Semicolon, Full stop & Comma

Question

Hi teachers,

While reading in the forum, I come across the following topic.

Colons, Semicolons & Commas (englishforums.com)

My question is about this part of it. I want to make sure of my understanding of this rule.

Finite clauses

A semicolon marks a much stronger division in a sentence than a comma. It is used to separate independent finite clauses that have no conjunction (sentence parts which would otherwise be separate sentences).
Rice bran oil cannot be prepared by distillation; the heat can destroy its colour and taste.
If the semicolon in the above sentence is replaced by a period, this would become two separate but closely related statements. These closely related ideas are linked by a semicolon, and it would be wrong to use a comma to perform the same function.

So, with a full stop, they would become separate but closely related sentences. Based on this, why would they add a semicolon as long as they are still related?

Why don't they just use a full stop there?

You may say because the semicolon is a much stronger division in the sentence. If so, what makes it stronger? In other words, how to determine what's the best usage?

Let's take the same example above: "Rice bran oil cannot be prepared by distillation; the heat can destroy its colour and taste."

Did they add a semicolon there because of the big effect that would happen if rice bran oil was being prepared by distillation? The big effect I mean is that the heat can destroy its colour and taste.

Let's take another example that comes to mind:

"Daniel shouldn't eat peanuts; he is allergic to them."

I added a semicolon intentionally in order to make it stronger because of the effect that would happen if Daniel ate peanuts. The big effect I mean is that he could get sick or even die. So, it's not wrong to add a full stop there but it's not the best option.

Am I correct in my understanding?

It seems to me that we can always use a full stop in the place of a semicolon but not vice versa. Is that correct too?

Thanks in advance

Anonymous · Accepted Answer

MoonriseA semicolon marks a much stronger division in a sentence than a comma. It is used to separate independent finite clauses that have no conjunction (sentence parts which would otherwise be separate sentences).Rice bran oil cannot be prepared by distillation; the heat can destroy its colour and taste.

I disagree with that only insofar as I think a semicolon requires that the second clause amplify the first, as it does in their example. A colon would be too strong (and unconventional), so we use a "semi" colon.

MoonriseSo, with a full stop, they would become separate but closely related sentences. Based on this, why would they add a semicolon as long as they are still related?

In everyday writing, the full stop is almost always better because the reader doesn't have to figure out what the writer meant by this oddball punctuation mark this time. If the ideas are indeed closely related, he can tell without it, as you say. In a more formal setting, the semicolon emphasizes the connection between the two clauses, a bit of semantic insurance, if you will, and it does no harm. There are also times when clarity pretty much demands it because of the surrounding text; you'll know them when you see them.

MoonriseYou may say because the semicolon is a much stronger division in the sentence. If so, what makes it stronger? In other words, how to determine what's the best usage?

I think you missed something. Your "Finite clauses" link said that the semicolon is stronger division than a comma, not a full stop, and it is. As I said, when in doubt, start a new sentence.

MoonriseLet's take the same example above: "Rice bran oil cannot be prepared by distillation; the heat can destroy its colour and taste."Did they add a semicolon there because of the big effect that would happen if rice bran oil was being prepared by distillation? The big effect I mean is that the heat can destroy its colour and taste.

Right. The first clause makes a flat statement, and the second clause expands upon it.

MoonriseLet's take another example that comes to mind: "Daniel shouldn't eat peanuts; he is allergic to them." I added a semicolon intentionally in order to make it stronger because of the effect that would happen if Daniel ate peanuts. The big effect I mean is that he could get sick or even die. So, it's not wrong to add a full stop there but it's not the best option. Am I correct in my understanding?

I agree with you. Don't forget the em dash, though—it can serve the same purpose less uglily.

AlpheccaStars · Answer

Here is a related topic on comma splices. Many people make the mistake of using a comma to join two main clauses. Here are some good resources.

https://chompchomp.com/terms/commasplice.htm

https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/punctuation/commas/commas_vs_semicolons.html

http://guidetogrammar.org/grammar/marks/semicolon.htm

Semicolon, Full stop & Comma

Finite clauses

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions