What kind of phrase is “…better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder”?
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Predictive-policing systems are imperfect, better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder.
I know that "better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder." is describing predictive-policing systems, but is it correct to write it as
Predictive-policing systems are imperfect and are better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder.
Can someone explain the meaning difference between these two versions of sentences?
modifiers absolute
edited Nov 5 at 20:42
Laurel
29.4k655104
asked Jun 7 at 7:00
ram annepu
42
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Predictive-policing systems are imperfect, better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder.
I know that "better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder." is describing predictive-policing systems, but is it correct to write it as
Predictive-policing systems are imperfect and are better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder.
Can someone explain the meaning difference between these two versions of sentences?
modifiers absolute
edited Nov 5 at 20:42
Laurel
29.4k655104
asked Jun 7 at 7:00
ram annepu
42
It looks like a confused sentence to me. The second part, no matter how it's written, doesn't logically follow from the first part. In order to make any sense of it, one way of rephrasing it could be: Predictive-policing systems are imperfect, and they analyze different subjects with different levels of accuracy. For example, they are better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder. (A semicolon could be used to keep it as a single sentence, but it seems simpler as two.)
– Jason Bassford
Jun 7 at 8:37
2
Here, 'better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder' is a parenthetical, an adjectival (describing the subject [referent] 'Predictive-policing systems') in apposition to the adjective 'imperfect' and detailing at least one area of imperfection. As it is a parenthetical, a single comma or dash may be used to offset (as the parenthetical is terminal), or a pair of brackets. I prefer the more lightweight comma. Zero punctuation is not an option in this case.
– Edwin Ashworth
Jun 7 at 10:30
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Predictive-policing systems are imperfect, better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder.
I know that "better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder." is describing predictive-policing systems, but is it correct to write it as
Predictive-policing systems are imperfect and are better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder.
Can someone explain the meaning difference between these two versions of sentences?
modifiers absolute
edited Nov 5 at 20:42
Laurel
29.4k655104
asked Jun 7 at 7:00
ram annepu
42
Predictive-policing systems are imperfect, better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder.
I know that "better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder." is describing predictive-policing systems, but is it correct to write it as
Predictive-policing systems are imperfect and are better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder.
Can someone explain the meaning difference between these two versions of sentences?
modifiers absolute
modifiers absolute
edited Nov 5 at 20:42
Laurel
29.4k655104
asked Jun 7 at 7:00
ram annepu
42
edited Nov 5 at 20:42
Laurel
29.4k655104
asked Jun 7 at 7:00
ram annepu
42
edited Nov 5 at 20:42
Laurel
29.4k655104
edited Nov 5 at 20:42
Laurel
29.4k655104
edited Nov 5 at 20:42
Laurel
29.4k655104
29.4k655104
asked Jun 7 at 7:00
ram annepu
42
asked Jun 7 at 7:00
ram annepu
42
asked Jun 7 at 7:00
ram annepu
42
42
It looks like a confused sentence to me. The second part, no matter how it's written, doesn't logically follow from the first part. In order to make any sense of it, one way of rephrasing it could be: Predictive-policing systems are imperfect, and they analyze different subjects with different levels of accuracy. For example, they are better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder. (A semicolon could be used to keep it as a single sentence, but it seems simpler as two.)
– Jason Bassford
Jun 7 at 8:37
2
Here, 'better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder' is a parenthetical, an adjectival (describing the subject [referent] 'Predictive-policing systems') in apposition to the adjective 'imperfect' and detailing at least one area of imperfection. As it is a parenthetical, a single comma or dash may be used to offset (as the parenthetical is terminal), or a pair of brackets. I prefer the more lightweight comma. Zero punctuation is not an option in this case.
– Edwin Ashworth
Jun 7 at 10:30
add a comment |
It looks like a confused sentence to me. The second part, no matter how it's written, doesn't logically follow from the first part. In order to make any sense of it, one way of rephrasing it could be: Predictive-policing systems are imperfect, and they analyze different subjects with different levels of accuracy. For example, they are better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder. (A semicolon could be used to keep it as a single sentence, but it seems simpler as two.)
