Doesn't this passage have some problems with interpunction, typos etc.? I think that in a few places they even make understanding of the text more difficult/unclear.
For example:
Quote:
In a typical show of their historical revisionism. Americans have mythologized these town meetings to the point of embarrassment.
Shouldn't these two sentences be written as one with independent and dependent clauses seperated with a comma?
In a typical show of their historical revisionism, Americans have mythologized these town meetings to the point of embarrassment.Quote:
In making these points, Parker hopes to lie to rest the notion that simple, family-oriented colonial New England was far preferable to the modern America that many an perceive has outgrown pure democracy.
Firstly, I'm not sure that "lie to rest" is correct. Secondly, I find this part confusing:
[...] New England was far preferable to the modern America that many an perceive has outgrown pure democracy. Quote:
Citing the disparity between the roll calls of several meetings and the voter registries of the towns in which they took place. Parker demonstrates that attendance atm town-hall meetings rarely exceeded 30 percent of all registered voters.
The first sentence doesn't have a subject, so it can't stay as an independent clause. Moreover, there's a typo in
atm. I think the sentence was intended to look like
Citing the disparity between the roll calls of several meetings and the voter registries of the towns in which they took place, Parker demonstrates that attendance at town-hall meetings rarely exceeded 30 percent of all registered voters. And now it makes perfect sense.
Quote:
A new book by Nathan Parker, however. suggests [...]
Full stop instead of a comma after
however.
Quote:
profoundly miSplaced
Capital "S" in the middle of
misplaced.
Can the OP fix or clarify these issues? Thank you!