0
Usenet Posted 23 years ago
Usage
'Commas Enhance Clarity, Regulate Writing Flow'
Commas Enhance Clarity, Regulate Writing Flow
By Kenneth F. Oettle Texas Lawyer Monday, September 15, 2003
When anyone reads anything which he wishes to study, he does not despise the letters and punctuation marks, and call them illusion, chance and worthless shells, but he reads them, he studies and loves them, letter by letter." That's a quote from Herman Hesse Siddharth's "New Directions." Not knowing how to use commas is like not knowing how to catch a baseball. Despite the simplicity and utility of doing it correctly, some people do it wrong anyway.
One catches a baseball by drawing the glove back as the ball approaches rather than snapping stiff-armed at the ball. This softens the impact and reduces the likelihood that the ball will bounce out of the glove. Either you know how to do this or you don't.
It seems like people either know how to use commas or they don't. Trying to teach this skill can be as frustrating as trying to teach someone to catch a baseball. Editing drafts doesn't seem to help, nor do principles such as "use a comma to separate independent clauses connected by 'and.' " The concept of "independent clause" is meaningless to most people who misuse commas (and to many who don't), as is the term "run-on sentence."
Supplying practical reasons for the rules of punctuation may help. After all, commas are practical. They show the reader where to pause, enhancing the rhythm and clarity of the prose.
Three rules for using commas are explained below.
o Rule No. 1. Precede tack-on "which" clauses with a comma.
Here's an example:
The trial court granted the motion for summary judgment which the appellate court affirmed.
This one is a classic. I call it the "breathless which clause" because it rushes on as if the writer is overwhelmed by the importance and urgency of the message and hasn't time to catch a breath. Because the word "judgment" is not followed by a comma, the writer seems to be distinguishing a summary judgment motion that was affirmed from summary judgment motions that were not affirmed. This makes no sense, and the reader eventually will catch on, but not without a moment of confusion, whether conscious and palpable or subconscious and fleeting.
True, the use of "which" instead of "that" could signal that the tack-on clause is intended to modify (describe) rather than identify something in the first half of the sentence, given that the proper way to identify an item in a set is to use "that," not "which" (for example, "the dog that barked," not "the dog which barked"). But writers so frequently use "which" where they should use "that" that most readers probably would figure the "which" to be functioning like "that" and briefly would be confused because the intended message (that summary judgment was affirmed) is at odds with the alternative, albeit illogical, message embedded in the structure (that the trial court granted the motion that was affirmed). Corrected, the sentence reads:
The trial court granted the motion for summary judgment, which the appellate court affirmed.
Getting commas right is not merely an academic exercise. Readers who expect to see proper punctuation may be irritated by an apparent lack of respect for the forms, and even those on whom punctuation is lost will have to sort through the conflicting grammatical messages. As a consequence, your writing may be perceived as substandard, and by dint of association, your argument may be perceived as substandard as well.
o Rule No. 2. Use a comma when tacking on an "ing" clause that modifies rather than identifies something in the first half of the sentence:
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York dismissed the complaint finding that plaintiff had failed to allege a prima facie case.
The writer meant to say the court dismissed the complaint for failure to allege a prima facie case. But without the comma, the sentence appears, at least momentarily, to suggest the court dismissed a particular complaint - the one that made a certain finding ("the complaint finding that plaintiff had failed to allege a prima facie case"). Because complaints don't make findings, the reader will figure it out, but at the cost of time and energy. Thus, a comma is needed between "complaint" and "finding:"
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York dismissed the complaint, finding that plaintiff had failed to allege a prima facie case.
Again, it is a small bump in the road for the alert reader, but bumps add up.
o Rule No. 3. Place a comma between "independent clauses" connected by "and," that is, groups of words that have a subject and a verb and could stand on their own as separate sentences.
As indicated above, lawyers have a tendency to run on as if breathless with the importance and urgency of what they have to say. Maybe they do this for effect, or maybe they fear they will lose the reader's attention if they interrupt the flow. For example:
The attorney work product privilege is not conditioned upon litigation actually ensuing and it will be applied as long as the prospect of litigation is identifiable.
This is a run-on sentence because it runs from one independent clause to another. Readers who are trained in punctuation - and this probably includes most judges - cannot help viewing the omission of the comma as substandard. If readers experience the packaging as substandard, then the message is at risk as well. In a close case, this could tip the balance.
A comma in the above sentence would tell the reader to pause and digest an important principle - that work product protection does not require actual litigation - before learning how the principle is qualified, namely, that the prospect of litigation has to be identifiable. Thus, the comma cannot only serve as a talisman against reader prejudice, but it also can aid clarity as well.
