Comma splice?

It is a comma splice. There should either be two independent sentences, or a semicolon (it's a good place for one, IMO), or the two clauses should be joined by a conjunction. Any one of those constructions would be better. I can't really say why you would want a comma there.

caw

I'm not typically a fan of the semicolon, but if you don't typically abuse them in your writing this is a prime spot for one!

This is indeed a comma splice. I've seen a few authors do this. As a degreed English editor, please know it is wrong. Good catch, though! Usually with short sentences, I use periods. Periods (unless semicolons enhance the flow) are usually better in my personal opinion. Have a nice day!

I love grammar, but I admit I am a grammar thickie.

I tend to play it safe by using periods, then cower in a corner reading a few passages from books by authors such as Ellroy.

So it's best to ignore me as this post is of no help to you.


P.S. Great replies from contributors as always.

It is indeed a comma splice, and from the perspective of strict punctuation rules, it is wrong. But that doesn't mean it is wrong from a writing perspective. The primary need for proper punctuation is clarity, but when clarity is not an issue (and it is not in your sentence) the rules can be broken for effect. Consider one of the most recognizable sentences ever written, the opening sentence of A Tale of Two Cities.

[h=1]It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of light, it was the season of darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair.

[/h]

CathleenT said:

*scatters nuts for sharp-eyed critters*

I used this line in my last story: This was true wisdom, this above all should be saved.

I understand about linking independent clauses with a semi or em dash. But the repetition makes me want to put a comma in there, and I can't articulate why.

Is there a real reason for a comma in this sentence, or is it some weird, fuzzy idea I've picked up?

Either way, I'd like to be able to articulate what is correct and why.

Thanks so much in advance.

Click to expand...

It's technically a comma splice, but I've often seen commas used in this way in published novels. Comma splices are acceptable when two (or sometimes more) independent clauses are very short, especially if they deal with the same subject (as is the case with your example). They can also work when two short independent clauses compare and contrast. Say you'd written instead: This was not wisdom, this was foolishness.

And of course (as with GS's example from Dickens above) if the independent clauses form a list of elements, then using commas to set them apart is perfectly fine (if the list elements also contain commas, semicolons are usually better for clarity).

http://grammartips.homestead.com/spliceok.html

The use of commas instead of separate sentences or semicolons does indeed affect the voice or feel of the sentence. I suspect that how acceptable one might be in a given situation might also depend on one's editor.

Agreed. To me, a semicolon is intermediate in continuity and flow between a comma and a period that separates the independent clauses into two sentences. I don't tend to use semicolons that often, but some writers do.

The thing is, if you use this technique, it should probably be done infrequently and deliberately. If you have comma splices all over the place, even for reasons like these, then editors (and readers) would justifiably wonder if you understand the rule at all.

While I agree with the issue of stylistics, in terms of this usage in fiction, in the example cited I'm going to express a mild disagreement with Da Mom and GSquid. For me, as a reader, these two short independent clauses would carry more punch as separate sentences, not run together. But you gotta make the choice you feel best making.

caw

guttersquid said:

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of light, it was the season of darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair.

Click to expand...

A veritable sea of comma splices. But that's actually the reason this passage works so well. It's meant to flow smoothly from one sentence to the next without any speed bumps to the eye and ear.

In regard to the OP's example, unless that's dialogue (which is exempt from the normal rules of grammar), I think it needs a semi-colon. It's not long enough to justify a comma splice. Just my opinion, of course.

My personal hierarchy of punctuation-preference in this case is as follows:

This was true wisdom: this above all should be saved.

This was true wisdom, this above all should be saved.

This was true wisdom; this above all should be saved.

This was true wisdom--this above all should be saved.

This was true wisdom. This above all should be saved.

The colon is simply wrong, as punctuation for this example.

caw

Isn't the Dickens an example of asyndeton? That's an age-old rhetorical device that (probably) predates the invention of the comma.

guttersquid said:

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of light, it was the season of darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair.

Click to expand...

