Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Grammar question: Do colons take precedence over semicolons, or vice versa?
Suppose I claim that Australia is older than Canada. Then I do some research, and I make the following correction:
"I was wrong: Australia was founded in 1901; Canada was founded in 1867."
There are three clauses in the above sentence:
1. I was wrong.
2. Australia was founded in 1901.
3. Canada was founded in 1867.
Obviously, I want the semicolon to divide clause 2 from clause 3, and the colon to divide clause 1 from clauses 2 and 3. This reading would be correct if the colon takes precedence over the semicolon. But, on another reading of the sentence, the colon divides clause 1 from clause 2, while the semicolon divides clauses 1 and 2 from clause 3. This reading would be correct if the semicolon takes precedence over the colon, but it is clearly not the reading I am going for.
So, which reading is correct? Does the colon take precedence like I want it to, or does the semicolon take precedence? I would appreciate a source too.
Mark: I know there are other ways I could say the same thing using different punctuation marks. My question is whether the sentence as stated is grammatical or not.
BOSFLASH: I'm glad you think I'm right, but do you have any sources? What is TLM?
Janko: I tried to explain what I meant by "takes precedence," but perhaps not very well. I know the colon alerts the reader to the fact that what follows is an explanation (which is exactly why I used the colon). The question is whether "what follows" ends at the semicolon or at the period. If it ends at the period, then the colon takes precedence, since the colon applies to the whole sentence, while the semicolon applies only to the second and third clauses (which is what I want). If it ends at the semicolon, then the semicolon takes precedence, since the semicolon applies to the whole sentence, while the colon only applies to the first and second clauses (which is not what I want). I know this is a very nitpicky question, but I really want to know the answer.
3 Answers
- JankoLv 67 years agoFavorite Answer
A colon isn’t some kind of superior semicolon that “takes precedence,” but a punctuation mark that in this case alerts the reader that what follows is an explanation of the error. Some writers might use an m-dash instead. The two independent clauses that follow are appropriately separated by a semicolon because there is no conjunction.
You don’t need a source for this — it’s the application of the standard rules of English punctuation.
- ?Lv 67 years ago
I was wrong. Canada was founded in 1867 while Australia was not founded until 1901.
Punctuation marks are tools. Your question is like asking if a wrench takes precedence over a screwdriver. You need the right tool for the job.
