comma before second ‘and’ [conjunction]: elements and equipments, and

[cornetto]

Due to the storm, the construction suffers ruptures and collapse of non-structural elements and equipments, and significant damage to structural elements.

Theoretically, I should not put a comma before the last and. But I think that in this case it makes the sentence clearer.
What do you think about? Is the comma needed or not?


Thank you.

 

[Dimcl]

As you probably know, commas are a hot topic but I would put the comma there if I were writing this.

On a different note, do you mean "suffered ruptures..." and do you intend for "equipments" to be plural?

 

[RCA86]

As Dimcl correctly said, there are a few different opinions as to the use of commas. But, I think you're right to use one in this case, since immediately before the comma, you are using the word "and" to link some nouns together.

I don't think I've ever actually heard "equipments", and I'm not sure that you can use it like that at all, but I could be wrong. I would definitely just use 'equipment'.

 

[cornetto]

No, it is suffers (present), because I give a definition.


Should I use machinery??

 

[cornetto]

No, it is suffers (present), because I give a definition.


Should I use machinery??

No machinery would be wrong. I am talking about cables, lights, tubes...all that is not "structural" in a building.

 

[panjandrum]

In a listing, a comma after the item before and is an "Oxford comma" or "Harvard comma".
There are some/many who use these routinely - and others who never do.

In this particular example, the list item before the and is a compound item. That makes the comma before the and almost essential to make the sentence clear.

... the construction suffers ruptures and collapse of non-structural elements and equipments, and significant damage to structural elements.

I may be misreading the sentence, but I understand it as telling me there are two conseqences of the storm - identified by my colour-coding above.

I suppose it is possible that there are three consequences:
... the construction suffers ruptures and collapse of non-structural elements and equipments, and significant damage to structural elements.

 

[cornetto]

In a listing, a comma after the item before and is an "Oxford comma" or "Harvard comma".
There are some/many who use these routinely - and others who never do.

Actually, I am using the oxford comma in my thesis.

... the construction suffers ruptures and collapse of non-structural elements and equipments, and significant damage to structural elements.


I may be misreading the sentence, but I understand it as telling me there are two conseqences of the storm - identified by my colour-coding above.

This is correct.

 

[RCA86]

Subjectively, I would write it like this:

Due to the storm, the construction suffers from ruptures and the collapse of non-structural elements and equipment, as well as significant damage to structural elements.

I'm not quite sure what you mean with the tense in this though. Does 'construction' refer to a 'construction process', or do you just mean a building (a construction)?

 

[cornetto]

Subjectively, I would write it like this:

Due to the storm, the construction suffers from ruptures and the collapse of non-structural elements and equipment, as well as significant damage to structural elements.

I'm not quite sure what you mean with the tense in this though. Does 'construction' refer to a 'construction process', or do you just mean a building (a construction)?

The second is true.

Is it "suffer from"?
Or just "suffer"?

Thanks for the help so far.