OP, I like your sentence as it is because it throws the stress onto the second 'this' where, I think, it belongs.

Thecla said:

Isn't the Dickens an example of asyndeton?

Click to expand...

Yep. Dickens and Thecla know their stuff.

Comma Rule Number 3: Commas separate items in a series:
James found blondes attractive, redheads adorable, and brunettes irresistible.


The final comma before the conjunction is always correct. However, the journalistic practice to omit the serial (or Oxford) comma is every author’s option:
James found blondes attractive, redheads adorable and brunettes irresistible.

Also correct is an occasional asyndeton, the intentional omission of the normally occurring conjunction (and, or, but, for, nor, so, yet) in a series of words, phrases, or clauses:
James found blondes attractive, redheads adorable, brunettes irresistible.

CathleenT said:

This was true wisdom, this above all should be saved.

Click to expand...

My opinion: Writing is like art.

What I did: I ran your sentence through a text to speech program.
The second half of the sentence sounded strange, so I monkeyed around with it a bit.

The two that flowed better (per the text to speech program) were:

This was true wisdom; and this, above all, should be saved.

This was true wisdom—and this, above all, should be saved.

(The additional of 'and' was a personal preference... it 'sounded' fine enough without it.)

M.S. Wiggins said:

My opinion: Writing is like art.

What I did: I ran your sentence through a text to speech program.
The second half of the sentence sounded strange, so I monkeyed around with it a bit.

The two that flowed better (per the text to speech program) were:

This was true wisdom; and this, above all, should be saved.

This was true wisdom—and this, above all, should be saved.

(The additional of 'and' was a personal preference... it 'sounded' fine enough without it.)

Click to expand...

I think it sounds good with "and," but the semi-colon would be incorrect there. It's supposed to replace a conjunction, not get added to one. The em-dash works, if you want the extra pause, but otherwise, a comma before "and" would do fine.

M.S. Wiggins said:

My opinion: Writing is like art.

What I did: I ran your sentence through a text to speech program.
The second half of the sentence sounded strange, so I monkeyed around with it a bit.

The two that flowed better (per the text to speech program) were:

This was true wisdom; and this, above all, should be saved.

This was true wisdom—and this, above all, should be saved.

(The additional of 'and' was a personal preference... it 'sounded' fine enough without it.)

Click to expand...

Not that I want to take sides here, but I like your 2nd suggestion (the one with the em dash) more than the OPs original line. And would definitely encourage the OP to pick one of the two options above, saving for the technically incorrect semicolon which can be remedied by removing 'and'. Personally I like the 'and', because there seems--to me--to add more emphasis on the word 'this' that follows. As a reader Cathleen's version feels weak, messy even. This feels clean cut, smooth, strong. I like it a lot.

CathleenT said:

I dislike comma splices--usually I'm death on them in SYW. This is the only one this piece has.

Click to expand...

I to personal creative choice and restraint. Otherwise, we'd be reading:

“Call me Ishmael[comma]” and then suffer comma splices and run-ons for 1,946 pages all the way to the single, solitary period following “[comma] it was the devious-cruising Rachel, that in her retracing search after her missing children, only found another orphan.”

Couldn't this be classed as a parallel structure?

Chase said:

I to personal creative choice and restraint. Otherwise, we'd be reading:

“Call me Ishmael[comma]” and then suffer comma splices and run-ons for 1,946 pages all the way to the single, solitary period following “[comma] it was the devious-cruising Rachel, that in her retracing search after her missing children, only found another orphan.”

Click to expand...

What's yer problem wit' dat? William Faulkner wrote dat way, and won a Nobel Prize. Plus there's lots of other suffering to be had reading Moby Dick, after that famous curt first sentence.

caw

The comma splice is a blatant disgrace,
But it shall always enjoy a safe base
When laddies and lasses
Sleep through English classes,
Then toss commas all over the place.

Comma splice!

I'd say use a period, it has more impact in this case (for me).

I'd say use a period. In this case it has more impact.

I'd say use a period; it has more impact in this case (for me).