Where comma: [verb + noun] + [or + is + pronoun] - [is + adjective]

Question

Excuse me, but I currently can't think of an example and I don't want to post the real sentence.

But do you think this requires a comma anywhere:

[verb + noun] + [or + is + pronoun] -> [is + adjective]

The first two parts are statements of the existence of the same noun. The last "is" refers either to the whole or the noun (probably just imprecise, but that's how it is), and negates the existence (or modifies it).

I tend to put in a comma before the last clause, it just seems to read better, but I can't justify separating a predicate from a potential subject with a comma. The second part can be seen as an insertion, which could therefore be separated on both sides by comma, but the "or" itself doesn't seem to require a separation in this case. Only after the pronoun I want to put in a comma.

Mister Micawber · Accepted Answer

Anonymous I currently can't think of an example

Nor can I. What does 'verb + noun' mean? Is it a question? Your explanation is murkier than your formula. You really need to compose an example.

CalifJim · Answer

Your chances of getting an answer are not good.

Your question reads like something from a mathematics book! And "I don't want to post the real sentence" doesn't exactly generate a lot of enthusiasm for answering, either. I'd try to answer, but I couldn't imagine what you were talking about.

CJ

Anonymous · Answer

Sorry for lack of clarity. I should have provided some actual sentence structure. But most of the explanation is basically just asking whether to put a comma here or there.

But this is probably the case I am talking about:

"wanting to find X or that there is X is not possible"

Simple enough after all.

Mister Micawber · Answer

Anonymouswanting to find X or that there is X is not possible

That structuring needs no comma really, though you may use two if you like:

Wanting to find X, or that there is X, is not possible.

Anonymous · Answer

Thanks. The original is longer, and something follows after it, that's why it seem to want some pause. But consistency is best.

Mister Micawber · Answer

AnonymousThe original is longer, and something follows after it, that's why it seem to want some pause.

And that's why you need to post the actual context if you need a definitive answer to a question about English.

Anonymous · Answer

Mister Micawber AnonymousThe original is longer, and something follows after it, that's why it seem to want some pause.And that's why you need to post the actual context if you need a definitive answer to a question about English.

Well, I wasn't sure if the sentence wouldn't be complete for the relevant question.

A more complete context of the already discussed sentence would be:

The way some want to find X or that there is X is not possible, and is based on wrong ideas

Now it looks like some commas are missing again (at least for fluent reading), with a notable pause before "is not possible", as I previously thought. But the proposed solution seems sufficient:

The way some want to find X, or that there is X, is not possible, and is based on wrong ideas

Now I'm aware that there are probably more problems than the question of commas, but I got stuck in the expression.

Fivejedjon · Answer

AnonymousThe way some want to find X or that there is X is not possible, and is based on wrong ideas

The problem is not the presence or absence of commas but the construction of the sentence itself. The way some want ... is not possible is not natural. I think you are trying to combine a number of ideas:

Some people want either to find X or to find if X exists.
They are attempting to find this in a certain way.
That way is unlikely to lead to success.
The idea of wanting to find X, or finding if X exists, is based on misconceptions.

Where comma: [verb + noun] + [or + is + pronoun] -> [is + adjective]

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions