The versatile comma

[John Cuthber]

 

At least in English you often know if if it is a question from near the beginning of the sentence (e.g. it might begin with a w-word). In some languages you don't know until the end of the sentence. (Ditto negatives)

You really know at the start that it's going to be a question?

 

I understand (from reading Asterix books as a kid) that the Spanish have got this problem sorted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_question_and_exclamation_marks

 

 

For better control when reading loud, my dad learned me to make my reading faster than my speech.

..my dad learned taught me...

Edited July 3, 2016 by John Cuthber

[Phi for All]

Upside down period? There exist the up period that corresponds to the semicolon ; in Greek language.

This is an 'absurdity' joke, pretending it makes a difference to invert something like a period.

 

Yes. And the funny thing when you have to change tone at the last minute in your speech when you didn't realize it was a question.

Questions can be very strong parts of a speech when you know they're coming, but when you have to do that tone change at the end they almost always sound weak.

 

For better control when reading loud, my dad learned me to make my reading faster than my speech. I mean, the eyes can go forward in the sentence and the voice can go a step back. You are then reading from short term memory, not directly from the text.

I think that's the natural evolution of the talent. Speak from scripts a LOT and you can skip ahead enough to warn yourself about inflections ahead.

[michel123456]

You really know at the start that it's going to be a question?

 

I understand (from reading Asterix books as a kid) that the Spanish have got this problem sorted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_question_and_exclamation_marks

..my dad learned taught me...

Thank you

This is an 'absurdity' joke, pretending it makes a difference to invert something like a period.

Well understood. My point is that it is not an absurdity because the period has a specific position, it is written on the text line (I don't know if there is another name for it). I mean a point that is not placed on the text line is not a period anymore. The position has the same importance than the graph.

When you invert it, you invert its position too (like in inverted question mark) and that makes it a upper period because is written above the text line.

[John Cuthber]

I think part of the absurdity would work better with this, than with a full stop.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpunct

because inverting it leaves it the same.

 

The inverted full stop does, it seems (sort of)exist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dot_(diacritic)#Overdot

[Strange]

You really know at the start that it's going to be a question?

 

 

Sometimes. (But as that isn't what I said ...)

[John Cuthber]

 

 

Sometimes. (But as that isn't what I said ...)

I misunderstood this?

"At least in English you often know if if it is a question from near the beginning of the sentence "

You meant something else?

"In some languages you don't know until the end of the sentence. "

Like English, for example?

[michel123456]

I misunderstood this?

"At least in English you often know if if it is a question from near the beginning of the sentence "

You meant something else?

"In some languages you don't know until the end of the sentence. "

Like English, for example?

Maybe he meant the use of did (did I ?)

[John Cuthber]

My point is that it is perfectly possible, and acceptable, to create a question that doesn't look like one until you get to the end.

If you are writing a speech for someone it's a bad style choice, but it's still technically correct.

That seems to me to be at odds with what Strange said

[Delta1212]

My point is that it is perfectly possible, and acceptable, to create a question that doesn't look like one until you get to the end.

If you are writing a speech for someone it's a bad style choice, but it's still technically correct.

That seems to me to be at odds with what Strange said

Then it's a good thing he said "often" and not "always", isn't it?

 

Because you do often know when a sentence is going to be a question based on the first word either being a question word or a verb.

[John Cuthber]

Then it's a good thing he said "often" and not "always", isn't it?

 

Because you do often know when a sentence is going to be a question based on the first word either being a question word or a verb.

It is,and it's also just as well that he implied that English was distinct from other languages don't do this.

"In some languages you don't know until the end of the sentence."

But actually, English is one of those languages where you don't know until the end of the sentence.

 

​Ironically, it's difficult to tell if the "In some languages you don't know until the end of the sentence." was an implication is that English is not one of those languages for exactly the same reason that it's difficult to tell if some sentences are questions - there's no intonation.

[Strange]

I misunderstood this?

