Comma question.

I guess "for" is used as a coordinating conjunction, joining two independent clauses.
isn't "the cat had upset the goldfish bowl" a complete sentence?

forthnot said:

As I turned around, I heard a loud thump, for the cat had upset the goldfish bowl.

is it because of a shift? or pause? I found this sentence on purdue OWL's comma exercise page. in their rules for comma usage, they have an example of a subordinate clause following a comma, but they do not offer an explanation as to why it was appropriate in that instance.

Click to expand...

Commas don't necessarily indicate pauses. Commas signal sentence structure. If a reader perceives a pause at a comma, it's most likely coincidence as there aren't always pauses at structural indicators.

Ave is correct. The comma before "for" in your example indicates a compound structure. In this case, "for" is one of the seven coordinating conjunctions: and, or, nor, but, for, yet, so.

forthnot said:

from what I understand, you do not use a comma if you have a subordinate clause following an independent clause.

.

Click to expand...

Not true, actually. See here: https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/607/01/

and here: https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/607/02

The comma after "thump" is correct in that sentence.

forthnot said:

OK! but let me try one more time.

Lisa waved at Nancy, who was laughing joyously. — they have that example marked as correct. However,

they have this example marked as incorrect: The cat scratched at the door, while I was eating.


who was laughing joyously is not a phrase, correct? Who acts as the subject in this clause which would make it a subordinate clause, right? so what am I missing here?

Click to expand...

who was laughing joyously refers to Nancy. Because Nancy has been sufficiently identified, who was laughing joyously is nonessential.

forthnot said:

purdue has this example on their site: Lisa waved at Nancy, who was laughing joyously. — they have that example marked as correct. However,

they have this example marked as incorrect: The cat scratched at the door, while I was eating.

Click to expand...

Yes, Guttersquid is again on the mark. Another explanation with examples of restrictive and nonrestrictive clauses is in Comma Rule 5A below:

Comma Rule Number 5: Words, phrases, or clauses (appositives and infinitives included) which interrupt the main clause must be set off with commas fore and aft. The rule includes the state following the name of a city and the year following the day of the month.
Mrs. Ellen Bennet, my mother, is in the drawing room.
The Brooklyn Bridge, as opposed to this matchstick construction, is sturdy and reliable.
He was born on June 23, 1941, Big Timber, Montana, along the Yellowstone River.
Those earrings, in my opinion, would look better hanging over formal dining tables.

5A. The final necessary use of the comma is the most difficult for many writers. It’s actually the same as rule 5, but it’s often presented in isolation because of its difficulty. As with appositives and infinitive phrases, it separates nonrestrictive clauses in a sentence. The nonrestrictive clause is not essential to the sentence. It merely adds information:
Abraham Lincoln, who was the tallest of U.S. presidents, was an imposing figure of a man.
The grizzly, a bear misunderstood by tourists, is named Ursus horribilis for good reason.

By contrast, a restrictive clause is essential to the sentence:
The lady who cried is my mother.
The man who shot Liberty Valance became a state senator.

Also, you would add the comma before the subordinating conjunction just for meaning -- using a comma in that situation is so common I never thought to note it, except for because. From the first paragraph of the first book I just picked up:

I was about the reach out and take one, when my sister stopped me. (Moyes, The Girl You Left Behind)

Click to expand...

When is a subordinating conjunction right? But without the comma, the sentence reads differently (and I think wrong).

And for the traditional ungrammatical comma before "because":

This comma use is correct, because it is an example of extreme contrast.

Click to expand...

That's from the Purdue web page cited above. (https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/607/02)