Turning the lightbulb on with comma's

:hat

O.K. writers. HELP! I have the Elements of Style but I am still having trouble with my comma's. I can't afford to take a writing class just for that. So I need your help. Maybe it can help a lot of us in the process. I understand the use of "series comma's."

example: Red, white, and blue.

Where the comma goes before the word "and" as well.

I am having trouble with the other uses of "and." When to include the comma before it, and when not to. Please include your examples with your findings, it will be appreciated. Thanks.

American style does use the comma before the final item in a series, as in your example, although English/Commonwealth style traditionally does not. I think it is best to, because it is never wrong, and omitting it can sometimes lead to unclear meaning.

Here's a link that might help you, with plenty of straightforward examples.

Comma use

You need help with apostrophes more than commas.

"commas" = plural, more than one comma.

"comma's" = possessive, as "The comma's tail is too short"

Forget Strunk & White. Get a copy of the Chicago Manual of Style. Best 25 bucks you'll spend.

Comma placement in lists: Add the comma before the 'and', like:

Red, white, and blue.

This is American-preferred. British preferred omits the final comma:

Red, white and blue.

Good points. For myself I know I'm supposed to take out that last comma in lists, but it's never made sense to me - it can be confusing and throw off rhythm to boot.

For other uses of commas, you could check out some of Gary Provost's books, like Make Your Words Work. And yeah, the Chicago Manual is the Bible, with the size to match.

Here's the one that gets me:


Is it better to take out the middle comma?


Actually I think that is right because it's joining two sentences, the second one with what that link calls an “introductory phrase.”

Where you'd brace the "and" with commas is in something like:


Where there's no independent clauses, but a clarification put in the middle.

Right?

I was walking down the street, and, just as I turned the corner, there was a loud crash.

This is grammatically correct, I guess. But it reads choppy for me. Writing is about rhythm, too. Sometimes I cringe when I see authors writing sentences like that, which are grammatically correct but stutter...

I'd probably infuriate grammar gods and goddesses but doing this:

I was walking down the street and, just as I turned the corner, there was a loud crash.

OR

I was walking down the street; just as I turned the corner, there was a loud crash.

I'd probably just split the sentence into two:

I was walking down the street. Just as I turned the corner, there was a loud crash.

Regarding the comma in a series...

I like ice cream, steak, and Rolos.

I like ice cream, steak and Rolos.

You can use either version. Just be consistent. Chicago style uses the comma before the and, AP style doesn't.

:hat

I know the series "apostrophes" are easy to me. Its the rest I need help with. Thanks for your input. Oh brother, there are so many variations. Lets keep it going though. I am learning a little bit already.

How much of this do we even have to worry about. When we write our manuscripts will they throw it in the garbage if all this isn't correct?

Consider this, written according to British style:

There were a number of balls in play; green, white, purple and black, red, blue and white.

Is the last ball white, or blue and white?

If you put a comma before the final 'and', the meaning is unambiguous.

Restrictive and nonrestrictive clauses:

A restrictive clause is one that would change the meaning were it left out. This clause restricts the meaning to what is being discussed.

The peanut butter and jelly sandwich.

If you were to leave out "and jelly" then it would be a peanut butter sandwich, so you do not use commas.

If you are talking about two sandwiches:

Of the two sandwiches the one on the left is thicker.

This restricts the meaning to the sandwich on the left and so no commas are used.

However:

The two sandwiches, both made this morning, are fresh.

The clause between the commas does not restrict the meaning in any way. It can be left out and make perfect sense.

The two sandwiches are fresh.

The nonrestrictive clause, "both made this morning" just tells you how fresh they are: Therefore you set this clause off with commas.

There would be no comma in:

I made one sandwich this morning and one this afternoon.

Re: Turning the lightbulb on with commas

Writing Again, I know from previous threads that you have your own way of understanding grammar. Some of what you wrote doesn't fit the standard way of analyzing sentence structure.

A restrictive clause is one that would change the meaning were it left out. This clause restricts the meaning to what is being discussed.

The peanut butter and jelly sandwich.

If you were to leave out "and jelly" then it would be a peanut butter sandwich, so you do not use commas.

"And jelly" isn't a clause at all. To be a clause, a series of words must contain a verb.

If you are talking about two sandwiches:

Of the two sandwiches the one on the left is thicker.

This restricts the meaning to the sandwich on the left and so no commas are used.

"Of the two sandwiches" isn't a clause; it's a prepositional phrase. Actually, a comma is correct in that sentence.

"Of the two sandwiches, the one on the left is thicker."

The two sandwiches, both made this morning, are fresh.

The commas are correct here, although "both made this morning" doesn't qualify as a clause. The following sentence contains a nonrestrictive clause: "These two sandwiches, which Ann made this morning, are fresh." The following sentence contains a restrictive clause: "The two sandwiches that Ann made this morning are fresh."

Re: Turning the lightbulb on with commas

:hat

Hey Reff, thanks for taking the apostrophe out of "commas." I didn't know how.

