Your Highness, the comma

And what does a comma do, a comma does nothing but make easy a thing that if you like it enough is easy enough without the comma. A long complicated sentence should force itself upon you, make you know yourself knowing it and the comma, well at the most a comma is a poor period that lets you stop and take a breath but if you want to take a breath you ought to know yourself that you want to take a breath. It is not like stopping altogether has something to do with going on, but taking a breath well you are always taking a breath and why emphasize one breath rather than another breath. Anyway that is the way I felt about it and I felt that about it very very strongly. And so I almost never used a comma. The longer, the more complicated the sentence the greater the number of the same kinds of words I had following one after another, the more the very more I had of them the more I felt the passionate need of their taking care of themselves by themselves and not helping them, and thereby enfeebling them by putting in a comma. So that is the way I felt about punctuation …(Gertrude Stein)

I am the comma¹, and even though I may not look like much, I take the liberty to disagree. I am only enfeebling,² Madame Stein, where I do not belong,³ but I never go into those places of my own free will. Some people just throw me somewhere like you, Madame Stein, do in your first sentence where a question mark⁴ would be required instead of a comma,^3a and others distribute us commas as if they used a salt shaker ⁵and hoped that we will fall into the right place all by ourselves. You, Madame Stein, most likely agree with those who say,⁶ “When in doubt, leave it out.” Not only is this utterly offensive ⁷but also paradoxical. I mean, hey², they cannot even write this rule without me.
Even though I am related to the period, ² this big shot that yells in your face that there is nothing more to discuss, and to this preposterous mutt called semicolon,⁸ which cannot even decide whether it wants to end something or not, I am a gentle marker ⁹which leads the reader,⁸ who otherwise may get lost, through the jungle of a sentence. Other than the period, the semicolon, or the colon¹⁰, ²I am proud to say, I can appear more than once in a single sentence. And while a period separates two independent clauses from one another as a brick wall divides two houses,¹¹ a coordinating conjunction and I separate them like a slightly curved walkway.
I,² the comma, tell you whether a phrase or clause is restrictive. Without me,⁸ whom you, Madame Stein, deign to call a “poor period,” you would not know that the clause ⁹ which you are reading right now is restrictive ¹¹whereas other clauses, ⁸ which may try as hard as they like, are not essential and thus need me to restrain them. A comma, ¹² however, is always important ¹³because I help establish the relationship among parts of a sentence and add precision and complexity to their meaning,¹⁴ something your amorphous,¹⁵ longwinded sentence, Madam Stein, utterly lacks. A comma at the right spot {certainly not here} gives {and definitely not here}¹⁶ a string of words their meaning⁵ and makes it beautiful.
Yet¹⁷, because it is not nobler to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous maltreatment, I have taken arms against a sea of troubles.¹⁸ Still¹⁷, the question remains ⁹WHERE to be or not to be.
Although I follow, e.g.,² an introductory also like a shadow,¹⁸ I do not want to be pushed behind although. Nor do I belong after but or and, or, nor, so, for, yet¹³ because I am first,^5a and,² as you saw just now, I also do not belong before, ² and certainly not after, because - or after, before, if, since, unless, until, and when¹⁹ for that matter. One just needs to understand me to appreciate me.
So that is the way I feel about myself.


1. A comma is needed before and when it introduces a second independent clause. The dependent clause “even though I may not look like much” does in this case not need to be set off by an additional comma after and.
2. Parenthetic expressions must be enclosed between commas.
3. Coordinating conjunctions (and, but, or, nor, so, for, yet, while [when it refers to time]) that link two independent clauses require a comma.
3a. Here, the narrator gets a little bit vainglorious. Although the comma is correct, a period instead would improve readability immensely.
4. Since the first clause of Gertrude Stein's remarks on punctuation is a question, it cannot be combined with the following clause by a comma. This creates a comma splice similar to the following example from the NYT (1/10/10): “The Very Serious Media are not writing the Orszag Love-Child Story, they are merely writing about the media frenzy surrounding it.” Instead of the comma, a semicolon would be correct here since both clauses are independent clauses and are not linked by a conjunction.
5. When two clauses that have the same subject are connected with and, no comma is needed.
5a. If the subject is repeated after and, a comma is required.
6. A comma separates direct quotations from preceding or following clauses.
7. But is here part of the paired conjunction not only…but also and cannot be preceded by a comma.
8. When which, who, whom, where etc. introduces a nonrestrictive relative clause, commas are needed. A nonrestrictive clause adds non-essential information and is thus a parenthetic statement.
9. When which etc. begins a restrictive relative clause, the clause is not enclosed between commas. A sentence like “which leads the reader through the jungle of a sentence” provides essential information about the preceding noun, “the marker.”
10. Introductory phrases must be set off by a comma. This particular introductory phrase also requires the serial comma, separating items in a list.
11. A sentence such as “While I eat, you watch the news,” requires a comma. Turning the sentences around (“You watch the news while I eat.”) does not. The same applies to constructions with whereas. See also 18)
12. However, therefore, nevertheless, above all, of course, in fact are transitional expressions that need to be enclosed between commas. When they, however, begin an independent clause, the preceding clause should end with a semicolon and the transitional expression be followed by a comma.
13. No comma should separate an independent clause from a following dependent clause beginning with after, before, because, if, since, unless, until, or when.
14. Similar to a nonrestrictive clause, an example is added here to supplement the statement in the main clause.
15. Adjectives that can be reversed or connected with and, must be separated by a comma. 16. Never separate subject and verb or verb and object by a comma.
17. Even though only one word, yet, like accordingly, actually, additionally, still etc., is here used as an introductory phrase that requires a comma.
18. Would the sentence be reversed (I have taken arms against a sea of troubles because it is not nobler to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous maltreatment) no comma would be needed. Similarly, the sentence “Although I follow also like a shadow, I do not want to be pushed behind although” does need a comma while “I do not want to be pushed behind although although I follow also like a shadow” does not.
19. Serial commas

Want to read more about commas? Go to The New Yorker.

The Power of Punctuation

Here is a lesson in creative writing. First rule: Do not use semicolons. They are transvestite hermaphrodites representing absolutely nothing. All they do is show you've been to college. (Kurt Vonnegut, A Man without a Country)




Kurt Vonnegut may not necessarily be right. The semicolon can make all the difference.
In his essay “Vorticism,” Ezra Pound credits the Japanese Haiku for helping him to capture a “metro emotion.” The first version of this short poem was published in 1913

The apparition    of these faces    in the crowd:
Petals             on a wet, black bough. 

Three years later, Pound revised it.

The apparition of these faces in the crowd;
Petals on a wet, black bough. 

Besides closing the spaces that indicated a pause or a moment of musing, Pound changed the punctuation. The colon in the first version indicates that the second part explains the first or restates it in a different way. Thus the 1913 version suggests that the faces in the crowd remind the author of petals on a dark branch. The semicolon used in the 1916 version changes the meaning of this two-liner completely. Both, faces and petals, are now independent although closely related objects, each an individual image connected to the metro. Now Pound limns an image of ghostly faces coming out of the dark subway tunnel into a misty spring morning with trees still leafless but just starting to bloom.



Here are a few rules for using the colon or the semicolon:

When to use a colon (:)

After an independent clause to introduce an explanation, expansion, or elaboration
~ All her writing focuses on suffrage: the right to vote in national elections.

After an independent clause to introduce a list
~ Her portfolio included three different pieces of writing: a short story, a poem, and a film script.

No colon, however, directly after a verb …
~ Her portfolio included a short story, a poem, and a film script.

.. or a preposition
~ Her portfolio consisted of a short story, a poem, and a film script.
~ Her portfolio included three different pieces of writing such as a short story, a poem, and a film script.
~ Her portfolio included all kinds of writing except a film script.
~ Her portfolio included different pieces of writing, for example a short story, a poem, and a film script.

When to use a semicolon (;)

Between two independent clauses that are closely connected.
~ I like solving complicated math problems; it is aerobics for the mind.

When two independent clauses are connected with a transitional expression such as however, moreover, in fact, nevertheless, therefore, accordingly etc.
~ I like solving complicated math problems; however, it makes me tired.

But NOT when the two independent clauses are connected by a conjunction such as and, but, or ,nor, so , for, yet, while, whereas etc.
~ I like solving complicated math problems, but it makes me tired.

In a list ONLY when the items listed require the use of a comma
~ I like brain games, especially Sudoku because it challenges my logic; optical illusions, which trick my senses; and paradoxes, which force me to think analytically.

The infamous “you”

The “red scare” of the seventeenth century were – the Quakers because they insisted on addressing everybody equally as thou and refused to use the then more respectful you for individuals of higher rank. Relics of this old respectful you are even today common in very formal salutations such as “Your Majesty,” “Your Highness” or “Your Grace.” While for example the French, despite their revolution against the aristocracy and for liberté, egalité, and fraternité, still make this clear distinction between formal and informal greeting, modern English speakers have all turned Quaker. We use you for everybody, from our family members to the president. Malcolm Gladwell considers this a unique benefit of the English language since it diminishes power-distance. He illustrates this with the story of the jinxed Korean Airline. The American consultant in charge of restructuring this ailing airline required those who “wanted to remain a pilot at the company … to be fluent in” English because “in English, they would be free of the sharply defined gradients of Korean hierarchy.” According to Gladwell, the story of KA “is an extraordinarily liberating example” of “making successes out of the unsuccessful” by taking “them out of their culture and re-norm them” (Outliers 219-220).

