0
Twistedthistle Posted 11 years ago
Grammar
triple puncuation
Hi, everyone,
I was wondering, what's your opinion on the triple punctuation (the exclamation, end quotes, then comma) in the following sentence?
He called it his 'pièce de résistance!', which I thought was a bit of an overstatement.
You see, to me it actually looks OK, even though I'm sure it makes some people cringe.
If, however, I decided to get rid of the comma, would the exclamation point be sufficiently strong (as it's part of a quotation) to absorb the comma, which marks the start of a dependent clause?
Love to hear what you guys thing,
Thanks in advance,
TT
I was wondering, what's your opinion on the triple punctuation (the exclamation, end quotes, then comma) in the following sentence?
He called it his 'pièce de résistance!', which I thought was a bit of an overstatement.
You see, to me it actually looks OK, even though I'm sure it makes some people cringe.
If, however, I decided to get rid of the comma, would the exclamation point be sufficiently strong (as it's part of a quotation) to absorb the comma, which marks the start of a dependent clause?
Love to hear what you guys thing,
Thanks in advance,
TT
Top answer
As written, it's OK to me. But the comma is necessary to show that what follows is a non-defining afterthought.
- As written, it's OK to me.
- But the comma is necessary to show that what follows is a non-defining afterthought.
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
As written, it's OK to me.
But the comma is necessary to show that what follows is a non-defining afterthought.
But the comma is necessary to show that what follows is a non-defining afterthought.
0
Related Questions