Reply
Tue 19 Apr, 2011 10:42 pm
I think "include, but are not limited, to the following" should be "include, but are not limited to, the following."
Because:
"are not limited to the following" works, but "include to the following" does not work.
Am I on the right track?
Context:
We have reviewed your firm’s response of November 19, 2010, and note that it lacks sufficient corrective actions.
Specific deviations observed during the inspection include, but are not limited, to the following:
1. Failure of your quality unit to ensure that materials are appropriately tested and the results are reported.
Note:
It is a letter from FDA to a manufacturere in Ninbo, China. Not available online.
Quote:Specific deviations observed during the inspection include, but are not limited, to the following:
My opinion is that the second comma is not required. In addition there is a definite need for a colon at the end of the statement as in the original. You did not use a colon in your "i think it should be...." statement.
We use a comma to indicate a slight pause in speaking. I feel that is not required in the case of the second comma.
I would write the statement as;
....include, but are not limited to the following:
I will be worth wating for other posters opinions on this.
@dadpad,
I was taught that a comma — or a dash — belongs on both sides of a parenthetical phrase. To figure out if a phrase is parenthetical, take it out. Does the sentence still make sense? Then the phrase is parenthetical and needs separation on both sides.
In all, I agree with Oristar that the sentence should read:
Specific deviations observed during the inspection include, but are not limited to, the following:
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace