 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / January 2007Comma or Em-Dash?
When there is an introductory phrase that does little more than reiterate the subject of the following independent clause, is a comma still appropriate, or is a dash needed? For example: The snow, it was falling. The snow -- it was falling. The light, it just hangs in the air. The light -- it just hangs in the air. My guts says that the dash is better, but I don't know the grammar rules well enough to say exactly why it should be that way. Is there a general rule that describes this kind of case? >When there is an introductory phrase that does little more than >reiterate the subject of the following independent clause, is a comma [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >My guts says that the dash is better, My guts say (not says) that both sentences are bad. What role does "it" play? It's a bad colloquialissm that shouldn't be reduced to writing. >but I don't know the grammar >rules well enough to say exactly why it should be that way. Is there a >general rule that describes this kind of case? Yes: Don't do it. If you are inclined to email me for some reason, remove NOPSAM :-) > >When there is an introductory phrase that does little more than > >reiterate the subject of the following independent clause, is a comma [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > If you are inclined to email me > for some reason, remove NOPSAM :-) Actually, it was supposed to be, "My gut says ...." The extra 's' on 'gut' is a typo. And you are right: 'it' does not serve a good purpose. However, I can't change it. The words themselves compose part of a transcript. I'm merely adding punctuation. Therefore, the question still stands. >> >When there is an introductory phrase that does little more than >> >reiterate the subject of the following independent clause, is a comma [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] >Actually, it was supposed to be, "My gut says ...." The extra 's' on >'gut' is a typo. And you are right: 'it' does not serve a good purpose. I make loads of tai-pos. >However, I can't change it. The words themselves compose part of a >transcript. I'm merely adding punctuation. Therefore, the question >still stands. Yes, it does. In that case, I can give a reaosn to use only the comma. In grammar school, when they were writing about what not to write, iirc the sentence was written something like, "Tommy, he is really good at sports." But I think you are safe either way. You should probably be consistent. If you are inclined to email me for some reason, remove NOPSAM :-) > When there is an introductory phrase that does little more than > reiterate the subject of the following independent clause, is a comma [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > rules well enough to say exactly why it should be that way. Is there a > general rule that describes this kind of case? In short sentences like those I wouldn't put any punctuation at all between the two parts of the subject. A verse beginning with a similar kind of apposition comes to mind: "The rain it raineth on the just, And also on the unjust fella, But more upon the just, because The unjust steals the just's umbrella."  SignatureOdysseus >> When there is an introductory phrase that does little more than >> reiterate the subject of the following independent clause, is a comma [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > But more upon the just, because > The unjust steals the just's umbrella." The apposition may be short and sweet, but if the examples are voiced, a pause is clearly required between the noun and the pronoun. Following Lynch, I would reject the dash, which is more appropriate for parenthesis, and stick with the comma. Joanne > When there is an introductory phrase that does little more than > reiterate the subject of the following independent clause, is a comma [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > rules well enough to say exactly why it should be that way. Is there a > general rule that describes this kind of case? The dash gives my guts a severe case of dyspepsia. It's ugly visually and syntactically to my taste and a comma is more than sufficient (and efficient). |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.