One may question whether “re-norming” is liberating or conforming. One may at the same time contest that the French are more polite simply because they have a formal way of addressing a stranger or an authority. Yet, even in English you is appropriate in formal writing only when giving directions or advice. Beyond that, writers should avoid this pronoun because it may pique the reader. A writer, for example, may explain subprime loans and the advantage of their lower initial interest rate. However, she then declares that your initial advantage only lured you into a dangerously risky financial situation because the inevitable annual adjustments will cost you in the end much more than a traditional loan. Using you, the writer forces the reader to identify with the subprime borrower, something not everybody may appreciate.

I am not you

The author of the NYT times article “Floating In the Digital Experience” (1/3/10) Manohla Dargis explains how “Avatar” has brought back the social experience of watching a movie together “after a decade when watching movies became an increasingly solitary affair, something between you and your laptop.” The reader rightfully may refuse to be depicted as one who watches movies cloistered in her bedroom. It is also an assumption that “Avatar” “forces you to remain attentively in your seat … and locks you in tightly.” What if it didn’t? What if the reader is just this one person who left the theater in the middle of the movie?

Using you in writing implies assumptions about the reader. However, when it is haphazardly mixed with we and I, the writer either lacks grammatical awareness or overindulges in poetic license for effect, however now clearly forces the reader to identify not only with the imaginary “you” but also with the author herself. “We now live in a world of the 24-Hour Movie, one that plays anytime and anywhere you want (and sometimes whether you want it to or not). It’s a movie we can access at home by pressing a few buttons on the remote (and agreeing to pay more for it than you might at the local video store).” WE agree to pay more than YOU might at Blockbusters? Watching “The Dark Knight,” Manohla Dargis felt “that I was at the very edge of the screen. ‘Avatar’ … blurs that edge, closing the space between you and the screen even more.” I/Manohla was on the edge of the screen, but 3D technology sucks YOU/the reader into it? “Mr. Cameron seems to want to invite you into the digital world he has created even if, like a film director, he wants to determine your route.” Yes, a movie director’s goal clearly is to capture the viewer and lead her along a path she herself might not have chosen, but a movie critic should refrain from directing. Even though movie aficionados certainly have a lot in common, they also have their individual preferences. Not everyone who is a movie enthusiast must necessarily be enthused by “Avatar.” Which brings us back to the initial discussion of respect. In spoken English, you may have a democratizing capacity, but in writing it blurs the line between the writer's and the reader's opinion.
Anyway, whoever yearns for a solitary affair with his or her laptop might want to check out this documentary: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0492506/

Stately speech

Lord Chancellor, did I deliver the speech well? I am glad of that, for there was nothing in it. (George III.)

