How do I punctuate the phrase “and limited by” in the following sentence:
The ad hoc system was created for, and limited by, the need for an early launch.
Should that be in parentheses or can I use commas? Or should I restructure the whole sentence?
It’s just fine as written. Parenthesis would also work, but they’re unneccesary here.
I would either use parentheses or no commas at all.
Looks good to me!
Fine to me too. Advice I’ve been given suggests that parentheses should be avoided if at all possible.
I like it as is, with commas. It’s permissible to omit commas in many circumstances, of which this is one, but it’s a question of style, and clarity is advanced by using them in this case.
Punctuation here may be used to function to indicate the kind of voice you would use if you were speaking.
Thus, the way you have punctuated the sentence indicates, and would be taken by the (intelligent) reader to indicate a switch to a lower key. (Try saying it. and you’ll see what I mean.) This in turn would indicate that the phrase thus “lowered” was of a different order to the preceding phrase (‘created by’).
While on the surface (perhaps), the second phrase is relegated in importance in this way, as in your example, pragmatically this device may be exploited to actually increase the impact of the second phrase.
For example, consider a politician who says “The war on terror was a response to, and a solution for, the problems we were confronted with”.
Parentheses might be used, perhaps, to signal that the second phrase is indeed being ranked lower in importance than the first phrase.
I concur.
I agree that, in normal writing, parenthesis should be kept to a minimum, if at all possible.
However, sometimes (when writing informally, of course) I like to use (abuse is more like it) parenthesis (sometimes I even nest them [like so {though at least I use different delimiters to keep things nice and tidy}] just to confuse people).
The ad hoc system was created for, and limited by, the need for an early launch.
The ad hoc system was created for and limited by the need for an early launch.
The ad hoc system was created for (and limited by) the need for an early launch.
Call me crazy, but I like the version without any commas. It just seems smoother to me. Definitely omit the parentheses though.
I’n not sure that it is fine. Try leaving out the parenthetical phrase.
The ad hoc system was created for . . . the need for an early launch.
Is that really what you want to say? Or do you just mean that the system was created for an early launch, i.e. the creators had an early launch in mind?
If the latter, the correct punctuation may be:
The ad hoc system was created for, and limited by the need for, an early launch.
Or you could rephrase the sentence something like this:
The ad hoc system was created for an early launch [or “created with an early launch in mind”], and was limited accordingly.
UDS is spot on!
I knew there was something I didn’t like. I was hoping to get away with it. Last time I’ll try to slip something by the SDMB. 
I would avoid parentheses unless necessary. I think commas or not are a stylistic choice – it can depend if one choice is subordinate to the other, since commas tend to set of clauses which aren’t required for the sentence to make sense, but can be ommitted with short ones.
I agree with UDS: the sentence is techinically correct, but I’m baffled by what “created for the need for an early launch” means. Could it be “created because of the need for an early launch” or “created intended to launch early”…?
I see you follow the Theodore Dreiser school.