Reductio ad absurdum?

Writers sometimes use fragments for making an emphatic point. For instance, the American film industry right now is thinking big and small, hoping we will keep watching. Wherever and however we do watch ("Huge Film, Small Film: Big Stakes" NYT 3/7/10). Here, the fragment is intended to highlight - with the fewest words possible - the idea that it doesn’t matter where one watches a movie.

Often, however, fragments occur involuntarily because the writer forgot to check whether the sentence contains all necessary elements, a subject and a predicate/verb.

A decade later, with new board designs facilitating aerials, San Clemente emerged as a launching pad. Particularly the high-performance and consistent waves at Lower Trestles, at San Onofre State Beach, and T-Street, near Trafalgar Lane, where the high-flying 1989 world champion Martin Potter inspired a crew of young locals, including Matt Archbold and Christian Fletcher ("Surfing Takes a New Direction" NYT 3/14/10). This sentence lacks a main verb correlating with the subject waves. The reader does not know what theses waves were doing and may assume that they attracted surfers, but the writer should not let the audience guess what he means. Any mis-guessing could be avoided by saying that the waves attracted surfers, particularly at Lower Trestles, at San Onofre State Beach, and at T-Street near Trafalgar Lane, where the high-flying 1989 world champion Martin Potter inspired a crew of young locals, including Matt Archbold and Christian Fletcher.
Yet, the writer originally may have intended to tell his reader that San Clemente emerged as a launching pad, particularly because of the high-performance and consistent waves etc. etc. , when the computer alerted him that this is going to be a “long sentence.” A long but correct sentence, however, is better than replacing a necessary comma with a faulty period.

In its combination of physical proximity and psychic distance, the taxi-sharing experiment sounded like a microcosm of New York. Like hearing your neighbor’s intimate moments through the bedroom wall but not acknowledging him when you see him by the mailboxes. Or standing closer to a sweaty ogre on the subway than you ever would to your best friend, all the while willing your mind to someplace very far away ("Sharing a Cab Ride Is Hard Enough. But Words, Too?" NYT 3/7/10). In this example, too, commas before like and or would have been correct and the sentence fragments (lacking a subject) avoided. A long sentence indeed, but still readable (fragment intended).

When illustrative examples are separated from the main clause by a period, they become absurd compilations of words that don't carry any clear message: A ski resort in the middle of Tuscany is somewhat surreal. Like a vineyard in Jackson Hole, Wyo ("Tuscany without the crowds" NYT 3/7/10). What should have been a comparison has turned grammatically into a command, telling the reader that she better likes this vineyard or else. . .

Sometimes, dependent clauses are mistakenly separated from independent ones by a period instead of a comma. Unfortunately, a comma is not always the solution. The menu last night stated how “parties of six or more will be charged a 20 percent gratuity.” Because there is simply no way that six adults can gauge the service of a meal with any degree of accuracy. Aside from the fact that the conjunction because is never preceded by a comma, combining the sentences would not make sense here since the menu didn't announce this fee because there is no way to gauge the service but rather because the owner assumes that there is no way to do so. However, had the writer used a question mark instead of the comma, he could have created an effective fragment simulating the fragmentary nature of his thoughts when reading the small print on the menu.

And you, my dear bartender, who cracked open a $4 beer bottle, and handed me back my change entirely in a stack of one-dollar notes. Very subtle (NYT 2/28 Hey, Waiter, How Much Extra Do You Really Expect?). Very subtle is just one of those fragments intended to simulate the fragmentary nature of thoughts. In the first sentence, however, either the word and is out of place or and handed me back my change entirely in a stack of one-dollar notes actually belongs to the relative clause beginning with who. Either way, the independent clause And you, my dear bartender is incomplete (lacking a proper verb). There are actually two ways to fix this. Simply get rid of and or change who into you and eliminate the comma. And you, my dear bartender, you cracked open a $4 beer bottle and handed me back my change entirely in a stack of one-dollar notes.

___________________________

A complete sentence needs at least a subject (S = a person or thing doing something) and a verb (V = expressing this action). The man (S) walks (V).
Most sentences also contain an object (O = a person or thing that receives the action). The man (S) walks (V) his dog (O).
Independent clauses (clauses that can stand alone) are often connected to dependent clauses (clauses that cannot stand alone). The man walks his dog (independent) even though it is raining (dependent). However, independent as well as dependent clause must have a subject and verb (The man (S) walks (V) / it (S) is raining (V)).
Dependent clauses can function as
1) an adverb (The man walks when the sun is shining: when the sun is shining is an adverb clause modifying the verb just as a proper adverb like slowly would do.)
2) an adjective (The man we saw yesterday walks his dog again today. The adjective clause we saw yesterday describes the man in the same way an adjective, e.g. old, does.)
3) a noun (The man knows what his dog likes. The noun clause what his dog likes functions as the object of knows. We could easily replace it with a simple object like the way).