Can include but is not limited to

Is this, or perhaps the previous version correct? There are many activities, including, but not limited to, running, jumping, and swimming. Eh, maybe that's too many. Does this justify a colon?

Is it orthographically correct? With or without the first comma in parens? There are many activities , including, but not limited to: running, jumping, and swimming. Then what about this? There are many activities, including - but not limited to - running, jumping, and swimming. Improve this question. Cory Gross Cory Gross 1 1 gold badge 4 4 silver badges 6 6 bronze badges. Either of the last two would be acceptable to me, were I an English examiner, Cory. The first I am ruling out, because you really do need a comma after activities, the rest of the sentence being subordinate to what has gone before.

The words 'but not limited to' also need a pair of commas or dashes either side, as they are obviously a subordinate clause. A good test of where to put the pair of commas is to see if the sentence makes grammatical sense if you simply remove the words between the commas. In this case it clearly does that. You have a very good grasp of all this. Not really a long enough list of things to justify a colon. Others may disagree. I don't see the need for 'but not limited to'.

If you really want emphasis here, go with the dashes as in your final example - the others are less easy on the eye in my opinion. I'd use the comma before the 'and' - guess where I took my degree. Oxford comma! Use it! Parentheses can be used here : "There are many activities, including but not limited to running, jumping, and swimming.

Add a comment. Active Oldest Votes. My choice would be: There are many activities, including, but not limited to, running, jumping and swimming. Improve this answer. Barrie England Barrie England k 10 10 gold badges silver badges bronze badges. Your style guide may vary on the "no comma before the and " issue. For example, you could say that the alphabet includes the letters A, B, and C.

You will notice that, although the other letters have been left out, the possibility remains that they are also included. Still, the possibility also exists that the drafter deliberately left out the other letters so as to exclude them. If you were to say that the alphabet includes but is not limited to the letters A, B, and C, you ensure that the others are included as well by default.

Although this is a commonly used phrase in legal jargon, certain judges may still consider it vague if someone were to challenge it. In an everyday context, the phrase simply means you are implying the set of items or things you list is part of a larger group of things you are not listing specifically.

Often words with similar meanings are confused by second-language learners, but that does not mean that it is impossible to learn. The group may be so large that you cannot name all of the items, or you may simply be unable to think of the rest of the list at that moment.

Using the entire phrase implies that there is more to the list than meets the eye and that it encompasses aspects that you did not state outright. We can also use it in everyday speech, but this is far less common. Image by Mohammed Hassan via Pixabay. One last thing to consider, too , is the sentence length which means the longer the sentence is, the more essential commas become.

The intended sense is retained when punctuating the expression this way. The sample sentence above is observable in liability waivers, legally known as an exculpatory clause, intended for acknowledging the risks involved in an activity. The claus e indicates that the contractor understands that he or she will not be able to demand forms of financial compensation for any injury caused by deliberate carelessness or inattention.

However , it is indicative that other related bases may also legally apply if the contractor is proven guilty. The same sense and purpose are retained despite the wordiness of the expression. The main difference of this prepositional phrase is that it is generally positioned at the earlier parts of a sentence or clausal list.

Using this phrase in particular redirects the reference back to the preceding immediate statement or examples. The wordiness of the expressions tackled in this post, albeit safeguards the authority, could invite trouble in worst-case circumstances. It, therefore, implies the extra verbiage afterward, usually written in parenthetical form, may be construed as redundant and unnecessary. This case should only be treated as passable in legal and academic papers that are intended for audiences who are no less than technical readers.

Hence, using this type of expression is generally inappropriate in teaching children nor beginner English language learners. No matter who is asked, every language breathes arbitrariness, novelty, as well as intentional or unconscious ambiguity.

Using highly technical expressions, although reflecting linguistic literacy, could also limit learnability. To balance the intelligibility curve, punctuation marks like commas are beneficial and essential in the process.

Thus, discretion and balance are advised among writers when employing relatively technical and complicated expressions. Hey fellow Linguaholics! I am the proud owner of linguaholic.