Clear rules as to this type of comma usage case?

Question

Hi. Please help.Why do they have commas (if they are correctly placed)? I think when we use only two adjectives out of the three (in each example), we wouldn't normally place commas (like "a long sweet food" for the first example and "a large circular piece of metal" for the second).a long, thin, sweet fooda large, flat, circular piece of metalAlso, how about this? Would you place a comma? Thank you for your help in advance.of ape-like, antediluvian man

Dokterjokkebrok · Accepted Answer

Hi,

In a sequence of modifiers, the use of commas adds to the ease of comprehension of the whole noun phrase and how it should be understood by the reader.

I normally try to use commas the way you have in your example sentences. However, being aware that commas represent a short break in a speech utterance, I sometimes leave them out if the adjectives are few (i.e. 2) and relatively short (i.e. 3-4 letters max.). Adding commas would otherwise feel like an overkill of punctuation. But maybe (probably) that is my opinion.

Regards,
DJB

Enoon · Answer

AnonymousWhy do they have commas (if they are correctly placed)? I think when we use only two adjectives out of the three (in each example), we wouldn't normally place commas (like "a long sweet food" for the first example and "a large circular piece of metal" for the second).

Those need commas, too.

AnonymousAlso, how about this? Would you place a comma? Thank you for your help in advance.of ape-like, antediluvian man

There are two tests, neither of which is as good as knowing what you mean. If you can use "and", use a comma, and if you can reverse the order of the adjectives with no change in meaning, use a comma. Your phrase fails both tests, to my way of thinking—we have an antediluvian man who is ape-like, not a man who is both ape-like and antediluvian. No comma.

It is often a matter of opinion, so, no, there is no infallible rule.

Anonymous · Answer

Thank you. When you say "relatively short (i.e. 3-4 letters max.)," are you referring to the number of letters that comprises an adjective? For example, "sad" would be three letters and short. Also, do you follow what I saw online called "The Loyal Order of Adjectives," (I am sure you do) or are you more concerned about clarity (comprehension) and a pause? Thank you again for your help in advance.

Enoon · Answer

AnonymousThank you. When you say "relatively short (i.e. 3-4 letters max.)," are you referring to the number of letters that comprises an adjective? For example, "sad" would be three letters and short. Also, do you follow what I saw online called "The Loyal Order of Adjectives," (I am sure you do) or are you more concerned about clarity (comprehension) and a pause? Thank you again for your help in advance.

Commas do not represent a pause. They are there to aid reading. The number of letters in the adjective has no bearing on the applicability of commas with it.

The order of adjectives is instinctive in a native speaker, by the way. It is surprising to me that there is such a reliable rule for it, but it does work.

Dokterjokkebrok · Answer

enoonCommas do not represent a pause. They are there to aid reading. The number of letters in the adjective has no bearing on the applicability of commas with it.

Possibly you are referring to another type of comma usage, but if in fact you believe that commas do not signify a pause, then why have you used a comma below? If your assumption is that commas aid reading – reading being basically secondary to and based on speech – then commas are there to signify whether in actual speech there is a natural pause or intonation change.

enoonThe order of adjectives is instinctive in a native speaker, by the way. It is surprising to me that there is such a reliable rule for it, but it does work.

Also, whether the number of letters in adjectives has any bearing on the applicability of commas is debatable. You may be right, but merely stating that it doesn't, is not an argument. I would appreciate it if you could elaborate on that.

Thank you.

DJB

Enoon · Answer

You said it yourself, that writing is secondary to speech. I disagree that writing is based on speech. I think it is a separate form of communication. That's why dialogue looks so different from narrative on the page. If you want to tell people where to pause, yes, the comma can do that, but that function should be reserved for dialogue and poetry and letters to your sister. The rest of the time, it helps the reader make sense of this unnatural process. Why did it take so long for people to get around to writing language, and some never did? Because it is not a natural thing to do, and we need all the help we can get with it.

As for my comma, it must be there whether or not I meant for the sentence to be said so briskly there would be no pause whatsoever between "speaker" and "by". We set off asides with a comma by convention.

And as for the number of letters in an adjective, I feel no need to explain why that is not so. You can't just make up any rule you like and then demand that others talk you out of it. It is wrong on its face. "Jerry was a hot, sad, red little man."

Dokterjokkebrok · Answer

Hi,

Yes, I have said that writing is secondary to speech. In addition, I also believe that it is modeled on what we say. When you say that the two are separate forms of communication, I can think of various arguments why they are in fact different from each other to some extent, and I would have to say you are right. However, I asume you are not suggesting they are two completely different, unrelated and indepedent forms of communication which, for various psycho-linguistical reasons is very unlikely. All forms of human communication inevitably stem from our brain and its ability to make sense of things.

enoonAs for my comma, it must be there whether or not I meant for the sentence to be said so briskly there would be no pause whatsoever between "speaker" and "by". We set off asides with a comma by convention.

Conventions are not just conventions for no reason. Therefore, there must be a reason for them to exist which aids our understanding of a text. Ultimately, that is what it all comes down to, right? Communication must be encoded and decoded again and virtually everything we employ in our communication, whether written or spoken, serves to achieve that goal.

enoonAnd as for the number of letters in an adjective, I feel no need to explain why that is not so. You can't just make up any rule you like and then demand that others talk you out of it. It is wrong on its face. "Jerry was a hot, sad, red little man."

I was most certainly not trying to make up any rules. If you had that impression, I apologize. Just for the record, I was only explaining to the anon why I personally sometimes leave out commas. I would not dare challenge a rule on my own in its entirety (I'm not even a native) but do think it is important to point out that, especially in languages, rules are not simply just rules. All users of a language together define the rules, but for that it must be possible to discuss why they are there in the first place.

- Regards -

DJB

Clear rules as to this type of comma usage case?

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions