Which is it:
1.) Providing children with positive adult role models, who illistrate ways to build self-confidence, develop skills and find avenues of success in our free enterprise system, is a hallmark of {organization's name}.
2.) Providing children with positive adult role models, who illistrate ways to build self-confidence, develop skills, and find avenues of success in our free enterprise system, is a hallmark of {organization's name}.
3.) Providing children with positive adult role models; who illistrate ways to build self-confidence, develop skills and find avenues of success in our free enterprise system; is a hallmark of {organization's name}.
Re: QUICK! GRAMMAR NAZIS!
I changed my name
Yeah, that part makes more sense in relation to the entire paragraph. Sorry!
then I would actually take out the commas and put it like this
Providing children with positive adult role models who illistrate ways to build self-confidence, develop skills, and find avenues of success in our free enterprise system is a hallmark of {organization's name}.
I think you are overusing commas the other way, and semicolon is not appropriate (except I always use a comma before the "and" in a list, APA and all...)
I changed my name
WTF TN?! LET ME QUOTE!!!!
Jilly - thanks! I definitely like that much better. I'm doing a proof of my director's proposal and it's full of random stuff like that, but this section tossed me for a loop a bit. Thanks again!
Yup. The sentence structure might sound better if you wrote it like "One hallmark of [company] is providing children with positive adult role models who illistrate ways to build self-confidence, develop skills, and find avenues of success in our free enterprise system." or something.
ETA I think either would be correct, one might just sound better to you than the other, its a personal preference at that point I think.
I changed my name
lol I didn't even catch that when reading. Now I posted it twice! haha irony.
I changed my name
This is what I was going to say. No comma needed between models and who.
67/200