Amazon Aqua credit card

Paul_DNAP

ferrism wrote: »

I am trying to find out if that is an allowable use of the English language.

Yes, it perfectly allowable and incredibly correct way of wording things. It is how you've chosen to read them that is the oddity here.

[Deleted User]

ferrism wrote: »

Especially as so many of these offers are written this way.

You mean in clear and concise English?

Terry_Towelling

ferrism wrote: »

Thanks for that. I agree a £20 voucher isn't worth the effort but learning how English really works is truly worth doing. Rhetorical question.... did I miss a comma before "but?"

If I may ignore the fact that your question was rhetorical...

My English grammar is not that spectacular, but I would have used a comma in the place you mention (like I have in this sentence) because the text after the "but" does not relate back to the text that came before it and could be a sentence in its own right with its own action.

If the text after the 'but' relates back to the text before it, then no comma would be needed.

For example, 'It's not the words that are the problem but the way they've written them' needs no comma.

However, 'it's not the words that are the problem, but the way they've written them is appalling' does need a comma.

I cannot say my interpretation is spot on (or even correct in any way at all) but that's how I try to do it.

At risk of labouring the point raised in your opening post, I still see reasonable grounds for interpretation in the way you have (and as mentioned by bsms1147). There are indeed three parts to the sentence.

1. Use the card
2. Pay on time
3. Don't go over your credit limit in the first 2 months.

Sadly, it doesn't matter what I think because they've made their decision and getting it changed is just not worth it.

ferrism

!!! wrote: »

You mean in clear and concise English?

Not really. As I mentioned before ....


In order to effect the meaning they wanted, the sentence should have started with "During the first two statement months the user must ....."


That would be clear and concise.

ferrism

Terry_Towelling wrote: »

If I may ignore the fact that your question was rhetorical...

My English grammar is not that spectacular, but I would have used a comma in the place you mention (like I have in this sentence) because the text after the "but" does not relate back to the text that came before it and could be a sentence in its own right with its own action.

If the text after the 'but' relates back to the text before it, then no comma would be needed.

For example, 'It's not the words that are the problem but the way they've written them' needs no comma.

However, 'it's not the words that are the problem, but the way they've written them is appalling' does need a comma.

I cannot say my interpretation is spot on (or even correct in any way at all) but that's how I try to do it.

At risk of labouring the point raised in your opening post, I still see reasonable grounds for interpretation in the way you have (and as mentioned by bsms1147). There are indeed three parts to the sentence.

1. Use the card
2. Pay on time
3. Don't go over your credit limit in the first 2 months.

Sadly, it doesn't matter what I think because they've made their decision and getting it changed is just not worth it.

Thanks for the excellent comma discussion. Nothing quite like it to end the week. Have a good weekend.

[Deleted User]

ferrism wrote: »

Not really. As I mentioned before ....


In order to effect the meaning they wanted, the sentence should have started with "During the first two statement months the user must ....."


That would be clear and concise.

Though the way in which it is currently written is colloquial and succinct.

Willing2Learn

Personally, I find the wording a touch ambiguous and definitely not as clear as it could have been.

[Deleted User]

You will be eligible for the Amazon.co.uk Gift Card if you complete your homework, turn up to lessons on time and you do not have a day off sick in each of your first two terms at school.

I reworded it slightly and asked my school age child what it meant. It was clear that all 3 clauses applied across 2 terms at school.

Terry_Towelling

You will be eligible for the Amazon.co.uk Gift Card if you complete your homework, turn up to lessons on time and you do not have a day off sick in each of your first two terms at school.

You will be eligible for the Amazon.co.uk Gift Card if you use your aqua card, your monthly payment is received on time and you do not go over your credit limit in each of your first two statement months.

I like the comparison and I would agree that an offer where only the credit-limit-excess issue was subject to a two-month time period would seem strange.

I'm trying very hard to play devil's advocate here and to find a reason why the two above scenarios are different but I'm not sure I can. I will, however, try. Warning, the following contains copious quantities of BS!

In the school scenario, none of the activities are interdependent and you have no control over when you are asked to do them or when you may be afflicted by them. All conditions are written in the active voice which preserves the written flow.

In the aqua scenario, condition 1 is fully your choice and entirely within your control, condition 2 depends on you doing condition 1 beforehand and condition 3 could be a consequence of doing condition 1 too much or not doing condition 2 at all. Condition 2 is also written in the passive voice which disturbs the written flow by breaking the chain wherein the subject performs the actions and the objects 'suffer' those actions.

I did say there would be loads of BS and, before anyone else says it, with a name like Terry Towelling, you'd expect me to hold a fair amount of p155 and sh 1t!

born_again

I think the question is...

Why apply for a AMAZON credit card and not use it at AMAZON.

Clearly the idea of getting their branded card is to get points for spending at AMAZON, as well as a FREE £20.