how would you punctuate this sentence?

[Gregg Bell]

Originally Posted by Dr. Drib

I wouldn't use any of yours. I would use mine:

1) Her vulnerability, including an inability to tolerate ridicule, had led her to kill another human being.

Another point: You use too many pronouns in one sentence.

By Greg Bell and Don Broyles

Yeah, there are a lot of pronouns in mine. Yours changes the meaning just enough though. Hmm. I don't know. It's all about meaning ultimately.

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by Gregg Bell

No, you're right. They're two different things.

In that case I would put an and not a comma.
Makes more sense.

[Gregg Bell]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

#1.

Write it without the clause and there's no problem:

Her vulnerability had led her to kill another human being.

To add the clause, you need to have both commas.

Her vulnerability, her inability to tolerate ridicule, had led her to kill another human being.

Although I would prefer a small change to

Her vulnerability, an inability to tolerate ridicule, had led her to kill another human being.

Now yours has "an inability to tolerate ridicule" as an appositive phrase.

Interesting in that each tiny change makes a nuance change in meaning.

[AnnGirdharry]

hello Gregg,

Actually I have a preference for
3) = another way

Her vulnerability, her inability to tolerate ridicule, led her to kill.

because -
The final 'had' hammers the sentence too hard and takes out the immediacy (the reader intuits this is in the past)
human being ?- well, if it's a suspense then the reader will intuit also that she killed a person (and not a dog, cat etc.)

best,
Ann Girdharry

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by AnnGirdharry

hello Gregg,

Actually I have a preference for
3) = another way

Her vulnerability, her inability to tolerate ridicule, led her to kill.

because -
The final 'had' hammers the sentence too hard and takes out the immediacy (the reader intuits this is in the past)
human being ?- well, if it's a suspense then the reader will intuit also that she killed a person (and not a dog, cat etc.)

It changes the tense from the pluperfect to the perfect, certainly. Whether or not that is a desirable thing is for the author to decide; as you say, they have different meanings.

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by Gregg Bell

Now yours has "an inability to tolerate ridicule" as an appositive phrase.

Interesting in that each tiny change makes a nuance change in meaning.

Ah - I hadn't realise that "her inability to tolerate ridicule" was a different attribute to "her vulnerability". In that case I'd have to suggest that the right wording is

Her vulnerability and her inability to tolerate ridicule had led her to kill another human being.

I don't think the first comma is right at all, if that's the meaning you meant.

It's interesting to have an example where the punctuation really does change the meaning.

[issybird]

I also thought they were the same attribute. Since they're not, I'd lose "vulnerability" altogether as weak and amorphous.

"Her inability to tolerate ridicule had led her to kill." (I agree about the human being v. alien.)

[Gregg Bell]

Originally Posted by AnnGirdharry

hello Gregg,

Actually I have a preference for
3) = another way

Her vulnerability, her inability to tolerate ridicule, led her to kill.

because -
The final 'had' hammers the sentence too hard and takes out the immediacy (the reader intuits this is in the past)
human being ?- well, if it's a suspense then the reader will intuit also that she killed a person (and not a dog, cat etc.)

best,
Ann Girdharry

Hi Ann. I agree that that ",had" is a big hit on the sentence. "led" is much better.

[Gregg Bell]

You know what, I have gotten completely turned around with this sentence. I do think that "her vulnerability" and "her inability to tolerate ridicule" are the same thing. When it was suggested they weren't I thought, 'Well, they're not exactly the same thing.'

But let's put it this way: I intended them to be the same thing. That was my meaning.

[Rizla]

Her vulnerability and inability to tolerate ridicule had led her to kill another human being.

Kiss (Keep it simple, stupid). The meaning was perfectly clear in the original, but was longer winded than it needed or wanted to be.

IMO the edited down sentence is fine. "There is no greater urge than to edit another person's work."

[arjaybe]

Originally Posted by Rizla

"There is no greater urge than to edit another person's work."

Dang! I can't think of a good way to edit that.

[Gregg Bell]

Originally Posted by Rizla

Kiss (Keep it simple, stupid).

Good advice!

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by Gregg Bell

You know what, I have gotten completely turned around with this sentence. I do think that "her vulnerability" and "her inability to tolerate ridicule" are the same thing. When it was suggested they weren't I thought, 'Well, they're not exactly the same thing.'

But let's put it this way: I intended them to be the same thing. That was my meaning.

In that case, I think you need both commas.

[Gregg Bell]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

In that case, I think you need both commas.

Agreed.

[bookman156]

Bit late to the party, but happened to read this thread.

The best way to punctuate the sentence is clearly: 'Her vulnerability, her inability to tolerate ridicule, had led her to kill another human being.'

Has she killed other human beings? Or is this her first and perhaps only? The sentence is ambiguous in that regard, despite the effort to punctuate it correctly.