Non-restrictive appositives

[Richard Togher]

I need help distinguishing between Restrictive appositives from non-restrictives ones. Eg

"He is known by the title, Lord of the Manor"

"He lives at the house, 35 Duke street"

I have read that the use of commas after "title" and "house" in the above is correct because the appositives are non-restrictive. But i'm not sure why these qualify as non-restrictive appositives (ie i wouldn't know whether or not to off-set them with commas).

Could it not be the case that you may need to restrict the appositive to the particular tilte or house in question, otherwise how would you know which title or house the sentence if referring to.

The modifier in the following should not be off-set by comma, but again i'm not sure why:

"was it the ommission of a comma after the word STORY"

This should not use a comma because it has the 'mention' of the word "story" rather than its normal use.

However, this explainatin needs some clarification for me.

Can anyone help.

Many thanks,

Richard

[Mister Micawber]

.
Commas have much also to do with clarity and clutter. In your first instance, the comma would be unnecessary if the title proper were otherwise set off:

He is known by the title "Lord of the Manor". Compare this to your later example, the omission of a comma after the word STORY, where the word is set off by its majuscules.

Your second example sounds odd to me in any case; is it perhaps BrE? I would not be entrapped by that appositive at all, but write:

He lives at the house at 35 Duke Street.
.

[Richard Togher]

Dear Mr Micawber,

The original source of the examples i gave was the site of a professor of english at a university in illonois.

He insists that whereas the last sentence i quoted (...the word STORY) should off-set the modifier, either by italics, quotes or some other means, the first two must be off-set by commas because, he says, the modifiers are non-restrictive.

i don't know why he says that one of the sentnces can be off-set with italics or quotes but the other two must each use a comma.

Why do you think he says this?

Many thanks,

Richard

[Mister Micawber]

Why do you think he says this?
Honestly? Because he found it-- or wrote it-- in a style manual. He is overly prescriptive. Professors have their weaknesses too (and I should know-- my grandfather was a professor at Illinois State U).
.

[Dr. Jamshid Ibrahim]

I need help distinguishing between Restrictive appositives from non-restrictives ones. Eg

"He is known by the title, Lord of the Manor"

"He lives at the house, 35 Duke street"

I have read that the use of commas after "title" and "house" in the above is correct because the appositives are non-restrictive. But i'm not sure why these qualify as non-restrictive appositives (ie i wouldn't know whether or not to off-set them with commas).

Could it not be the case that you may need to restrict the appositive to the particular tilte or house in question, otherwise how would you know which title or house the sentence if referring to.

The modifier in the following should not be off-set by comma, but again i'm not sure why:

"was it the ommission of a comma after the word STORY"

This should not use a comma because it has the 'mention' of the word "story" rather than its normal use.

However, this explainatin needs some clarification for me.

Can anyone help.

Many thanks,

Richard

In a way they are like defining and non-defining clauses. The sentences above qualify as non-restrictive because they can stand alone without the additions. If you are still confused I would suggest: consult "A Grammar of Contemporary English by Quirk / Greenbaum / Leech / Svartvik Beginning from Page 620 they provide a detailed discussion of Apposition. The most comprehensive discussion. Wikipedia's entry is not really very useful. General grammar books avoid any detailed discussion.

[danmahaffey]

Dr. Ibrahim is our Alexander the Great and, with one fell stroke, he rends our Gordian knot of blindness, unshackling us from our muddle and leading us to knowledge and insight. I thank you, sir.

[Dr. Jamshid Ibrahim]

Dr. Ibrahim is our Alexander the Great and, with one fell stroke, he rends our Gordian knot of blindness, unshackling us from our muddle and leading us to knowledge and insight. I thank you, sir.

Thanks Dan. Do you think I deserve all that honour? Thank you for your kindness and readiness to interact and help. We need more of people like you. Still teachers like us Dan not only answer questions but learn a lot from our students as well.
Best
Jamshid

[Richard Togher]

Dear Dr Ibrahim,

Thank you for suggesting this text book. I will see if i can purchase a copy on-line.

Meanwhile

[Richard Togher]

Dear Dr Ibrahim,

Thank you for suggesting this text book.

I while try to purchase a copy on-line.

Meanwhile may i ask you to clarify whether or not you included the sentence "... ommision of the word STORY", when you said "all of the above" stand alone without the additions.

Thank you for taking the time to clarify this.

[Dr. Jamshid Ibrahim]

Dear Dr Ibrahim,

Thank you for suggesting this text book.

I while try to purchase a copy on-line.

Meanwhile may i ask you to clarify whether or not you included the sentence "... ommision of the word STORY", when you said "all of the above" stand alone without the additions.

Thank you for taking the time to clarify this.

No, I didn't because it is different (see No 4 below). There is no subordiante or superordinate appositive here or not clear which one is subordinate:
My friend Dan came here (not clear which of the appositives is subordinate).
In non-restrictive apposition the appositives have different information value with one of the appositives assuming a subordinate role in the distribution of information. Its subordinate role is reflected in the fact that it is marked by punctuation (in formal writing).

1. BTW sometimes you can make the same non-restrictive apposition restrictive (as with defining/non-defining clauses) but the meaning changes accordingly:
Mr Smith, the lawyer, came here yesterday.
Mr Smith the lawyer came here yesterday (Mr Smith the lawyer as opposed to any other Mr Smith you know) This is one of the typical Cambridge Advanced or Profiency Certificate questions.

2. Indicators of apposition can be either:
- lexical: namely, including (in writing and speech)
- separate tone units (in speech)
- punctuation:commas (in writing).

3.Typically, appositves are non-restrictive noun phrases

4.Three types of restrictive apposition occur with noun phrases:
- The first type: the first noun phrase starts with a determiner whereas the second noun phrase (which is more specific) is usally a name: The German Steffi Graf beat her.
This type is also used with words that are cited and with the titles of works:
She said I shouldn't use the word half-caste. (this is the same as your "story" example)

- The second type resembles titles. They generally precede the name: Prince Charles
- The third is the reverse of the first (the name comes first and the noun phrase follows:
He doesn't pay but Laura the student does.

[Dr. Jamshid Ibrahim]

Dear Dr Ibrahim,

Thank you for suggesting this text book. I will see if i can purchase a copy on-line.

Meanwhile

Yes, you can but I am afraid it is very expensive. Something like 150 Dollars. But it is worth the money. I have even seen used copies for less money offered by Amazon. Still you need to check. Another useful book is:
The oxford English Grammar (Sidney Greenbaum)