"At least in English you often know if if it is a question from near the beginning of the sentence "

You meant something else?

 

 

I meant what I said: "in English you often know if if it is a question from near the beginning of the sentence"

 

For example, the sentence might start with a "question word" (who, where, what, etc). Or, the main verb might be near the beginning (e.g. "he is running" vs "is he running").

 

There are some (slightly odd) examples where you wouldn't know until the last word (perhaps, "you like fish, yes?") but that is not the norm. In English. In some languages, the standard grammar of a declarative sentence is indistinguishable from a question until the last word.

 

Obviously tone of voice is important but the original point was about the written language.

[John Cuthber]

"Or, the main verb might be near the beginning (e.g. "he is running" vs "is he running")."
Isn't the main verb there "running"?

​I think it's the auxiliary verb that's moved.

The whole discussion is starting to remind me of an old joke.

A linguistics professor was lecturing his class the other day. "In English," he said, "a double negative forms a positive.

However, in some languages, such as Russian, a double negative remains a negative. But there isn't a single language, not one, in which a double positive can express a negative."

A voice from the back of the room piped up, "Yeah, right"

[Strange]

"Or, the main verb might be near the beginning (e.g. "he is running" vs "is he running")."

Isn't the main verb there "running"?

​I think it's the auxiliary verb that's moved.

 

That is true. The auxiliary verb is usually close to the main verb, however.

 

Can you give me a good example of a question that is not clearly distinct from a statement until the last word. The ones I can think of sound awkward (but I am very unimaginative).

[imatfaal]

 

 

That is true. The auxiliary verb is usually close to the main verb, however.

 

Can you give me a good example of a question that is not clearly distinct from a statement until the last word. The ones I can think of sound awkward (but I am very unimaginative).

 

You think it is impossible to write a sentence which is not clearly distinct from a statement until the last word.

 

You think it is impossible to write a sentence which is not clearly distinct from a statement until the last word?

[Strange]

 

You think it is impossible to write a sentence which is not clearly distinct from a statement until the last word.

 

You think it is impossible to write a sentence which is not clearly distinct from a statement until the last word?

 

Good example. Thanks.

 

Or, better, to quote Special Agent Gibbs, "You think?"

Edited July 7, 2016 by Strange

[imatfaal]

back to the op - the courts have finally ruled:

 

http://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2017/03/16/lack-oxford-comma-costs-maine-company-millions-overtime-dispute/BIxK837fA2C06qavQMDs5J/story.html?event=event25?event=event25

 

In other words: Oxford comma defenders won this round.

“That comma would have sunk our ship,” David G. Webbert, a lawyer who represented the drivers, said in an interview Wednesday.

[Strange]

back to the op - the courts have finally ruled:

 

http://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2017/03/16/lack-oxford-comma-costs-maine-company-millions-overtime-dispute/BIxK837fA2C06qavQMDs5J/story.html?event=event25?event=event25

 

 

 

More discussion of the various issues here: Court fight over Oxford commas and asyndetic lists

[Velocity_Boy]

 

 

Brilliant use of the comma in a recent moderator decision:

And, while we are at it, there is the Oxford comma:


And the comma of direct address (more informally known as the Donner Party comma) which makes the difference between: "Let's eat, Grandma!" and "Let's eat Grandma!"

As a devout word and punctuation nerd, I can readily and confidently attest that the Oxford version is correct. You must differentiate the last set of entities in the example by using the comma. Else ways, JFK and Stalin appear as if they are unified in a set, together.

This is one of the most common errors today in comma usage. It's Eats shoots and leaves all over again.

Another error we have see increase drastically over the past few years, especially in novels, is the way writers use commas when there should be a period of at least a semi colon. That is to say, they are writing run-on sentences. It's no coincidence that the very best writers don't do this.

[Delta1212]

It's not a matter of whether or not it is correct. There is no standardized system of comma usage in the English language but rather multiple competing style guides. Some use the comma, some do not. The debate is over whether it is clearer, and therefore better, to use the comma or whether it is unnecessary.

