Because in complex sentence

Question

When "because" is used as a sentence conjunction in a complex sentence, is a comma required before the "because?"For example:I ate an apple and he ate a banana.vs.I ate an apple, and he ate a banana.

Usenet · Accepted Answer

[nq:1]When "because" is used as a sentence conjunction in a complex sentence, is a comma required before the "because?" For example: I ate an apple and he ate a banana. vs. I ate an apple, and he ate a banana.[/nq]
No. A comma represents a pause. If you want a pause, add a comma. If you don't, don't.
The "normal" sentence is the one without the comma. With the comma, and therefore with the pause, the sentence has a slightly different slant. Here it could mean that he ate his banana after you ate your apple. Or maybe you want to emphasise that you did different things. Or maybe the second part of the sentence was an afterthought.
Adrian

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]When "because" is used as a sentence conjunction in a ... vs. I ate an apple, and he ate a banana.[/nq]
[nq:1]No. A comma represents a pause. If you want a pause, add a comma. If you don't, don't.[/nq]
I offer a contrary view with complications.
The complication is that there are two different kinds of conjunctions relevant here, coordinating and subordinating. A coordinating conjunction joins two or more grammatically equivalent constructions words, phrases, clauses. Relevant here is its function of joining two indepedent clauses. The most obvious coordinating conjunctions are "and," "but," and "or." Note that in the preceding sentence "and" is a coordinating conjunction that connects three single words.
The other kind of conjunction is a subordinating conjunction, which connects a dependent (subordinate) clause to an independent clause. There are many such conjunctions "because, "while," "after," "that" (when used as a conjunction), "although," etc., etc.
The traditional rule of punctuation when joining two independent clauses with a coordinating conjunction is to put a comma before the conjunction. Failure to do so can lead to confusion: "I very much admire John Dean and Mrs. Dean very much admires me." Reading this the first time through, you may get the impression that I'm saying I admire Mrs. Dean (and maybe I do admire her, but the sentence doesn't say that). Put a comma before the "and", and the meaning becomes clear.

The traditional rule saves you the worry of examining every sentence of that form to determine whether you need a comma to avoid misleading the reader. Just do it every time. End of problem. It also serves the purpose of indicating that the sentence is made up of two independent clauses clarifyiung the structure. This structural function is far more important, in this instance, than whether you take a breath between the two clauses.
[nq:1]The "normal" sentence is the one without the comma. With the comma, and therefore with the pause, the sentence has ... you want to emphasise that you did different things. Or maybe the second part of the sentence was an afterthought.[/nq]
I think this puts far, far too much weight on the comma. It's there to separate the two clauses, and that's all it needs to do.

Okay, occasionally a sentence is so short that you don't need a comma even if it is made up of two independent clauses joined by a conjunction. The one about eating the fruit almost makes it under that wire, but I'd insist on something even shorter, such as "I walked and he ran." When there are direct objects in both clauses, I'd say you need the comma.
So far we've been talking about independent clauses joined by a coordinating conjunction. The rule for subordinating one clause to another is different. You don't have such a serious problem of misdirection there, so the comma is usually optional. "I admire him because he is so honest" is a simple example. "Because he is so honest" is the subordinate clause, and there is no need for a comma preceding it. Save the comma for where you need a pause, or where the structure becomes clearer if you insert it: "I prefer a comma in a sentence like this, although you may feel otherwise."
There's one more point that needs making about "because" specifically. If the independent clause has a negative meaning, the "because" that follows can lead to confusion. Consider the sentence: "I did not go to bed because my parents insisted that I do so." That can mean (1) I did go to bed, but not as the result of my parents' insistence or (2) I am a bad boy, and when my parents insisted that I go to bed I refused.

There's no way, from the sentence itself, to tell which is meant. Context may help, of course, and here we have none, but it's better not to get caught writing such a sentence. Some people think that putting a comma before the "because" will make it clear that the second (bad boy) meaning is intended, but that's a lot of weight to put on a comma. So watch out for "not ... because" sentences.
What was that question again?

Bob Lieblich
Who may even know what he's talking about

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1] A comma represents a pause. If you want a pause, add a comma. If you don't, don't.[/nq]
A comma doesn't always represent a pause, and a pause doesn't always require a comma.
IMO.
Maria Conlon

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2] A comma represents a pause. If you want a pause, add a comma. If you don't, don't.[/nq]
[nq:1]A comma doesn't always represent a pause, and a pause doesn't always require a comma. IMO.[/nq]
You tell 'em, Tootsie.