Regarding the other stuff.
You guys are supposed to help me, not confuse me more! Lol.

Can you simply it so I understand what you're doing?

Re: Turning the lightbulb on with commas

Illynne, I am no expert, but I think the way to see where to use or not use a comma lies in sentence structures and also the rhythm. For example, in the case:

Of the two sandwiches, the one on the left is thicker.

"The one of the left is thicker" is a complete sentence. So you need to separate it from "Of the two sandwiches" with a comma.

I am no expert, and I don't know what I'm talking about.

It's not totally wrong, IMHO, to omit the comma. Again, since "I don't know what I'm talking about" is a complete sentence, it's good to use a comma to separate the sentences. But you don't have to, since "and" connects the two sentences.

I went to the store and bought a newspaper.

Here, "bought a newspaper" is not a complete sentence. It lacks the subject "I," which is supplied in the first sentence ("I went to the store"), so you shouldn't add a comma there.

A comma also puts a pause in your sentence:

I came down the stairs, so you don't have to climb up.

Without the comma, it's still good. But the comma adds a pause and hopefully reads better.

As others have said, the comma before the last item on a list is optional -- you'll be fine as long as you're consistent.

The following two sentences mean different things with and without the comma:

She ate a peanut butter and jelly sandwich.
She ate a peanut butter, and jelly, sandwich.

The first one: "peanut butter and jelly" together describe the sandwich. It's a type of sandwich.

The second one: "peanut butter, and jelly, sandwich" means it's really just a peanut butter sandwich... oh by the way, there's jelly in it, too.


I could be wrong -- as I said, I'm no expert. Consult the style and grammar guide when in doubt.



p.s. my last sentence above also can be confusing:
Consult the grammar guide when in doubt -- no comma needed.

When in doubt, consult the grammar guide. -- needs a comma.

Re: Turning the lightbulb on with commas

:hat
Maestrowork, maybe I am making it too hard. I thought there were rules that needed to be followed concerning conjunctions and clauses.

Set me straight you guys, please. Thanks.

Re: Turning the lightbulb on with commas

To take out the apostrophe in the subject line, I used–ta DAAA!–the Delete key.

I can't think of a reason anybody would write "She ate a peanut butter, and jelly, sandwich."

Strunk and White say to use a comma in a compound sentence (two independent clauses: "I am no expert, and I don't know what I'm talking about") unless the clauses are short and similar: "I'm no expert and neither are you." At least I think they said it in some edition or other. I can't find it in the Strunk and White I have now.

On an earlier question, where the example was "I was walking down the street, and, just as I turned the corner, there was a loud crash," S & W do it like this: "I was walking down the street, and just as I turned the corner, there was a loud crash."

I'm afraid I can't simplify comma use. Get Strunk and White.

Re: Turning the lightbulb on with commas

These two sentences are similar in the use of comma:

I was walking down the street, and just as I turned the corner, there was a loud crash.

The conjunction connects two sentences: a) "I was walking down the street; b) Just as I turned the corner, there was a loud crash. So use a comma (but not two).

I am no expert, and I don't know what I'm talking about.

Same thing here. Thus, the comma. Although, as Reph and I pointed it out, the comma can be ommited if the two sentences are short: I'm no expert and I don't know anything.

To Comma or not to Comma

"I was walking down the street and, just as I turned the corner, there was a loud crash".

Despite grammatical correctness, I prefer this over "I was walking down the street, and just as I turned the corner, there was a loud crash".

I know this can be construed as splitting hairs and one might as well argue how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, so it is important to emphasis that as writers, our whole identity consists of evoking an idea or emotion based upon the way that words can evoke an idea or an emotion.

So to get back to the example above and why I believe example one is better suited to writers, if not grammatically correct as per S&W.

So much of what we do must find the balance between engaging the readers emotions and the readers intellect. For the most part, anything that does not draw attention to the process of reading, will be aimed at the readers emotion. Anything that draws attention to the act of reading, will tend to be processed by the readers intellect.

So the example with the comma after the and, brings the reader in because it gets processed as one thought. The narrator walked down the street and heard a crash while so doing. This idea is qualified by what the narrator was doing while walking, but the mind will still structure it as one idea because the emphasis is on the whole sentence.

The second example will bring the reader out because each image must be processed individually. Instead of one idea, we are presented with two... walking down the street and what happened after that. The reader must pause between the comma and mentally distinguish the next section as a different idea. This brings the reader out of the moment at a point when the reader should be going more into the scene.

I'm sure there can be a counter argument to this... there is very little that can be written in stone to what we do, though I would favor the first example if I had to choose.

- Anatole

Re: To Comma or not to Comma

Good point, Anatole, and while I've never analysed the reason why it works in your thoughtful way, I think you're right.

Every style guide I've seen says the comma should always go before the 'and', but in speech we commonly break and pause after the 'and', to effectively paraphrase the following non-restrictive clause.