The sentence can be fixed in three ways. You can add a comma after "ensuing," thus eliminating the run-on factor. You can add a semicolon after ensuing and drop the "and," or you can put a period after ensuing and begin a new sentence.
I like the period because it directs the reader to stop completely and absorb the first thought before moving on. The semicolon is a nice touch, but I avoid it because many readers do not know what to make of it, and I don't want to confuse or alienate them. Our job is not to expose readers to the finer tools of writing, merely to persuade them.
Puzzler
How would you tighten and sharpen the following sentence?
A corporation has an obligation to report all campaign contributions that it makes that are over $100.
Reduce the phrase "has an obligation to" to "must" and remove both "that" constructions at the end of the sentence because they are implicit.
The revised version:
A corporation must report all campaign contributions over $100.
Kenneth F. Oettle is a partner and co-chairman of the appellate group and writing and mentor programs at Sills Cummis Radin Tischman Epstein & Gross. He invites questions and suggestions for future columns to (Email Removed). This article originally appeared in The New Jersey Law Journal, a Texas Lawyer affiliate. "Making Your Point" appears monthly in Texas Lawyer.
http://www.law.com/jsp/printerfriendly.jsp?c=PubArticle&t=PrinterFriendlyArticleState&&cid=1063212016887
- - - - - - - Posted on Sunday, September 14, 2003 by Recourse - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
LOL, very amusing. I used to proof-read for one lawyer at my firm and I would say to him, "I brought my little bag of commas and have added several to your piece,"
Posted on Sunday, September 14, 2003 by jocon307
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
He must be a 'comma chameleon', like in the song by Boy George.
Posted on Sunday, September 14, 2003 by headsonpikes
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
instant commas gonna get you
Posted on Sunday, September 14, 2003 by InvisibleChurch
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Oh, . . my, . . GOD,
I love,
commas!
Posted on Sunday, September 14, 2003 by norraad
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I thought Boy George was a colon aficionado.
Posted on Sunday, September 14, 2003 by e_engineer
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I, agree, wholehearteldy.
Posted on Sunday, September 14, 2003 by Larry Lucido
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
This reminds me of something I read once. Supposedly a class was given the following sentence to punctuate:
woman without her man is a savage
The boys in the class punctuated it thus: "Woman, without her man, is a savage."
The girls punctuated it: "Woman! Without her, man is a savage."
Posted on Sunday, September 14, 2003 by Verginius Rufus
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Most of us know when to pause when speaking, so a much simpler method to figure out comma placement is to read the sentence as if you were speaking it. Whenever you pause, put a comma there. Of course, this method isn't 100% correct every time, and it might not work if English is not your first language. But it is a lot easier than trying to remember several rules of grammar.
Posted on Sunday, September 14, 2003 by timm22
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To be strict, there shouldn't be a comma in the Hesse quotation after "punctuation marks," because the verb call" in "and call them illusion" looks back to the same subject as the preceding clause. Nitpicking, maybe, but that seems to be what he is calling for.
Still, there's no great harm in adding an extra comma here and there if it clarifies the sense, as it could be argued this one does.
Posted on Sunday, September 14, 2003 by Cicero
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[nq:1]The girls punctuated it: "Woman! Without her, man is a savage."[/nq]
Woman, without her, man doesn't have to deal with monthly cycles, and can watch his football game in peace, but he will have to make his own sandwich, and get his own beer.
Posted on Sunday, September 14, 2003 by Moonman62
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Now we need a column about using apostrophes for plurals. That's one of the biggest abuses of written communication I see today.
Posted on Sunday, September 14, 2003 by Allegra
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I suppose I need to clarify: One is NOT supposed to use apostrophes for plurals.
Posted on Sunday, September 14, 2003 by Allegra
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - End of forwarded messages
*---
Jai Maharaj
By Kenneth F. Oettle Texas Lawyer Monday, September 15, 2003
When anyone reads anything which he wishes to study, he does not despise the letters and punctuation marks, and call them illusion, chance and worthless shells, but he reads them, he studies and loves them, letter by letter." That's a quote from Herman Hesse Siddharth's "New Directions." Not knowing how to use commas is like not knowing how to catch a baseball. Despite the simplicity and utility of doing it correctly, some people do it wrong anyway.
One catches a baseball by drawing the glove back as the ball approaches rather than snapping stiff-armed at the ball. This softens the impact and reduces the likelihood that the ball will bounce out of the glove. Either you know how to do this or you don't.
It seems like people either know how to use commas or they don't. Trying to teach this skill can be as frustrating as trying to teach someone to catch a baseball. Editing drafts doesn't seem to help, nor do principles such as "use a comma to separate independent clauses connected by 'and.' " The concept of "independent clause" is meaningless to most people who misuse commas (and to many who don't), as is the term "run-on sentence."
Supplying practical reasons for the rules of punctuation may help. After all, commas are practical. They show the reader where to pause, enhancing the rhythm and clarity of the prose.
Three rules for using commas are explained below.
o Rule No. 1. Precede tack-on "which" clauses with a comma.
Here's an example:
The trial court granted the motion for summary judgment which the appellate court affirmed.
This one is a classic. I call it the "breathless which clause" because it rushes on as if the writer is overwhelmed by the importance and urgency of the message and hasn't time to catch a breath. Because the word "judgment" is not followed by a comma, the writer seems to be distinguishing a summary judgment motion that was affirmed from summary judgment motions that were not affirmed. This makes no sense, and the reader eventually will catch on, but not without a moment of confusion, whether conscious and palpable or subconscious and fleeting.
True, the use of "which" instead of "that" could signal that the tack-on clause is intended to modify (describe) rather than identify something in the first half of the sentence, given that the proper way to identify an item in a set is to use "that," not "which" (for example, "the dog that barked," not "the dog which barked"). But writers so frequently use "which" where they should use "that" that most readers probably would figure the "which" to be functioning like "that" and briefly would be confused because the intended message (that summary judgment was affirmed) is at odds with the alternative, albeit illogical, message embedded in the structure (that the trial court granted the motion that was affirmed). Corrected, the sentence reads:
The trial court granted the motion for summary judgment, which the appellate court affirmed.
Getting commas right is not merely an academic exercise. Readers who expect to see proper punctuation may be irritated by an apparent lack of respect for the forms, and even those on whom punctuation is lost will have to sort through the conflicting grammatical messages. As a consequence, your writing may be perceived as substandard, and by dint of association, your argument may be perceived as substandard as well.
o Rule No. 2. Use a comma when tacking on an "ing" clause that modifies rather than identifies something in the first half of the sentence:
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York dismissed the complaint finding that plaintiff had failed to allege a prima facie case.
The writer meant to say the court dismissed the complaint for failure to allege a prima facie case. But without the comma, the sentence appears, at least momentarily, to suggest the court dismissed a particular complaint - the one that made a certain finding ("the complaint finding that plaintiff had failed to allege a prima facie case"). Because complaints don't make findings, the reader will figure it out, but at the cost of time and energy. Thus, a comma is needed between "complaint" and "finding:"
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York dismissed the complaint, finding that plaintiff had failed to allege a prima facie case.
Again, it is a small bump in the road for the alert reader, but bumps add up.
o Rule No. 3. Place a comma between "independent clauses" connected by "and," that is, groups of words that have a subject and a verb and could stand on their own as separate sentences.
As indicated above, lawyers have a tendency to run on as if breathless with the importance and urgency of what they have to say. Maybe they do this for effect, or maybe they fear they will lose the reader's attention if they interrupt the flow. For example:
The attorney work product privilege is not conditioned upon litigation actually ensuing and it will be applied as long as the prospect of litigation is identifiable.
This is a run-on sentence because it runs from one independent clause to another. Readers who are trained in punctuation - and this probably includes most judges - cannot help viewing the omission of the comma as substandard. If readers experience the packaging as substandard, then the message is at risk as well. In a close case, this could tip the balance.
A comma in the above sentence would tell the reader to pause and digest an important principle - that work product protection does not require actual litigation - before learning how the principle is qualified, namely, that the prospect of litigation has to be identifiable. Thus, the comma cannot only serve as a talisman against reader prejudice, but it also can aid clarity as well.
The sentence can be fixed in three ways. You can add a comma after "ensuing," thus eliminating the run-on factor. You can add a semicolon after ensuing and drop the "and," or you can put a period after ensuing and begin a new sentence.
I like the period because it directs the reader to stop completely and absorb the first thought before moving on. The semicolon is a nice touch, but I avoid it because many readers do not know what to make of it, and I don't want to confuse or alienate them. Our job is not to expose readers to the finer tools of writing, merely to persuade them.
Puzzler
How would you tighten and sharpen the following sentence?
A corporation has an obligation to report all campaign contributions that it makes that are over $100.
Reduce the phrase "has an obligation to" to "must" and remove both "that" constructions at the end of the sentence because they are implicit.
The revised version:
A corporation must report all campaign contributions over $100.