[Velocity_Boy]

An expert in syntax and composition would argue that there IS a correct methodology for using the comma. And that it should be a standard. Just as the period or the colon or the hyphens are. The fact that many people don't understand the correct usage of something does not mean there is not a correct way.

 

A caveat here.....I am speaking of standards and rules for non fiction writing. As in text books, written media, science articles, et al. And not in novels or fictional stories. In that genre, writers can of course do what they want. Look at one of my favorites, as an example. Cormac McCarthy. He breaks several accepted rules of punctuation and syntax on just about every page! LOL. Yet, he is great. A Pulitzer prize winner. Yet nobody in their right mind would tell him he is writing all wrong.

Edited March 27, 2017 by Velocity_Boy

[StringJunky]

An expert in syntax and composition would argue that there IS a correct methodology for using the comma. And that it should be a standard. Just as the period or the colon or the hyphens are. The fact that many people don't understand the correct usage of something does not mean there is not a correct way.

 

A caveat here.....I am speaking of standards and rules for non fiction writing. As in text books, written media, science articles, et al. And not in novels or fictional stories. In that genre, writers can of course do what they want. Look at one of my favorites, as an example. Cormac McCarthy. He breaks several accepted rules of punctuation and syntax on just about every page! LOL. Yet, he is great. A Pulitzer prize winner. Yet nobody in their right mind would tell him he is writing all wrong.

The 'correct' usage is what is consensually understood by the author and their readers; it is is fluid.

[Strange]

As a devout word and punctuation nerd, I can readily and confidently attest that the Oxford version is correct. You must differentiate the last set of entities in the example by using the comma. Else ways, JFK and Stalin appear as if they are unified in a set, together.

 

 

It is not "correct". It is just a stylistic choice. There are examples where including the last comma introduces ambiguity.

An expert in syntax and composition would argue that there IS a correct methodology for using the comma.

 

You can find a link to the "expert" view in my post #42. You will see that they do not consider one or other to be "correct".

Edited March 27, 2017 by Strange

[DrKrettin]

The debate is over whether it is clearer, and therefore better, to use the comma or whether it is unnecessary.

 

I agree, but I found this sentence grammatically interesting because at first I miss-read it as "The debate is over. Whether it is ...". The reason that I miss-read it was because I find myself having to make sense of some internet users who are just too lazy to use punctuation (not the case here).

 

People forget that punctuation replaces the intonation heard in speech which serves to prevent ambiguities. When writing for readers from different cultures with different expectations from the language, as on an internet forum, punctuation can be very important. As is the use of capital letters: I am often amazed at how lazy people get with those, as if it were really difficult to use the shift key. Not everybody sees the difference between "I helped my Uncle Jack off his horse" and "I helped my uncle jack off his horse".

[CharonY]

An expert in syntax and composition would argue that there IS a correct methodology for using the comma. And that it should be a standard. Just as the period or the colon or the hyphens are. The fact that many people don't understand the correct usage of something does not mean there is not a correct way.

 

A caveat here.....I am speaking of standards and rules for non fiction writing. As in text books, written media, science articles, et al. And not in novels or fictional stories. In that genre, writers can of course do what they want. Look at one of my favorites, as an example. Cormac McCarthy. He breaks several accepted rules of punctuation and syntax on just about every page! LOL. Yet, he is great. A Pulitzer prize winner. Yet nobody in their right mind would tell him he is writing all wrong.

 

 

I'd argue that in science the stylistic choices are even less stringent. So far I have not seen a single journal demanding one or the other and the various style guides also dissent. As others said, as long as the sentence is not ambiguous it is fine.

[Delta1212]

 

 

It is not "correct". It is just a stylistic choice. There are examples where including the last comma introduces ambiguity.

Yes, by now everyone knows what happens when you invite the strippers, JFK and Stalin, but it is far less often mentioned what happens when you invite the stripper, JFK, and Stalin.