0
Anonymous Posted 16 years ago
Grammar
Comma and because
Please tell me if my understanding is correct.
Example 1: He was at the hospital because of the bruise. (no comma preceding because, since 'of the bruise' is a dependent clause)
Example 2: He was at the hospital, because he suffered a bruise. (comma should precede because, since 'he suffered a bruise' is an independent clause).
Is this right?
Example 1: He was at the hospital because of the bruise. (no comma preceding because, since 'of the bruise' is a dependent clause)
Example 2: He was at the hospital, because he suffered a bruise. (comma should precede because, since 'he suffered a bruise' is an independent clause).
Is this right?
Top answer
Example 1: He was at the hospital because of the bruise. (no comma preceding because, since 'of the bruise' is a dependent clause-- No, it is just a prepositional phrase explaining why he was at the hospital ) Example 2: He was at the hospital because he suffered a bruise. (comma should precede because, since 'he suffered a bruise' is an independent clause-- No comma; it is a dependent clause ).
- Example 1: He was at the hospital because of the bruise.
- (no comma preceding because, since 'of the bruise' is a dependent clause-- No, it is just a prepositional phrase explaining why he was at the hospital ) Example 2: He was at the hospital because he suffered a bruise.
- (comma should precede because, since 'he suffered a bruise' is an independent clause-- No comma; it is a dependent clause ).
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
8 Answers
0
Example 1: He was at the hospital because of the bruise. (no comma preceding because, since 'of the bruise' is a dependent clause-- No, it is just a prepositional phrase explaining why he was at the hospital)
Example 2: He was at the hospital because he suffered a bruise. (comma should precede because, since 'he suffered a bruise' is an independent clause-- No comma; it is a depende
Example 2: He was at the hospital because he suffered a bruise. (comma should precede because, since 'he suffered a bruise' is an independent clause-- No comma; it is a depende
00
Thanks, I am a little confused about the second one. He was at the hospital, for he suffered a bruise. (for is the conjunction used to connect two independent clauses, and hence we have a comma before for). If we replace 'for' with 'because', shouldn't the same logic apply?
00
Not necessarily. The comma is needed with 'for' because it can be misconstrued as another part of speech.
00
I see. What about 'as' and 'since' because they too could be used to show cause/reason? He was lying to me as he was scared. He was lying to me since he was scared. Are commas essential in this case?
00
My feeling is similar with these: 'as' needs a comma because it is structurally confusing, but 'since' doesn't because it is not. Just a personal feeling, probably.
00
Oh thanks, MM. What about other subordinating conjunctions like although, though, while etc.? I am assuming commas should be avoided for these? Regarding 'as', I thought a comma implied causation and 'no comma' implied simultaneity of actions. She smiled as the sun came up. (she smiled at the same time as the sun came up). She smiled, as the sun came up. (owing to the comma, it means she smiled
00
All these commas we have been talking about (including those associated with the subordinate conjunctions you, mention) are essentially up to the writer, who must decide restrictiveness, clarity, flow and minimal use of that punctuation mark, and the balance to be set among these factors in deciding whether to add a comma or not.
The problem with She smiled as the sun came up / She sm
The problem with She smiled as the sun came up / She sm
00
Related Questions