Bob Lieblich
So how far *is* it from Detroit to Chicago?

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2] A comma represents a pause. If you want a pause, add a comma. If you don't, don't.[/nq]
[nq:1]A comma doesn't always represent a pause, and a pause doesn't always require a comma. IMO.[/nq]
I think Bob L. explained it very well, and I agree with his assessment of comma usage between independent clauses. I am well aware that there are others who have a different view.

Skitt (in SF Bay Area) http://www.geocities.com/opus731/ I speak English well I learn it from a book!
Manuel (Fawlty Towers)

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]A comma doesn't always represent a pause, and a pause doesn't always require a comma. IMO.[/nq]
[nq:1]You tell 'em, Tootsie.[/nq]
Well, I did (maybe), but you explained it, which I am usually unable to do. I learned from your reply (and "Thank You," by the way), but can offer no assurance that I will remember the details.

Maria Conlon
(Nickname: "Tootsie")

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]A comma doesn't always represent a pause, and a pause doesn't always require a comma. IMO.[/nq]
[nq:1]I think Bob L. explained it very well, and I agree with his assessment of comma usage between independent clauses. I am well aware that there are others who have a different view.[/nq]
Well, I agree with Bob, too. (See my reply to him.)

What I can't figure out is whether you agree with *my* post or not. If not, you are very much the diplomat, Alec. :-)
Maria Conlon

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]No. A comma represents a pause. If you want a pause, add a comma. If you don't, don't.[/nq]
[nq:1]I offer a contrary view with complications. The complication is that there are two different kinds of conjunctions relevant here, ... "and," "but," and "or." Note that in the preceding sentence "and" is a coordinating conjunction that connects three single words.[/nq]
I wouldn't put a comma after "but". I was taught not to; it's just decoration.
[nq:1]The traditional rule of punctuation when joining two independent clauses with a coordinating conjunction is to put a comma before the conjunction.[/nq]
As I hinted above, I know (knew) of no such rule.
[nq:1]Failure to do so can lead to confusion: "I very much admire John Dean and Mrs. Dean very much admires ... impression that I'm saying I admire Mrs. Dean (and maybe I do admire her, but the sentence doesn't say that).[/nq]
I read it and wasn't confused in the slightest. I admit though that I have seen (better) examples where there *is* some confusion and a comma would be preferred.
[nq:1]Put a comma before the "and", and the meaning becomes clear. The traditional rule saves you the worry of examining every sentence of that form to determine whether you need a comma to avoid misleading the reader. Just do it every time. End of problem.[/nq]
...and the creation of a different problem. Since, in English, the comma is, unlike in German, not a grammatical device, it's unwise to use it as one. Its purpose is to represent a pause**, and to give it two purposes creates confusion.
** The "pause" may manifest itself as a stop or a change in tone.
[nq:1]It also serves the purpose of indicating that the sentence is made up of two independent clauses clarifyiung the structure. This structural function is far more important, in this instance, than whether you take a breath between the two clauses.[/nq]
A grammarian may find it useful to indicate this, but to the rest of us it's of no importance.
Adrian

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]The traditional rule of punctuation when joining two independent clauses with a coordinating conjunction is to put a comma before the conjunction.[/nq]
[nq:1]As I hinted above, I know (knew) of no such rule.[/nq]
From http://ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/commas.htm:
Use a comma + a little conjunction (and, but, for, nor, yet, or, so) to connect two independent clauses, as in "He hit the ball well, but he ran toward third base."

In English the comma *is* a grammatical device, but some use it also to indicate pauses in speech, but that is a secondary function of the comma.
Skitt (in SF Bay Area) http://www.geocities.com/opus731/ I speak English well I learn it from a book!
Manuel (Fawlty Towers)

Usenet · Answer

You can't speak for readers with comparatively low English literacy skills, who find such clues helpful. The structural comma is also helpful in instructional writing, as in the following example:
"From the File menu, choose Print, and select the target printer."

Neither comma is required, but without them
the instruction lacks clarity.

Michael West
Melbourne, Australia
(In the shadow of the You-Yangs)

Because in complex sentence

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions