0
Anonymous Posted 17 years ago
Grammar

Comma before a subordinate clause

Hi. Do you think we should almost always (possibly always?) place a comma before a subordinate clause when an independent clause precedes it?

I think the word "providing" is a subordinate conjunction (if I am not mistaken), but I think we usually see sentences with a comma before it when an independent clause is before it. (I hope I phrased my question correctly to reflect what I wanted to say.)
  

Top answer

No, not at all. Restrictive subordinators would not normally be preceded by commas.

  • No, not at all.
  • Restrictive subordinators would not normally be preceded by commas.
Free · every Monday

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.

4 Answers
0
No, not at all. Restrictive subordinators would not normally be preceded by commas.
0
AnonymousDo you think we should almost always (possibly always?) place a comma before a subordinate clause when an independent clause precedes it?
I agree with Mr. Micawber. In fact, I think you'll find the comma is more often omitted between a main clause and a following subordinate clause. This is especially true with the conjunctions if and beca
0
Thank you, Mr. M and CalifJim.

So would you say that eventhough all are subordinate clauses, if one is restrictive, it will not normally preceded by commas?

Sorry but woud you answer this, too? Could we have several subordinate clauses in one sentence like I seem to have done with my above question? Please take a look at the part "eventhough all are subordinate clauses, if one i
0
AnonymousSo would you say that eventhough even though all are subordinate clauses, if one is restrictive, it will not normally preceded by commas?
That seems reasonable, yes. However, I am not familiar with the term "restrictive" being used for any but relative (adjectival) subordinate clauses. That leaves

Related Questions