Comma questions

King Neptune · Mar 18, 2015

pandaponies said:
A surbordinate clause IS by definition a dependent clause. Adding the subordinating conjunction makes it a dependent clause, period. Your examples are coordinating conjunctions. I already talked about the difference earlier in this thread.

I would totally be trying to choke people with the Force if they weren't shielded by the safety of their computer screens. I feel like I'm talking to a wall half the time here.

Nod of acknowledgement to Chase re: keeping options open, but statements like "you need a comma before a subordinate clause because it's an independent clause" are just plain wrong and WTF-worthy.

I believe that you are mistaken.

King Neptune · Mar 18, 2015

guttersquid said:
A clause is not independent just because it contains a subject and verb. To be independent, a clause must express a complete thought, otherwise it's a fragment.

A clause is independent if it can be a sentence as it stands. That would require a subject and a verb. Whether any independent clause or sentence contains a complete thought is very much a matter of opinion.

pandaponies · Mar 18, 2015

I'm not. Please pick up a grammar handbook.

guttersquid · Mar 18, 2015

Try this example of why a comma is sometimes needed.

Mary: "John's cute. You should date him."
Sally: "I won't date John because he's cute." (John's cuteness is not enough for Sally to date him. [Admittedly, the meaning here is uncertain.])

Now put the subordinate clause at the beginning.

Sally: "Because he's cute, I won't date John." (Sally doesn't date cute guys.)

To keep the original sentence structure while maintaining the second meaning (Sally doesn't date cute guys.), a comma is required.

Sally: "I won't date John, because he's cute."

In other words, you don't need a comma if you can relocate the subordinate clause to the beginning of the sentence without changing the meaning of the sentence, but you do need a comma if putting the subordinate clause at the beginning changes the meaning of the sentence.

Chase · Mar 18, 2015

guttersquid said:
All my stories are closed-captioned for the deaf and hard-of-hearing.

Oh, man, I want to plagiarize this signature line. How 'bout leaving it to me in your will?

:ty:

, the grateful :deaf:

guttersquid · Mar 18, 2015

Chase said:
Oh, man, I want to plagiarize this signature line. How 'bout leaving it to me in your will?

, the grateful

Well, I could do that, but then some officer would yell, "Fire at will!" and the whole thing would be torn to shreds. Then neither of us would have it.

CathleenT · Mar 18, 2015

Okay, and just to really muddy the waters, the beta I mentioned sent me this when I requested it. It's from MST (although I'm embarrassed to say I don't know what that is).

***

Short Clauses and Commas?

Is I swore, and he turned to glare at me, or I swore and he turned to glare at me correct?

Okay this is perhaps one of the most misunderstood rules. Take a good look at the sentence structure.

It contains two independent clauses. I swore. and He turned to glare at me. Technically following the rules, you would think the comma is absolutely necessary.

However, according to The Chicago Manual of Style (chapter 6 section 18), this comma can be omitted. The exact wording from Chicago is "If the clauses are very short and closely connected, the comma may be omitted."

(A short clause is generally interpreted to be 4 words or less.)

This means that I swore and he turned to glare at me is absolutely 100% correct.

Really? Is that really true?

I know this is new for several people, so I've attached several links to support this claim.

CWS Illinois (see the section "commas used to separate" number 10). You can also look at the section "commas used to set off" number 2 for examples when using adverbial phrases.

Grammarly Answers- This one shows that Gardner argues against this rule. However, both MLA, AP Styleguide, and Chicago argue for the omission of this comma.

Ted Montgomery- see 11a.

National Geographic Style Manual- (see number 5 and 6)

***

So I guess it depends if you're going with Strunk & White and Gardner or the other standards.

Personally, I'm hoping this is a gray zone, and I can get by with the Elements of Style format. Going back through my manuscript and counting words in phrases to decide if the comma is valid is a step I just don't need.

King Neptune · Mar 18, 2015

CathleenT said:
Okay, and just to really muddy the waters, the beta I mentioned sent me this when I requested it. Its from MST (although I'm embarrassed to say I don't know what that is).

***

Short Clauses and Commas?

Is I swore, and he turned to glare at me, or I swore and he turned to glare at me correct?

Okay this is perhaps one of the most misunderstood rules. Take a good look at the sentence structure.

It contains two independent clauses. I swore. and He turned to glare at me. Technically following the rules, you would think the comma is absolutely necessary.

However, according to The Chicago Manual of Style (chapter 6 section 18), this comma can be omitted. The exact wording from Chicago is "If the clauses are very short and closely connected, the comma may be omitted."

(A short clause is generally interpreted to be 4 words or less.)

This means that I swore and he turned to glare at me is absolutely 100% correct.

Really? Is that really true?

I know this is new for several people, so I've attached several links to support this claim.

CWS Illinois (see the section "commas used to separate" number 10). You can also look at the section "commas used to set off" number 2 for examples when using adverbial phrases.

Grammarly Answers- This one shows that Gardner argues against this rule. However, both MLA, AP Styleguide, and Chicago argue for the omission of this comma.

Ted Montgomery- see 11a.

National Geographic Style Manual- (see number 5 and 6)

***

So I guess it depends if you're going with Strunk & White and Gardner or the other standards.

Personally, I'm hoping this is a gray zone, and I can get by with the Elements of Style format. Going back through my manuscript and counting words in phrases to decide if the comma is valid is a step I just don't need.

That usage has come to be accepted recently, and it is perfectly gray. Drop the comma, if you wish. Keep the comma, if you wish. I don't like dropping commas, but I have noticed that I sometimes drop the comma with two word clauses, but those might be the ones that most need the separator. In any event, it is not mandatory that one drop the comma.

"And he turned to glare at me" has seven words, so it doesn't qualify according to the "four words or less" that you cited.

Chase · Mar 18, 2015

King Neptune said:
That usage has come to be accepted recently, and it is perfectly gray. Drop the comma, if you wish. Keep the comma, if you wish. I don't like dropping commas, but I have noticed that I sometimes drop the comma with two word clauses, but those might be the ones that most need the separator. In any event, it is not mandatory that one drop the comma.

Couldn't have said it better.

It's always correct to set off two main clauses of any length with a comma + coordinating conjunction (and, or, nor, but, for, yet, so).

This discussion reminds me of a time several decades ago when no serial (Oxford) comma was all the rage. Many tried to assert that its use was wrong, even outside of journalistic writing.

Comma questions

King Neptune

King Neptune

pandaponies

in ur boardz, correctin ur grammar

guttersquid

I agree with Roxxsmom.

Chase

It Takes All of Us to End Racism

guttersquid

I agree with Roxxsmom.

CathleenT

I write

King Neptune

Chase

It Takes All of Us to End Racism