In these cases, the “longness” of the phrase and its nonexistent independent clauses are just formalities. We’re calling the same thing by another name. I think it confuses people when there are guidances out there about not using overlong “sentences” but then they are undermined by overlong sentences which are merely “sentences” by technicality.

The rule is, write clearly. And if it’s not clear, write it more clearly. That’s pretty much it.

If you need guidance, Cormack McCarthy is the professor.

Those semicolons can be replaced with periods and negates your point. That's just a string of ideas, not really one logical sentence.

I haven't earnestly studied English grammar to the same level I've studied Romanian grammar.

In Romanian you have "sentences" (noun - verb - etc) and "phrases" (multiple sentences together, basically they're separated only by periods). I think in English grammar "sentences" are called clauses?

Anyway, Romanian "sentences" are generally short, and if they're not, for sure that's bad style. Romanian "phrases" can be long, but depending on the structure of the "sentences" and the logical separation between them, they can be quite clear.

Maybe the same distinction makes sense here? "Sentences" (clauses?) should be relatively clear and short and somewhat independent, "phrases" can be long, but only if their individual components ("sentences") are of high quality on their own and if they're connected in clear ways.

Sort of. If you remove semicolons and use periods, you have to remove the ‘that’ as well. Then, to me, the sentence loses its impact. Theres a parallelism that is artistic, and makes everything flow.

But in some sense this is art, not science; it shouldn’t be analyzed too much :)

> But in some sense this is art, not science; it shouldn’t be analyzed too much :)

I thought we were discussing law, not art. If legal drafting is to be compared with art, only art experts will gain.

I suppose that's true. Got a little sidetracked there :)

Agree when it comes to law - utility trumps art.

semi-colons do help, as does numbering. Using the "and" also helps.

An awful lot of people don't know how to use or interpret semicolons, including lawyers and judges. The best use of semicolons is to designate the timing of prose that is supposed to be spoken (or read as if it was meant to be spoken). In that sense a semicolon is a bit like a comma - it denotes timing and "breath".

When they are used to group ideas, commas and semicolons tend to encourage long, complex utterances that might be ambiguous, and at any rate are harder to parse. If it's important that an utterance be clear, just use simple language.

Expressing complex ideas in simple language is hard - you have to get the ideas perfectly clear in your head. If you still can't express those ideas in simple language, try again to get them clear. Don't draft any laws until you can do that.