48 Ambiguous Punctuation and Word Order

The order of modifiers and the placing of punctuation marks can considerably affect the sense of what is said. Everyone is familiar with boners of this sort: "Lost, a fountain-pen by a student half-full of ink," "For sale, Chow dog, eats anything, very fond of children," "See revival of Fred Astaire in Top Hat and selected shorts!" These childish jokes illustrate the need for proper disposition of modifying elements in a sentence. They do not prepare for subtle uses of the possibilities of ambiguous punctuation and word order.

Many poets characteristically exploit these possibilities. If, for example, a phrase stands ambiguously between two components, this is a fair sign that the poet intends it to go with both, not to alternate between one or the other, and from this two-way reading expects to get an economy and enrichment. The critic-poet William Empson adduces many examples. In the Seven Types of Ambiguity he shows that a part of the effectiveness of poetry depends on this. One instance must suffice. Quoting Macbeth:

If it were done, when 'tis done, then 'twere well
It were done quickly;

Empson points out that this is "double syntax" since the line end imposes its stop and yet what follows completes the sentence. It is certainly better to do murder quickly, and it is certainly true that no deed of Macbeth's sort is really over with ("done") when it is committed ("done"). Informed readers want the interpretation to include both thoughts.

We are not always reading poetry. In argument, we shall want as little of this sort of doubleness as of any other. The importance of watching these elements of punctuation and order is very apparent to legal writers, where care with "and/or" constructions, commas, and all the punctilious details of composition is often carried to what may seem to the layman absurd lengths. Yet cases have turned on carelessness with a single comma in contracts or wills. And issues have often been confused, outside the courtroom, because of divergent interpretations permitted by misplaced modifiers or haphazard punctuation.

EXAMPLE

COMMENT

Peter's will provides, "My son Peter, Jr. shall receive $5,000 per year until he has completed his military service, when he shall receive $10,000 per year and the use of my estate Blackacre, if he is married." Peter, Jr., still a bachelor, completes his military service.

Peter, Jr. will do well to see his lawyer. Does the restrictive clause "if he is married" refer only to the immediate antecedent, Blackacre, or does it refer both to Blackacre and to the receipt of the $10,000 per year? Since the restrictive clause is set off by a comma, a grammarian would apply it to both Blackacre and the $10,000 per year. Courts will not press rules of punctuation to defeat the intent of the parties where the intent is apparent. But what did the deceased Peter intend? Maybe it will take a lawsuit to determine.