 |
 | 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 2007are commas needed?
I have just read the end sentence which states: 'Your thoughtful leadership is as always greatly appreciated.' It seems to me that there should be a comma after 'is' and after 'always'. Writing seems to omit this from my reading of late. Lazy journalism? Please advise. > I have just read the end sentence which states: > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > 'always'. Writing seems to omit this from my reading of late. Lazy > journalism? Ah the parenthetical comma! Parentheses or dashes are possible also, I think. > I have just read the end sentence which states: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Please advise. I would have put them there, but I tend to be commatose. Often I am right, though.  SignatureSkitt (in Hayward, California) http://www.geocities.com/opus731/ > > I have just read the end sentence which states: > > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > I would have put them there, but I tend to be commatose. Often I am right, > though. I'm with Skitt. I'd add that use of the commas is, I would say, indisputably <litotes alert> not incorrect. At worst you'll encounter a stylistic objection. But there are many who will consider omission of the commas *wrong*.[1] In short, you won't go wrong if you use the commas. [1] Ask Mark Wallace about the asterisks. SignatureBob Lieblich Commaphile Hi. I read somewhere(on a style manual) that commas to mark off such expressions as 'however', 'as always' etc must be used only when you want to emphasize the qualification to the main clause introduced by these words or phrases and not otherwise. Keeping this distinction alive(if it's recognised at all) seems to be to the language's advantage. I'd appreciate comments. >I have just read the end sentence which states: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Please advise. It's a similar story with most common two-or-three-word parentheticals -- "so to speak", "of course" and so on. I don't care for it much either. SignatureArchie Valparaiso (Me? I blame the weather.) > I have just read the end sentence which states: > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > 'always'. Writing seems to omit this from my reading of late. Lazy > journalism? It is rarely wrong to add commas, because, they tend to break the text up, into bite-sized chunks, making it easier to digest, even if grammatically wrong. spellin mistaik filted: >> I have just read the end sentence which states: >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >into bite-sized chunks, making it easier to digest, even if grammatically >wrong. I am pleased to, see that someone, has finally brought some, sense to this topic....r Signature"You got Schadenfreude on my Weltanschauung!" "You got Weltanschauung in my Schadenfreude!" Harry Lethall: > It is rarely wrong to add commas, because, they tend to break the text up, > into bite-sized chunks, making it easier to digest, even if grammatically > wrong. That's laying it on a bit thick. The ungrammatical comma after "because" does not make the sentence easier to read. SignatureMark Brader, Toronto | "The time to make up your mind about people msb@vex.net | is never." --The Philadelphia Story |
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.