Thus, the "historical" part is redundant.
4) Sentences have been written in the passive voice. That can be looked down upon. It could have sounded dull if you left it that way.
5) Just flat out say "passive or agressive". Forget or ignore or disregard or avoid or bypass trying to give each idea two duplicate or pairs of words or names or thoughts.