punctuation - Using commas in cases of "extreme contrast" (commas in compound predicates with "but")


It seems to me that many, including myself recently, are applying this "extreme contrast" rule to the wrong cases. (See #2 in link below.) https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/punctuation/commas/extended_rules_for_commas.html


Specifically, I mean...you can't put a single comma between the two verbs of a compound predicate just because the second one follows "but" and seems 'extremely contrasty' (more than "but" can handle alone?), can you? That's comma abuse according to the link above. (See #13.)


Basically, I was taught rules like the ones in these links: https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/commas/ https://www.grammarly.com/blog/comma-before-but/


But, I thought they might be outdated, so I started...abusing commas, I think, like in a recent comment I made:



That's what I was thinking, but couldn't articulate--the "or" being inclusive...



That doesn't seem correct to me...most of the time, and this is definitely wrong...I think:



I tried, but couldn't do it.



But, for whatever reason, I have no problem at all with this:



I tried and tried, but couldn't.



Clearly, I'm confused about it now (i.e. what's modern vs. what's just wrong). I couldn't find a similar context (concerning rule #13 as stated above) in the 40+ questions on this site (concerning a comma before "but"), so thanks in advance if you can help with this. Good evening.



Answer



Those are sentences with elliptic clauses, which means something is left out that has to be supplied:





  1. That's what I was thinking, but [what I] couldn't articulate—the "or" being inclusive...




  2. I tried, but [I] couldn't do it.




  3. I tried and tried, but [I] couldn't.





The conventional stylistic rule of thumb here is that independent clauses are separated by commas, while elliptical clauses are not. So at the very least you could write those sentences without the comma.


But is the comma permissible anyway? That is a more nuanced stylistic question. It may depend on which style book you ask. I believe they will generally tell you that you shouldn't use a comma with an elliptical clause unless you have a special reason to do so.


This reason could be that you want to introduce an extra long pause to emphasise the contrast of a but clause. Or that the elliptical clause should be seen as a kind of afterthought: afterthoughts are generally separated by commas. Or that you have more than one elliptical clause, and you want to indicate that the first one is strongly conexed to the main clause while the second is more separate. Or that the sentence is very long already and would become more readable with an extra comma. Or some other reason that applies to non-compulsory commas in any other position.




  1. That's what I was thinking, but couldn't articulate—the "or" being inclusive...



In your first example, I would probably not use a comma, because it really isn't necessary and the sentence sounds nicer, more concise, without it. But you might feel you want to emphasise the contrast using an extra special pause. It's ultimately up to you.




  1. I tried, but couldn't do it.



In your second example, I agree with you that the comma is the least appropriate. One reason is that the sentence is short, and shorter sentences generally have fewer non-compulsory commas. Another is that it is easy to 'fix' the sentence if you really need the comma, by adding I (the subject) to the second clause, thereby removing the ellipsis; this results in two independent clauses, which normally have a comma between them. The fix is not as easy in the first example, because you would need to add two words; that can be a reason to do it the other way.




  1. I tried and tried, but couldn't.



Here we have three clauses, the last two elliptical. I might very well use a comma here, to indicate that the first two clauses belong together and the third is separate. It would actually be functional here to so mark the degree of conexion.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

verbs - "Baby is creeping" vs. "baby is crawling" in AmE

Years and years ago, I remember reading in a book on AmE usage that the phrasal turn a baby creeps before it walks was to some extent more common to AmE than to BrE, which preferred exclusively the "crawl" version. And so, I just recently checked on the accuracy of that information on NGram Viewer , and it actually was fact... more than a century ago! What I would like you to tell is if it would sound sort of weird to hear someone say today in the US that a child "creeps" before walking and running (see Synonyms ) rather than it crawls. Also, what's the story to those terms? How did "to crawl" come to prevail and supersede "to creep" to describe the way a baby moves around? As with a plant, so with a child. His mind grows by natural stages. A child creeps before he walks , sits before he stands, cries before he laughs, babbles before he talks, draws a circle before he draws a square, lies before he tells the truth, and is selfish before he
Read more

commas - Does this sentence have too many subjunctives?

