I have to use the word “comma”. In our case, how do I replace one by another? The guarantee is worth 30 days and money back is not a compensation. If you don’t buy

it then the promise is considered legitimate.

A general rule is that a comma should be used if the two modifiers both modify the noun, rather than the first one modifying the noun-phrase formed by the second modifier and the noun.

Luggage. It’s a heavy and bulky box.

What are some of my favourite toys?

Heavy applies to box as much as bulky does.

Lovely applies to all hand made toys.

Could you put both and between it without changing the meaning (but being wordier and hence changing emphasis)?

2. Why have we moved to the second case? Where can we switch it?

3. Are they at the same level in what modifier order they are specified (amount or number, general opinion, specific opinion or quality, size, age, shape, color, origin or material, purpose or qualifier, noun-as-modifier). What modifier order?

What are the different methods of spotting the same thing around you as they are different ways of doing it.

(They can be complicated if pair of adjectives become idiomatic, so re-arranging will sound wrong even though its grammatically fine).

Noun or adjectives are ordered between them in the same order as Nouns are ordered between them. The question of modifier order is complicated here because nouns turned to modifiers (3 to ), (“30 days to 30-day, money back from noun to money-back, no risk to no-risk ) always tend to come at the end.

Is money back a qualifier or a definition of an idiom I like to hear? I was slightly more inclined to have “no-risk, 90-day trial”, but not a lot and I wouldn’t expect “90-day and no risk trial”.

In all, I think “the money-back guarantee is for 30 days” is more plausible than “the 30 days guarantee is money-back”; the modifiers aren’t at the same level, they aren’t easily switched, and they don’t work equally well with and.

How

can I run

a demo for

90 days? – Are the “correct” versions?

Are the scare-quotes around “correct” and/or “to the right” there for a reason?

If I’m trying to sell things and to use the guarantee or trial to do so, I may very well want to emphasize “30 day” and “money-back” individual qualities. What would I mean if I had a month to sell a product? No risk, 90 days, the same as the other way around. Why I should use a space between the two?

(It’s also a reason why I should choose to put “no-risk” in front and have “no-risk, 365 days trial” as much as putting a length first would be more common, as it allows for more emphasis on “no-risk”).

I think this is in itself a good example of the difficulties of talking about rules with comma placement, we’ve a very good rule that matches most use that would have us not use a comma but also a perfectly good reason to put it in anyway.

A comma is usually used between adjectives that are parallel, that is, modify the same head in a noun phrase. This usage is essentially just a listing comma: you put commas before all entries in a list (including or excepting the final one thatalso has an and, depending on whether you like the Oxford comma or not).

Example:

A small, red, wooden(,) and cozy house.

Here, we have four adjectives that all modify house : The house is small, it is red, it is wooden, and it is cozy.

If we put this statement in the context of a copular sentence,

it becomes: The house is small, red, wooden, and cozy.

Conversely, there is no comma between adjective and thing that it modifies. So there is never a comma in “a wooden house”. But adjectives are also used in nouns. They are not just used but can also be used in a noun. Ambrose yay yay, yay yay noun phrase modified by adjective. What does a red wooden house feel

like, and what is the following?

This means something different, though: it means that the house is wooden. This ] (another single unit) is red. And the ] (single unit again) is small.

If we make a copular sentence from this, it becomes’stacked layers’: The house is

cozy.
The cozy house is built of wooden.
The wooden house is red.
With only two interior spaces, the cozy house is small.

In this example, that gets a bit geeky. What is it more natural to just describe a member of the category homes as being all four things more than taking a member of the somewhat fanciful category German cozy houses and describing it as German, etc?

In your example a 30-day money-back guarantee

is a good thing.
A 90 day no risk trial. How can I learn more about this booming business?

With the comma, these phrases describe a member of the category guarantees, which is then said to be both 30-day and money-back ; and a member of the category trials, which is said to be both 90-day and no risk. Without the commas, the categories are money-back guarantees and no-risk trials.

In copular form with the comma

: The guarantee is the 30-day money-back guaranteed.
Is there a risk in the 90-day trial.

So is any money

back guarantee required in every product that is purchased after 30 days?
No -risk trial is 90 days.

Lest some people ask me which one is more logical, and some people think it makes sense? Either version, with or without the comma, is perfectly correct; they just mean slightly different things.

No-risk or money-back. Neither is that really a true adjective. They’re more like noun adjuncts. (Some of such adjectives refer to “swedish”, whereas in our society they’re more about noun adjuncts. Do copular sentences sound the same? (Critical: Generally, they are taken as attributively rather than predicatively )

We offer a 30-day

money-back guarantee a 60

day no-risk obligation A 30-day money-back guarantee. This guarantee is valid for 14 days.

–> No comma required. –> No comma required.

The 30 days long comma money back guarantee gives people the guarantee that they get whatever they wanted for free. If they are unhappy with the product, they can’t be changed. Why?

How is it related to the United States?