I've seen plenty of examples of it in the works of good authors, so they've obviously manage to elude the depredations of their editors and preserve the rhythm of their writing voice. I get the impression that once one is well established as an author, anything goes, because the power balance shifts and the number of people who feel qualified to mess with your work dramatically declines.

Re: To Comma or not to Comma

It strikes me that we're all doing this the hard way. We're taking a complicated sentence and trying to break it down into its component clauses. It would be far easier, I think, to take a simple sentence and to build upon it. So let us put the sample sentence in the simplest possible language (the Dick and Jane version, if you like). Let's change the sentence:

"I was walking down the street, and, just as I turned the corner, there was a loud crash."

to

"I walked down the street. I turned the corner. I heard a crash."

I've changed the wording. In my opinion, the awkwardness of the original comes, not from the commas, but from the passive voice and the useless adjective. A loud crash? Give me a break. Have you ever heard a quiet crash? When I line edit, I delete all adverbs and adjectives that don't pull their weight. It could be that you want this sort of casual voice for your first person narrator, but I wouldn't. It sounds too much like all the other slush on the slush pile.

Now we have a simple sentence to work with, we can see how we might use commas. There are really only three uses. First, we use commas to separate the elements of a list (and like others here, I prefer the American style, which is clearer). Second, we can use a comma and conjunction to join two simple sentences together and create a compound sentence. Our example becomes:

"I walked down the street, I turned the corner, and I heard a crash."

I would probably further simplify this by dropping I from the second two clauses:

"I walked down the street, turned the corner, and heard a crash."

I feel this is superior to the original version of the sentence. It has a distinct rhythm. The original has the rhythm of a drunk, white man dragged unwittingly onto the dance-floor by a girlfriend.

Third, we can use a comma to separate a subordinate or adjective clause from the main clause of a sentence. So our example might become:

"Walking down the street, I turned the corner and heard a crash."

Here I'm using the rule that you can drop a comma from a compound sentence if the clauses are short. We don't need to write: "...I turned the corner, and heard a crash."

So, that's about it. I recommend that, if you have trouble, you should start with a simple sentence and build it up, rather than start with a complicated sentence and try to break it down. It works for me. Beware, though, I'm talking here about line editing. For a first draft, I put all the fussy grammar and punctuation aside and concentrate on finishing.

Re: To Comma or not to Comma

I would probably further simplify this by dropping I from the second two clauses:

"I walked down the street, turned the corner, and heard a crash."

I feel this is superior to the original version of the sentence. It has a distinct rhythm. The original has the rhythm of a drunk, white man dragged unwittingly onto the dance-floor by a girlfriend.

Third, we can use a comma to separate a subordinate or adjective clause from the main clause of a sentence. So our example might become:

"Walking down the street, I turned the corner and heard a crash."

Ha ha! While the rest of us were arguing over the viability of the example sentence, you simply rewrote it so that it read better.

So much for that...

I have to say I like your first example better, if only because the last one begins with the action instead of the subject, which can sometimes confuse the reader... but even then, your last example is clear and probably wouldn't be confusing, given the context of what led up to it.

- Anatole

Re: To Comma or not to Comma

The original has the rhythm of a drunk, white man dragged unwittingly onto the dance-floor by a girlfriend.

I love that - I wrote that original bit and I actually have been that drunk, white man dragged unwittingly onto the dance floor.

So yeah, the passive verb and "loud crash" are poor writing - it was just something off the top of my drunk, white head to put commas in.

I liked anatole's emotion/intellect bit. And it's always amazing how much can go into a single sentence. Even if we're the only ones who know.

Re: To Comma or not to Comma

Another example where comma placement serves an expressive function: "I was walking on 40th Street and, you won't believe this, I ran into Joe from Mrs. Cassell's third-grade class back at Springfield Elementary." This might occur in dialogue. You could also use dashes to set off "you won't believe this."

Re: To Comma or not to Comma



Now Reph, if we can just get the apostrophe out of the main title.

I don't see anything wrong with saying a loud crash. Of course it would be dumb to say a quiet crash. A loud crash compared to just a crash though, is a difference. It makes you visualize more drama to the loud crash.

Regarding the commas. You guys are telling me that you don't need to pay attention to conjunctions and clauses. You don't have to know all the rules regarding conjunction and clauses.
You are going more on feeling and flow. I don't know if that is the correct way to deal with commas, but is what I am gathering from your posts.

Are we doing this wrong?

Re: To Comma or not to Comma

So yeah, the passive verb and "loud crash" are poor writing - it was just something off the top of my drunk, white head to put commas in.

Click to expand...

No need to explain. That's the sort of sentence we all write in a first draft, when we're struggling to get the ideas onto the screen. :hat

Re: To Comma or not to Comma

I don't see anything wrong with saying a loud crash. Of course it would be dumb to say a quiet crash. A loud crash compared to just a crash though, is a difference. It makes you visualize more drama to the loud crash.

Click to expand...

It's subjective of course. There will always be some leeway over what is a meaningful distinction and what isn't. Personally, I prefer to make my adjectives work harder.