According to President Obama, who usually shines at sophisticated syntax, "a good piece of legislation, is like a good sentence; or a good piece of music. Everybody can recognize it. They say, 'Huh. It works. It makes sense'." A statement like this makes any language nerd first glow with pleasure, then glower. Although Obama praises the beauty of a good sentence, he does it not quite correctly. Everybody is an indefinite pronoun that refers here to a nonspecific group of people and requires a singular verb. “Everybody can recognize it” is indeed correct since can remains unchanged whether used as a singular or a plural verb. However, because everybody requires the singular, it cannot be followed by they. In order to avoid the correct but awkward phrase “He or she says, 'Huh…,” the speaker should have combined both sentences, telling his listeners that “Everybody will recognize it and say…” Opinions on the use of they differ , yet if as easily avoidable as above, just don't combine an indefinite pronoun with a plural pronoun.
Far more disconcerting is Obama’s statement that "When it comes to Iraq, I opposed the war. It was a bad idea, but as we bring out our troops, I have responsibility; ... Just because I opposed it, doesn’t mean that I don’t have responsibility to make sure that we do things in responsible fashion." The question is what the bad idea was. Grammatically, it would refer to the previous clause “I opposed the war.” Is this what the speaker really meant? I doubt it.
Nevertheless, such mistakes are still a far cry from another president’s musings over whether "the highways on the Internet will become more few." However, Bush’s question whether "our children is learning?" has found its match last week. In an interview, Janet Napolitano reassured us that she keeps “focused, really trying to ascertain who needs to be our targets." Bush and Napolitano obviously have a problem with subject/verb agreements. Children are learning – or not. Targets need to be ascertained.
In her interview, Napolitano asserted that her focus on clear targets shall help to keep paranoia about terrorism attacks at bay. Several months earlier, the Vice-President tried to keep another paranoia at bay – not very successfully though. On the Today Show, he provided handy tips to protect against the swine flu and maintained that he "wouldn't go anywhere in confined places now. … When one person sneezes, it goes all the way through the aircraft. That's me. I would not be, at this point, if they had another way of transportation, suggesting they ride the subway. If you're out in the middle of a field and someone sneezes, that's one thing. If you're in a closed aircraft or closed container or closed car or closed classroom, it's a different thing." We understand that he wanted to say that, right now, he would avoid confined spaces such as airplanes. Less clear is already what it is that spreads throughout the aircraft. Considering the following sentence “That’s me,” one is tempted to assume that he himself is going all the way through the aircraft. Although Biden may be ubiquitous and influential, he certainly did not want to compare himself with an influenza virus. It gets utterly confusing when he continuous that he “would not be” – what? He would not go all the way through the aircraft if they had another way of transportation? Who the heck are they anyway? But back to the questions what he would not be. In fact, he would not be suggesting that anybody rides the subway. Confusion always results when related words are not kept together. In this case, the speaker even split the verb, inserting one phrase (at this point) and one clause (if they had another way of transportation) between auxiliary verb and main verb, which makes his statement barely comprehensible.
Joe Biden finally recommends not being in “a closed container,” which echoes Janet Napolitano’s observation that in order to keep the country safe, “you can’t put the United States in a big Tupperware container.” Picture in your mind the images you create! Figurative language can endow a text with fresh effects or insights, but when it slops over, it messes up the whole thing. Watch this
literally hilarious lesson.

Holiday Blues

Good food and not fine words keep me alive. (Moliere)





What's wrong with those kids?


After all the servings of turkey, green bean casserole and ham went the way of all flesh, it is time to once more weigh the advantages of diets and healthy living. Here is a little entree I found recently on a discussion forum:

A study found out that kids that live closer to the store walk less then kids that live further away from the store. The study showed that even if kids lived by green open spaces they would rather walk to the convenience store for that junk food, instead of playing in a park that was in the same distance from their homes.

It is quite a stirring observation these researchers cooked up, yet one that could do with some grammatical refining.

A study found out that kids who…
When a relative pronoun (who, which, that) refers to a human antecedent such as kids, who is the correct pronoun. Similarly, we would not refer to a girl's new dress by saying that she (personal pronoun used to refer to a female being) wears its (a personal pronoun used to refer to inanimate objects) new dress.

A study found out that kids who live closer to the store walk less than…
Then and than sound alike, almost look alike but are anything but alike. While then refers to time, than is a conjunction between the first and the second item in a comparison.

A study found out that kids who live closer to the store walk less than kids who live farther…
Like than and then, farther and further sound pretty similar yet mean different things. Further refers to time or quantity, while farther refers to distance.

A study found out that kids who live closer to the store walk less than kids who live farther away from the store. The study showed that even if kids live near green open spaces they rather walk …
There is a difference between even if and if. If introduces a conditional sentence and requires a specific use of tenses: If the kids lived near green open spaces, they would spend more time playing. Even if indicates that a particular condition will not change the results. Since this represents a general statement of fact and timeless truth, the correct verb tense is present tense.

A study found out that kids who live closer to the store walk less than kids who live farther away from the store. The study showed that even if kids live near green open spaces they rather walk to the convenience store to buy junk food than to the park to play a round of soccer.
Rather is followed by than when comparing two objects or situations. The information about the same distance can be eliminated since the sentence states in the beginning that they live near green open space. To add the information about soccer helps to give this sentence a complete parallel structure: to buy junk food // to play a round of soccer

HOMONYMS are words that sound alike but have different meanings.
Homophones are a type of homonym that also sound alike and have different meanings, but have different spellings.
HOMOGRAPHS are words that are spelled the same but have different meanings. Heteronyms are a type of homograph that are also spelled the same and have different meanings, but sound different.

Whose blunder was it now?

On January 5, 2010, News 8 KFMB San Diego reported that a viewer “made a disrespectful discovery” when "he placed flowers at his parents' final resting place. 'What they should have done is they should have kept them aside neatly and at least dusted the dirt off of them,' he said. He sent News 8 pictures of three headstones, which were scattered in dirt just 30 feet away from where his parents and brother are buried."

What may be a “disrespectful discovery”? And what should the cemetery employees “have kept aside”? The flowers? The parents’ gravesite?

