Any order is equally correct. What are some examples? The one you have is fine, going from less specific to more specific.

However, there’s clearly a “to” missing in front of “Oliver”. The other answers so far fix it only quietly, and only insufficiently with saying “To Oliver on your Christening”. That makes Oliver a different person from the recipient of the Christening, because you are second person, while Oliver is third person. For someone to fix that, the you should be replaced with his.

To Oliver on his Christening, with love from Godfather and second cousin Jamie

The second his is optional. If something is yours to answer, it just cannot

be yours.

1. What is the best way to define a VPN?
2. Is the Recursive Acronym Syndrome Syndrome normal? If not, how the internet works?
3. Why do people write Virtual Private Networks?

What is the best VPN/VPN? Is it a good practice to expand an acronym at the very first time you use it in your

text?

In every bad situation there is an element of good Another

one would be “one door closes, another opens”, attributed

to Alexander Graham Bell “.

What is the English equivalent of the Chinese/Japanese saying — “The life is like Old Sai’s Horse”?

Why is Wikipedia so popular?

I have

• had enough. A correction: I’ve got more than enough.
• Would you rather be a mouse or a rat?

Both “rather”… for also using his old words “rather” and “rather” If I want to be included, the list is longer than that.. ” and “more than ” are fixed

expressions.

Your premise is wrong. Homographs that are not homophones exist in a great many languages, and in a great variety of writing systems. Germanic, Slavic, Sinitic; Latin, Cyrillic, Hanzi, have you name it…

To distinguish lead from lead, from, аu043cu043eu043a from аu043cu043eu043a, Heroin from Heroin you have to rely on context. Why can’t some languages have stress marks or diacritics? ^When

there’s not enough context, all bets are off, but keep your mind that it is not some weird exception, but rather the default situation. Any sequence of characters and symbols in which we write is free to have as many different meanings as people choose to give it, and is thus prone to being ambiguous with not enough context provided. (And remember how there are complete homonyms, where not just the spelling but also the pronunciation are identical. Yet everyone makes do with them just fine.)

Present vs. present is an example of an initial-stress-derived noun, which are extremely common in English. What would be the main problem with homographs in particular in which one is a noun and the other is a verb. Of course you’ll need very little context to tell what part of speech you’re looking at.

As to read, it actually nicely demonstrates another problem still: we probably have the pair of homographs because otherwise we’d have a pair of different homographs. What was the thing wrong when past-tense read actually used to be “red”, but this in turn opposed an adjective red. All prior questions you ask are welcome.

^{* And of course at the extreme end of this spectrum you have systems like Japanese, where every single kanji have two readings, by Design, so as a complete layman I can’t possibly tell how to read anything, until some kind person comes along and spells it out for me in hiragana. What will happen if the system goes on to outlive me?}

What was your opinion of Gecko?