Question about semicolon use in lists

Bufty

Where have the last ten years gone?
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
16,768
Reaction score
4,663
Location
Scotland
It's not a question of 'weak' anything. It's a question of clarity.

The punctuation means I don't interpret all these sentences in the same way. It's up to you how you punctuate it.

posted by Pellshek I have a question on semicolons & lists.

Here's my problem sentence, punctuated three ways (commas only, semicolons only, mix of two):

No. 1: They both knew what he was telling her with that kiss, what the film of sweat meant, and the shallow breaths.

No. 2: They both knew what he was telling her with that kiss; what the film of sweat meant; and the shallow breaths.

No. 3: They both knew what he was telling her with that kiss; what the film of sweat meant, and the shallow breaths.

.........

No. 1: The commas feel too weak, and meaning unclear.
No. 2: Final semicolon feels unnecessary to achieve clarity. Final semicolon breaks the flow.
No. 3: This one sounds best to my ear, I think it makes the meaning ping. But looking at the rules, I think it may be ungrammatical. I'm not sure it's even a "list" because it only contains 2 items.

Really not sure. What do you think?
 
Last edited:

CathleenT

I write
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 6, 2014
Messages
5,097
Reaction score
1,981
Location
Northern California
I would have said that since the second part of the sentence is not a list, and the clauses are not independent, that a semicolon is not appropriate.

Is the second part of the sentence a list? I never thought to define what one was before.

Btw, I have no idea what is says about me that I get more entertainment value lurking in the grammar thread than watching television. Other than I am odd, which I already knew. :)
 
Last edited:

guttersquid

I agree with Roxxsmom.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 9, 2011
Messages
1,324
Reaction score
229
Location
California, U.S.A.
They both knew what he was telling her with that kiss: what the film of sweat meant, and the shallow breaths.

The colon solves your problem. A comma would be confusing, and a semicolon would be wrong.
 

King Neptune

Banned
Joined
Oct 24, 2012
Messages
4,253
Reaction score
372
Location
The Oceans
I have a question on semicolons & lists.

Here's my problem sentence, punctuated three ways (commas only, semicolons only, mix of two):

No. 1: They both knew what he was telling her with that kiss, what the film of sweat meant, and the shallow breaths.

No. 2: They both knew what he was telling her with that kiss; what the film of sweat meant; and the shallow breaths.

No. 3: They both knew what he was telling her with that kiss; what the film of sweat meant, and the shallow breaths.

.........

No. 1: The commas feel too weak, and meaning unclear.
No. 2: Final semicolon feels unnecessary to achieve clarity. Final semicolon breaks the flow.
No. 3: This one sounds best to my ear, I think it makes the meaning ping. But looking at the rules, I think it may be ungrammatical. I'm not sure it's even a "list" because it only contains 2 items.

Really not sure. What do you think?

No. 3 is the best of those, but that comma is unnecessary, and some people would say it is incorrect. I think that when one wonders about wording it probably means that it should be rewritten.

No. 1 is not grammatically correct. The last comma shouldn't be there.
No. 2 is not grammatically correct. The second semicolon is wrong.

No. 4: They both knew what he was telling her with that kiss; what the film of sweat meant and the shallow breaths.


No. 5: They both knew what he was telling her with that kiss, and what the film of sweat meant and the shallow breaths.


BTW, you probably should have started a new thread, because this is a different question.
 

pellshek

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
56
Reaction score
7
I have a couple of questions about semicolons and lists. I hope it's ok to add to this thread as it seems on-topic to my query.

..............


Q1: Can semicolons be used to separate non-complex lists, i.e. lists that don't have internal commas/punctuation? Say, when the list is long/verbose.

Eg: He walked into the museum. It was an amazing place: classical paintings in the room to the right; modern art to the left; at the rear were the sculptures; the Picasso hung on the wall near the entrance.

I suppose we could have commas here, or we could split the sentence into smaller chunks, but are the semicolons grammatical as is? It feels to me like the semicolons add a kind of clarity/hardness to the breaks in the list, and cause less confusion as the sentence moves along. You never lose your orientation with the semicolons.

Q2: What constitutes a "list"? Can it be as few as two items?


Eg: He walked into the room. It was a murky, stinking space. A mirror along the wall to the left; a row of seats along the wall to the right.

So this semicolon separates two fragments. It feels to me more satisfying then a comma or full stop. But I'm not sure if it's grammatically ok given it's a "list" of only 2 items.

.......

Many thanks.
 

BethS

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 21, 2005
Messages
11,708
Reaction score
1,763
Q1 -- Usually a semi-colon is used to separate items in a list where each item contains commas and multiple phrases. But what you've done is not incorrect; the phrases are long enough to justify it.

Q2 -- If you're going to punctuate it that way, put a colon after "space." You could also put an em-dash after "space." But as it is, I don't think a semi-colon is correct there. A comma is more proper.
 

guttersquid

I agree with Roxxsmom.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 9, 2011
Messages
1,324
Reaction score
229
Location
California, U.S.A.
Q1: Can semicolons be used to separate non-complex lists, i.e. lists that don't have internal commas/punctuation? Say, when the list is long/verbose.

No. The semicolon is only necessary because of internal punctuation.

He walked into the museum. It was an amazing place: classical paintings in the room to the right; modern art to the left; at the rear were the sculptures; the Picasso hung on the wall near the entrance.

What's mucking this sentence up is the independent clause (bolded). A simple rewording would solve the problem.

It was an amazing place: classical paintings in the room to the right, modern art to the left, sculptures at the rear, the Picasso on the wall near the entrance.

Q2: What constitutes a "list"? Can it be as few as two items?[/B]

Eg: He walked into the room. It was a murky, stinking space. A mirror along the wall to the left; a row of seats along the wall to the right.

So this semicolon separates two fragments. It feels to me more satisfying then a comma or full stop. But I'm not sure if it's grammatically ok given it's a "list" of only 2 items.

Yes, a list can be only two items, but the semicolon is wrong because, as you pointed out, the items are fragments. A simple comma would accomplish the same effect and would be proper.
 
Last edited:

pellshek

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
56
Reaction score
7
Yes, a list can be only two items, but the semicolon is wrong because, as you pointed out, the items are fragments. A simple comma would accomplish the same effect and would be proper.


I was thinking a bit more about this point.

Are you citing the rule here by which semicolons should only be used to link independent clauses, and are therefore wrong with fragments?

If so, is that applicable to the question of semicolons being used to separate list items, as in the current issue?

In my second example above, we have two fragments for sure, but the semicolon is there not to connect the items (as a regular semicolon might with indie clauses), but rather to separate them as items in a list. So I'm wondering if the fact they are fragments matters.

I'm a bit muddled on this point.
 

guttersquid

I agree with Roxxsmom.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 9, 2011
Messages
1,324
Reaction score
229
Location
California, U.S.A.
I

In my second example above, we have two fragments for sure, but the semicolon is there not to connect the items (as a regular semicolon might with indie clauses), but rather to separate them as items in a list. So I'm wondering if the fact they are fragments matters.

In this case a semicolon is not needed, not because they are fragments, but because the two items have no internal punctuation. A comma would be the correct punctuation mark.