Running on and on and on

There's not much to be said about the period except that most people don't reach it soon enough. (William Zinsser)

Yes because he never did a thing like that before as ask to get his breakfast in bed with a couple of eggs since the City Arms hotel when he used to be pretending to be laid up with a sick voice doing his highness to make himself interesting for that old faggot Mrs Riordan that he thought he had a great leg of and she never left us a farthing all for masses for herself and her soul greatest miser ever was actually afraid to lay out 4d for her methylated spirit telling me all her ailments she had too much old chat in her about politics and earthquakes and the end of the world let us have a bit of fun first God help the world if all the women were her sort down on bathingsuits and lownecks and on and on goes Molly

With Molly's final ruminations, James Joyce created probably the longest run-on sentence in literary history. However, the length of a sentence does not determine whether or not it is faulty. Run-ons come in all shapes and sizes.

The girl ran into the boy she wasn't watching.
The sentence suggests that the girl was watching another boy and, probably because she was so fascinated by him, ran into this poor chap. Or maybe she simply was not watching the boy into whom she ran? On the other hand, she might have run into him because she was not watching anything around her?
Nobody knows. Some punctuation or a conjunction can help avoiding confusion as well as a faulty fused sentence:
The girl ran into the boy; she wasn't watching. OR: The girl ran into the boy because she wasn't watching.

That is often the problem when people disagree and they get mad and insult one another personally.
What is the problem when people disagree and get mad? The sentence does not clarify this because it fuses two ideas without proper punctuation.
That is often the problem when people disagree; they get mad and insult one another personally.
Rephrasing is sometimes an even better solution: The problem when people disagree is that they often get mad and insult one another personally.

In recent years, a few large corporations have gained control of the media, and this presents a major problem for the same stories are published in the newspapers, on the radio and on TV and what happens is that the media do not illuminate an issue from different angles because they do less independent reporting, becoming the mouthpiece of corporate interests, but I personally would like to see more independent newspapers so the readers have a better chance to form their own opinions and consequently become better informed citizens.
This is an exemplary run-on sentence with several independent clauses (complete thoughts) forced together with a few conjunctions here and there instead of being properly separated. This causes unnecessary difficulties for the reader to follow the writer’s train of thought. For example, “this presents a major problem for the same stories” makes the reader stop and wonder why the stories may have a problem. Only the following words “are published” clarify the problem involved with media conglomerates. In order to be clearly understood, the writer should separate ideas from one another by a period, eliminate unnecessary words and phrases and rearrange some parts.
In recent years, a few large corporations have gained control of the media. This presents a major problem because the same stories are published in the newspapers, on the radio and on TV. The media are not independent anymore and, instead of illuminating an issue from different angles, have become the mouthpiece of corporate interests. A larger number of independent newspapers would afford the readers with a better chance to form their own opinions and consequently become better-informed citizens.

For more, including some really neat quizzes go to
this site.

The way we write - now?

Mesmerized, we listen to eloquence incarnate. At the same time, we KIT using as few characters as possible to discuss Really Important Things. It goes like this: "hey .. sup .. j/cu .. same .. wut r u doing 2nite .. n2m ..cu" According to those in the know, "this new lingo combines writing and speaking to a degree that we've never seen before" and "is really an extension of what teenagers have always done: recreate the language in their own image" (Neil Randall, English professor at the University of Waterloo and author of "Lingo Online: A Report on the Language of the Keyboard Generation"). It is worth noting that Professor Randall capitalizes the word language in the title of his treatise and thus indicates that IM lingo already has matured from a simple way of writing to a language in its own right.

Yet, is it really something we have "never seen before"? Is it really a language in its own right or just a new type of shorthand? Is it new at all?

"Know what I mean. Accept my poor little pres enclos. Ask her no answ. Hold on. Bye for today. Yes, yes, will tell you. Want to. To keep it up. Call me that other." This is how James Joyce verbalized stream of consciousness and interior monologue. Thus, is IM lingo, which also attempts to reduce a message “to its simplest and most efficient terms not exceeding the span of casual vision and congruous with the velocity of modern life” (Joyce), maybe just an “interior dialogue,” a shared stream of consciousness?

Stream of consciousness and interior monologue, of course, do not care about grammar but invent their own lingo and jump from reference to reference. Yet, even though James Joyce introduced all those techniques into fiction, neither his tendency to write without punctuation nor his many neologisms have really caught on – unless, we consider IM lingo an offspring of the Joycian language, an idea which literati would abhor and Joyce shrug of with “K.M.R.I.A.”

More about texting and spelling.