comma with adjective: start getting early, reduced benefits

[LQZ]

Retirees can start getting early, reduced benefits at age 62. They get full benefits if they wait until they turn 66. Those born after 1960 will have to wait until they turn 67.---taken from the NYT

Dear all,

Is the red comma wrongly used? To me, without the comma sounds natural. Thanks.


LQZ

 

[ewie]

Hello LQZ. No, I'd say that's a valid use of a comma.
The benefits (1) are early, and (2) are reduced.
Without the comma there's a danger that the reader might think that the benefits are (only) reduced early.
Does that make sense?

 

[LQZ]

Thank you, ewie.

But I am still confused. I think the problem is I can't understand the meaning of 'retirees can start getting early'. Could you explain further? Thanks again.

 

[téméraire]

Hi LQZ,

The usage of the comma is correct. Now to explain the sentence:

"Retirees can start getting early, reduced benefits at age 62."

That is, retirees can begin receiving benefits at age 62 (hence, "early" since 66 is the standard age at which they would receive the benefits); however, the disadvantage of receiving the benefits early is that they will get less money than if they would wait until they reached age 66. I hope that helps.

 

[LQZ]

Yes, temeraire, thank you so much, it indeed helps.


Now I think of the original sentence as 'retirees can start getting early benefits at age 62 that are reduced.' Am I right?

 

[téméraire]

LQZ,

Sorry for the tardiness of my reply! Your interpretation works perfect! I'm glad I could assist you. Have a great day!

Cheers