– Jason Bassford
Jun 7 at 8:37
2
Here, 'better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder' is a parenthetical, an adjectival (describing the subject [referent] 'Predictive-policing systems') in apposition to the adjective 'imperfect' and detailing at least one area of imperfection. As it is a parenthetical, a single comma or dash may be used to offset (as the parenthetical is terminal), or a pair of brackets. I prefer the more lightweight comma. Zero punctuation is not an option in this case.
– Edwin Ashworth
Jun 7 at 10:30
It looks like a confused sentence to me. The second part, no matter how it's written, doesn't logically follow from the first part. In order to make any sense of it, one way of rephrasing it could be: Predictive-policing systems are imperfect, and they analyze different subjects with different levels of accuracy. For example, they are better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder. (A semicolon could be used to keep it as a single sentence, but it seems simpler as two.)
– Jason Bassford
Jun 7 at 8:37
It looks like a confused sentence to me. The second part, no matter how it's written, doesn't logically follow from the first part. In order to make any sense of it, one way of rephrasing it could be: Predictive-policing systems are imperfect, and they analyze different subjects with different levels of accuracy. For example, they are better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder. (A semicolon could be used to keep it as a single sentence, but it seems simpler as two.)
– Jason Bassford
Jun 7 at 8:37
2
2
Here, 'better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder' is a parenthetical, an adjectival (describing the subject [referent] 'Predictive-policing systems') in apposition to the adjective 'imperfect' and detailing at least one area of imperfection. As it is a parenthetical, a single comma or dash may be used to offset (as the parenthetical is terminal), or a pair of brackets. I prefer the more lightweight comma. Zero punctuation is not an option in this case.
– Edwin Ashworth
Jun 7 at 10:30
Here, 'better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder' is a parenthetical, an adjectival (describing the subject [referent] 'Predictive-policing systems') in apposition to the adjective 'imperfect' and detailing at least one area of imperfection. As it is a parenthetical, a single comma or dash may be used to offset (as the parenthetical is terminal), or a pair of brackets. I prefer the more lightweight comma. Zero punctuation is not an option in this case.
– Edwin Ashworth
Jun 7 at 10:30
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
Your first usage, with the comma, may be better written with a colon. Predictive-policing systems are imperfect: better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder. The meaning is then more clear. The subordinate clause explains how the systems are imperfect.
With the "and are," the meaning changes subtly. You create two independent clauses with parallel structure, joined by the conjunction "and." You could expand it like this to understand the difference in meaning. Predictive-policing systems are imperfect. Predictive-policing systems are better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder. In this construction, the second part is not necessarily explanatory of the first part. The imperfection might be unstated: buggy software or high cost. Using a colon clarifies the semantic intent: that you are explaining the imperfection.
answered Jun 7 at 9:06
Lofty Withers
81567
1
I'm a fan of the em dash in cases like this—you can't go wrong! Chicago states: "The em dash...is the most commonly used and most versatile of the dashes. [They're] used to set off an amplifying or explanatory element and in that sense can function as an alternative to parentheses, commas, or a colon..."
– Jas. MacOisdealbha
Jun 7 at 14:11
that was really helpful. thank you @lofty withers
– ram annepu
Jun 7 at 15:40
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
This is a common and typical pattern of structuring such sentences. It has a complex meaning.
Predictive-policing systems are imperfect, better at than of, say, murder.
- Predictive-policing systems are imperfect.
- Being imperfect, they are only suited to certain types of applications and not to others.
- Finding patterns of burglary is one type of application. It does not need a perfect system.
- (Solving a case of) murder is another type. It is not amenable to an imperfect system like predictive-policing.
HTH.
answered Jun 7 at 12:20
Kris
32.3k541116
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
Your first usage, with the comma, may be better written with a colon. Predictive-policing systems are imperfect: better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder. The meaning is then more clear. The subordinate clause explains how the systems are imperfect.