Does this sentence have too many subjunctives? If it please the king, let it be decreed that they be destroyed, and I will pay 10,000 talents of silver into the hands of those who have charge of the king's business, that they may put it into the king's treasuries. I am stumped by this sentence construction. First, there is "Let it be," which is a common English idiomatic phrase, but then it follows another subjunctive. Is that to say you can actually have a subjunctive followed by another subjunctive? Also, why does the sentence use "please"? If that's the subjunctive tense there, then why is it followed by another subjunctive instead of a conditional, or maybe "Let it be" is the conditional? Lastly, I wish to know how the that is used in the sentence. Perhaps, the simplified sentence can be restated like so: Let it be decreed that they be destroyed and that they may put it into the king's treasuries. If not, maybe the simplified sent
Read more

time - English notation for hour, minutes and seconds

I often see English notation about time using the " and ' symbols. I have always mistaken about the two, and even their meaning. I'm more used to "01:05:56", for example. How do you represent the hour, minutes, and seconds using the apostrophe and quotes punctuations? Which is for the hour, which is for minutes, and which is for seconds? Is it the common way to write duration of time elapsed? Do they have a special pronunciation? Answer It's not particularly common for expressions of time. It's similar to degrees-minutes-seconds: instead of decimal degrees (38.897212°,-77.036519°) you write (38° 53′ 49.9632″, -77° 2′ 11.4678″). Both are derived from a sexagesimal counting system such as that devised in Ancient Babylon: the single prime represents the first sexagesimal division and the second the next, and so on. 17th-century astronomers used a third division of 1/60th of a second. The advantage of using minute and second symbols for time is that it o
Read more

grammatical number - Use of lone apostrophe for plural?

I've been reading William Manchester's book "American Caesar", which is about Douglas MacArthur, and I found that he uses a strange convention for pluralizing the family name. When talking about the MacArthurs as a whole, he writes MacArthur' with an apostrophe, as in "After the war, the MacArthur' lived in Tokyo while the general was proconsul" (yes, he uses that term to describe him). I have never seen or heard of a rule that would prescribe this. Manchester is a bit old-timey in his style: for example, he also writes "in behalf of" instead of "on behalf of", which is the only one I have ever seen. So perhaps this is similar. Where does he get this apostrophe from? Edit: There seems to be some difficulty finding examples, which is odd. Here is a direct link to a page from Google Books that shows the apostrophe.
Read more

etymology - Origin of "s--t eating grin"

What is the origin of the phrase shit eating grin ? How did it come to mean showing smugness or self-satisfaction of an individual's actions? Answer From the Urban Dictionary: ...these uses are documented in the Oxford English Dictionary no earlier than 1957 There have been similar expressions used quite far back: In Book XXI of his History of Rome, Livy describes a Carthaginian sect of coprophages, the risus faecivorus, or shit-eating grin, being commonly displayed by its adherents. Although, its origin is undetermined, they may have been incidents which caused the invention of this phrase. Below is an excerpt: "1944 Jrnl. Nerv. & Mental Dis. XCIX. 959 Among demented patients in advanced stages of their illness,..it is not rare to see some of them grasp their own feces, chew them and eat them often with great pleasure and satisfaction (coprophagia).
Read more

etymology - Where does the phrase "doctored" originate?

This is a phrase I’m particularly confused about, because it’s used often when something is manipulated or changed. For example, sometimes images surface online that are clearly Photoshopped, but people refer to them as “doctored” images. Why use the word “doctored” here? Answer The earliest Google Books match for an instance of doctored in a transitional (or perhaps post-transitional) sense between "amended" and "adulterated" appears in William Marshall, The Rural Economy of Glocestershire; Including Its Dairy: Together with the Dairy Management of North Wiltshire, and the Management of Orchards and Fruit Liquor, in Herefordshire , volume 2 (1789): Men in general, however, whose palates are set to rough cider, consider the common sweet sort as an effeminate beverage; and rough cider, properly manufactured, is probably the most generous liquor; being deemed more wholesome, to habits in general, than sweet cider:—even when genuine. That which is drank, in the kingd
Read more

word choice - Which is the correct spelling: “fairy” or “faerie”?

Fairy vs. faerie — which is the correct spelling? Answer As others have noted, fairy is the standard modern spelling, and faerie is a pseudo-archaism. However, in some contexts there is now a semantic distinction between the two spellings! In particular, fairy tales and the associated idea of fairies typically refer to the genre of folk stories printed by the Brothers Grimm, then sweetened and popularized for modern audiences by Disney et al. Faerie stories , on the other hand, are stories about the fae : otherworldly, unpredictable, and dangerous creatures who appear in the folk-tales and myths of England and Ireland. In origin, of course, the fairies and the fae are one and the same, but the connotations and usage of the words today are headed in opposite directions. A Google image search for fairy vs. faerie shows a lot of overlap, but some very significant differences in tone and content between the two terms. Note that the search for "fairy" turns up a number
Read more