Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory

From	Daniel Bastos <dbastos@toledo.com>
Newsgroups	comp.programming, alt.algebra.help
Subject	Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory
Date	2017-09-23 08:41 -0300
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<86poahabhq.fsf@toledo.com> (permalink)
References	(7 earlier) <87fubgghsi.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Pine.NEB.4.64.1709212034090.26559@panix5.panix.com> <87k20qb3vy.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Pine.NEB.4.64.1709221937340.19630@panix5.panix.com> <oq511j$bng$1@dont-email.me>

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes:

[...]

> [...] After all, it's hardly /that/ difficult, in a discussion about
> sets, to work out that, if there are two characters you can't read,
> they are probably the union and interection symbols. [1]

[...]

> [1] Students of English are challenged to remove as many commas as
> possible from that sentence whilst, at every stage, retaining or
> improving its overall clarity.

I'm certainly not the right person to claim I have a solution here ---
as I don't know any English grammar --- but I'd just guess first that by
removing all commas there we have a perfectly grammatical phrase.  That
is,

  After all it's hardly /that/ difficult in a discussion about sets to
  work out that if there are two characters you can't read they are
  probably the union and interection symbols.

I can't say it improves clarity.  I think the commas, even if
unnecessary, are safeguards to clarity.  But I think this phrase in
particular sounds perfectly clear to me --- perhaps luckily.

Second guess:

  After all it's hardly /that/ difficult in a discussion about sets to
  work out that if there are two characters you can't read, they are
  probably the union and interection symbols.

Perhaps I shouldn't remove that last comma because we have a conditional
there implying the two sentences (1) ``if there are two [...]'' (2)
``they are probably [...]'' have a relation of subordination, that is,
the second sentence is dependent upon the first and so the comma
indicates a separation of the two.  (So we don't try to interpret it as
one ``whole'', non-subordinate sentence.)

That's my reasoning.  I couldn't back it up with grammatical reference.

In other words, I'm saying perhaps your phrase is clarified with this
this parenthesis-notation.

  After all it's hardly /that/ difficult in a discussion about sets to
  work out that (if there are two characters you can't read, they are
  probably the union and interection symbols).

That is, your phrase is

  It's hardly-difficult to work out that (X).

Since X happens to be a ``long'' subordinate phrase, so a comma is
required to organize it.

Thread

on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Daniel Bastos <dbastos@toledo.com> - 2017-09-18 12:51 -0300
  Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-09-18 20:40 +0100
    Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory William Elliot <marsh@panix.com> - 2017-09-18 21:39 -0700
      Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-09-19 13:05 +0100
        Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory William Elliot <marsh@panix.com> - 2017-09-19 19:47 -0700
          Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-09-20 14:28 +0100
            Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory William Elliot <marsh@panix.com> - 2017-09-20 21:06 -0700
              Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-09-21 17:03 +0100
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Daniel Bastos <dbastos@toledo.com> - 2017-09-21 15:06 -0300
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-09-21 21:24 +0100
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Daniel Bastos <dbastos@toledo.com> - 2017-09-21 17:57 -0300
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-09-21 23:40 +0100
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory William Elliot <marsh@panix.com> - 2017-09-21 20:45 -0700
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-09-23 02:27 +0100
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory William Elliot <marsh@panix.com> - 2017-09-22 19:49 -0700
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-09-23 08:04 +0100
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Daniel Bastos <dbastos@toledo.com> - 2017-09-23 08:41 -0300
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Paul N <gw7rib@aol.com> - 2017-09-24 14:00 -0700
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-09-23 14:50 +0100
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory William Elliot <marsh@panix.com> - 2017-09-23 22:04 -0700
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-09-24 07:39 +0100
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory William Elliot <marsh@panix.com> - 2017-09-25 01:13 -0700
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-09-25 09:46 +0100
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory William Elliot <marsh@panix.com> - 2017-09-25 21:38 -0700
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-09-26 10:19 +0100
                Modern Trash William Elliot <marsh@panix.com> - 2017-09-26 03:37 -0700
                Re: Modern Trash David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-09-26 12:52 +0200
                Re: Modern Trash Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-09-26 23:10 +0100
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-09-24 22:33 +0100
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory William Elliot <marsh@panix.com> - 2017-09-25 01:08 -0700
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-09-25 20:44 +0100
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory William Elliot <marsh@panix.com> - 2017-09-25 21:36 -0700
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-09-26 12:04 +0100
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory William Elliot <marsh@panix.com> - 2017-09-26 23:15 -0700
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-09-27 12:52 +0100
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory William Elliot <marsh@panix.com> - 2017-09-27 19:55 -0700
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2017-09-24 16:55 +0000
        Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-09-22 10:23 +0200
          Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-09-22 21:18 +0100
            Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Daniel Bastos <dbastos@toledo.com> - 2017-09-23 08:48 -0300
            Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-09-25 10:17 +0200
              Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Daniel Bastos <dbastos@toledo.com> - 2017-09-25 07:31 -0300
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-09-25 13:30 +0200
              Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-09-25 20:32 +0100
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-09-26 10:12 +0200
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-09-26 11:53 +0100
                Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-09-26 13:24 +0200
    Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Daniel Bastos <dbastos@toledo.com> - 2017-09-19 16:21 -0300
      Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-09-20 17:43 +0100
        Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Daniel Bastos <dbastos@toledo.com> - 2017-09-21 16:20 -0300
          Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Daniel Bastos <dbastos@toledo.com> - 2017-09-21 17:52 -0300
          Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-09-21 22:02 +0100
            Re: on cut edges and bonds, graph theory Daniel Bastos <dbastos@toledo.com> - 2017-09-23 13:42 -0300

csiph-web