With the "and are," the meaning changes subtly. You create two independent clauses with parallel structure, joined by the conjunction "and." You could expand it like this to understand the difference in meaning. Predictive-policing systems are imperfect. Predictive-policing systems are better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder. In this construction, the second part is not necessarily explanatory of the first part. The imperfection might be unstated: buggy software or high cost. Using a colon clarifies the semantic intent: that you are explaining the imperfection.
answered Jun 7 at 9:06
Lofty Withers
81567
1
I'm a fan of the em dash in cases like this—you can't go wrong! Chicago states: "The em dash...is the most commonly used and most versatile of the dashes. [They're] used to set off an amplifying or explanatory element and in that sense can function as an alternative to parentheses, commas, or a colon..."
– Jas. MacOisdealbha
Jun 7 at 14:11
that was really helpful. thank you @lofty withers
– ram annepu
Jun 7 at 15:40
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
Your first usage, with the comma, may be better written with a colon. Predictive-policing systems are imperfect: better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder. The meaning is then more clear. The subordinate clause explains how the systems are imperfect.
With the "and are," the meaning changes subtly. You create two independent clauses with parallel structure, joined by the conjunction "and." You could expand it like this to understand the difference in meaning. Predictive-policing systems are imperfect. Predictive-policing systems are better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder. In this construction, the second part is not necessarily explanatory of the first part. The imperfection might be unstated: buggy software or high cost. Using a colon clarifies the semantic intent: that you are explaining the imperfection.
answered Jun 7 at 9:06
Lofty Withers
81567
1
I'm a fan of the em dash in cases like this—you can't go wrong! Chicago states: "The em dash...is the most commonly used and most versatile of the dashes. [They're] used to set off an amplifying or explanatory element and in that sense can function as an alternative to parentheses, commas, or a colon..."
– Jas. MacOisdealbha
Jun 7 at 14:11
that was really helpful. thank you @lofty withers
– ram annepu
Jun 7 at 15:40
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
Your first usage, with the comma, may be better written with a colon. Predictive-policing systems are imperfect: better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder. The meaning is then more clear. The subordinate clause explains how the systems are imperfect.
With the "and are," the meaning changes subtly. You create two independent clauses with parallel structure, joined by the conjunction "and." You could expand it like this to understand the difference in meaning. Predictive-policing systems are imperfect. Predictive-policing systems are better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder. In this construction, the second part is not necessarily explanatory of the first part. The imperfection might be unstated: buggy software or high cost. Using a colon clarifies the semantic intent: that you are explaining the imperfection.
answered Jun 7 at 9:06
Lofty Withers
81567
Your first usage, with the comma, may be better written with a colon. Predictive-policing systems are imperfect: better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder. The meaning is then more clear. The subordinate clause explains how the systems are imperfect.
With the "and are," the meaning changes subtly. You create two independent clauses with parallel structure, joined by the conjunction "and." You could expand it like this to understand the difference in meaning. Predictive-policing systems are imperfect. Predictive-policing systems are better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder. In this construction, the second part is not necessarily explanatory of the first part. The imperfection might be unstated: buggy software or high cost. Using a colon clarifies the semantic intent: that you are explaining the imperfection.
answered Jun 7 at 9:06
Lofty Withers
81567
answered Jun 7 at 9:06
Lofty Withers
81567
answered Jun 7 at 9:06
Lofty Withers
81567
answered Jun 7 at 9:06
Lofty Withers
81567
81567
1
I'm a fan of the em dash in cases like this—you can't go wrong! Chicago states: "The em dash...is the most commonly used and most versatile of the dashes. [They're] used to set off an amplifying or explanatory element and in that sense can function as an alternative to parentheses, commas, or a colon..."
– Jas. MacOisdealbha
Jun 7 at 14:11
that was really helpful. thank you @lofty withers
– ram annepu
Jun 7 at 15:40
add a comment |
1
I'm a fan of the em dash in cases like this—you can't go wrong! Chicago states: "The em dash...is the most commonly used and most versatile of the dashes. [They're] used to set off an amplifying or explanatory element and in that sense can function as an alternative to parentheses, commas, or a colon..."