Kenneth F. Oettle is a partner and co-chairman of the appellate group and writing and mentor programs at Sills Cummis Radin Tischman Epstein & Gross. He invites questions and suggestions for future columns to (Email Removed). This article originally appeared in The New Jersey Law Journal, a Texas Lawyer affiliate. "Making Your Point" appears monthly in Texas Lawyer.
http://www.law.com/jsp/printerfriendly.jsp?c=PubArticle&t=PrinterFriendlyArticleState&&cid=1063212016887
- - - - - - - Posted on Sunday, September 14, 2003 by Recourse - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
LOL, very amusing. I used to proof-read for one lawyer at my firm and I would say to him, "I brought my little bag of commas and have added several to your piece,"
Posted on Sunday, September 14, 2003 by jocon307
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
He must be a 'comma chameleon', like in the song by Boy George.
Posted on Sunday, September 14, 2003 by headsonpikes
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
instant commas gonna get you
Posted on Sunday, September 14, 2003 by InvisibleChurch
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Oh, . . my, . . GOD,
I love,
commas!
Posted on Sunday, September 14, 2003 by norraad
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I thought Boy George was a colon aficionado.
Posted on Sunday, September 14, 2003 by e_engineer
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I, agree, wholehearteldy.
Posted on Sunday, September 14, 2003 by Larry Lucido
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
This reminds me of something I read once. Supposedly a class was given the following sentence to punctuate:
woman without her man is a savage
The boys in the class punctuated it thus: "Woman, without her man, is a savage."
The girls punctuated it: "Woman! Without her, man is a savage."
Posted on Sunday, September 14, 2003 by Verginius Rufus
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Most of us know when to pause when speaking, so a much simpler method to figure out comma placement is to read the sentence as if you were speaking it. Whenever you pause, put a comma there. Of course, this method isn't 100% correct every time, and it might not work if English is not your first language. But it is a lot easier than trying to remember several rules of grammar.
Posted on Sunday, September 14, 2003 by timm22
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To be strict, there shouldn't be a comma in the Hesse quotation after "punctuation marks," because the verb call" in "and call them illusion" looks back to the same subject as the preceding clause. Nitpicking, maybe, but that seems to be what he is calling for.
Still, there's no great harm in adding an extra comma here and there if it clarifies the sense, as it could be argued this one does.
Posted on Sunday, September 14, 2003 by Cicero
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[nq:1]The girls punctuated it: "Woman! Without her, man is a savage."[/nq]
Woman, without her, man doesn't have to deal with monthly cycles, and can watch his football game in peace, but he will have to make his own sandwich, and get his own beer.
Posted on Sunday, September 14, 2003 by Moonman62
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Now we need a column about using apostrophes for plurals. That's one of the biggest abuses of written communication I see today.
Posted on Sunday, September 14, 2003 by Allegra
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I suppose I need to clarify: One is NOT supposed to use apostrophes for plurals.
Posted on Sunday, September 14, 2003 by Allegra
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - End of forwarded messages
*---
English is Munglish
---*Jai Maharaj
Top answer
[nq:1]Commas Enhance Clarity, Regulate Writing Flow By Kenneth F. Oettle Texas Lawyer Monday, September 15, 2003[/nq] (Whereupon he quoted the entire copyrighted article and several postings, mostly idiotic, commenting on it) I wish to deal with only one example sentence. The author first quotes it without a comma, then purports to show how it can be improved by adding a comma.
- [nq:1]Commas Enhance Clarity, Regulate Writing Flow By Kenneth F.
- Oettle Texas Lawyer Monday, September 15, 2003[/nq] (Whereupon he quoted the entire copyrighted article and several postings, mostly idiotic, commenting on it) I wish to deal with only one example sentence.
- The author first quotes it without a comma, then purports to show how it can be improved by adding a comma.
- [/nq] What's wrong with this sentence, even after addition of the comma?
- Answer: the court did not affirm the motion for summary judgment, it affirmed the trial court's grant of the motion.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
1 Answers
0
[nq:1]Commas Enhance Clarity, Regulate Writing Flow By Kenneth F. Oettle Texas Lawyer Monday, September 15, 2003[/nq]
(Whereupon he quoted the entire copyrighted article and several postings, mostly idiotic, commenting on it)
I wish to deal with only one example sentence. The author first quotes it without a comma, then purports to show how it can be improved by adding a comma. Here'
(Whereupon he quoted the entire copyrighted article and several postings, mostly idiotic, commenting on it)
I wish to deal with only one example sentence. The author first quotes it without a comma, then purports to show how it can be improved by adding a comma. Here'
0
Related Questions