– Jas. MacOisdealbha
Jun 7 at 14:11
that was really helpful. thank you @lofty withers
– ram annepu
Jun 7 at 15:40
1
1
I'm a fan of the em dash in cases like this—you can't go wrong! Chicago states: "The em dash...is the most commonly used and most versatile of the dashes. [They're] used to set off an amplifying or explanatory element and in that sense can function as an alternative to parentheses, commas, or a colon..."
– Jas. MacOisdealbha
Jun 7 at 14:11
I'm a fan of the em dash in cases like this—you can't go wrong! Chicago states: "The em dash...is the most commonly used and most versatile of the dashes. [They're] used to set off an amplifying or explanatory element and in that sense can function as an alternative to parentheses, commas, or a colon..."
– Jas. MacOisdealbha
Jun 7 at 14:11
that was really helpful. thank you @lofty withers
– ram annepu
Jun 7 at 15:40
that was really helpful. thank you @lofty withers
– ram annepu
Jun 7 at 15:40
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
This is a common and typical pattern of structuring such sentences. It has a complex meaning.
Predictive-policing systems are imperfect, better at than of, say, murder.
- Predictive-policing systems are imperfect.
- Being imperfect, they are only suited to certain types of applications and not to others.
- Finding patterns of burglary is one type of application. It does not need a perfect system.
- (Solving a case of) murder is another type. It is not amenable to an imperfect system like predictive-policing.
HTH.
answered Jun 7 at 12:20
Kris
32.3k541116
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
This is a common and typical pattern of structuring such sentences. It has a complex meaning.
Predictive-policing systems are imperfect, better at than of, say, murder.
- Predictive-policing systems are imperfect.
- Being imperfect, they are only suited to certain types of applications and not to others.
- Finding patterns of burglary is one type of application. It does not need a perfect system.
- (Solving a case of) murder is another type. It is not amenable to an imperfect system like predictive-policing.
HTH.
answered Jun 7 at 12:20
Kris
32.3k541116
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
This is a common and typical pattern of structuring such sentences. It has a complex meaning.
Predictive-policing systems are imperfect, better at than of, say, murder.
- Predictive-policing systems are imperfect.
- Being imperfect, they are only suited to certain types of applications and not to others.
- Finding patterns of burglary is one type of application. It does not need a perfect system.
- (Solving a case of) murder is another type. It is not amenable to an imperfect system like predictive-policing.
HTH.
answered Jun 7 at 12:20
Kris
32.3k541116
This is a common and typical pattern of structuring such sentences. It has a complex meaning.
Predictive-policing systems are imperfect, better at than of, say, murder.
- Predictive-policing systems are imperfect.
- Being imperfect, they are only suited to certain types of applications and not to others.
- Finding patterns of burglary is one type of application. It does not need a perfect system.
- (Solving a case of) murder is another type. It is not amenable to an imperfect system like predictive-policing.
HTH.
answered Jun 7 at 12:20
Kris
32.3k541116
answered Jun 7 at 12:20
Kris
32.3k541116
answered Jun 7 at 12:20
Kris
32.3k541116
answered Jun 7 at 12:20
Kris
32.3k541116
32.3k541116
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f449380%2fwhat-kind-of-phrase-is-better-at-finding-patterns-of-burglary-than-of-say%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
It looks like a confused sentence to me. The second part, no matter how it's written, doesn't logically follow from the first part. In order to make any sense of it, one way of rephrasing it could be: Predictive-policing systems are imperfect, and they analyze different subjects with different levels of accuracy. For example, they are better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder. (A semicolon could be used to keep it as a single sentence, but it seems simpler as two.)
– Jason Bassford
Jun 7 at 8:37
2
Here, 'better at finding patterns of burglary than of, say, murder' is a parenthetical, an adjectival (describing the subject [referent] 'Predictive-policing systems') in apposition to the adjective 'imperfect' and detailing at least one area of imperfection. As it is a parenthetical, a single comma or dash may be used to offset (as the parenthetical is terminal), or a pair of brackets. I prefer the more lightweight comma. Zero punctuation is not an option in this case.
– Edwin Ashworth
Jun 7 at 10:30