Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to johnstevens77,Bhoddhisatva,scotia,Anonymous,Cornytiv34, for Donating to support the site

A question of grammar...

Mind that apostrophe.
Changeable
2 Lemon pips
Posts: 140
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 7:02 pm
Has thanked: 87 times
Been thanked: 8 times

A question of grammar...

#300858

Postby Changeable » April 15th, 2020, 2:46 pm

More than 55 year ago I remember my English teacher, (a certain Mrs Crump) telling our English language class that you must never, never, ever, on pain of death, place a comma after an "and."
Today I regularly see commas before as well as after an and.
What is the correct grammatical rule relating to this?

Thanks in advance,

Changeable

Itsallaguess
Lemon Half
Posts: 9129
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:16 pm
Has thanked: 4140 times
Been thanked: 10023 times

Re: A question of grammar...

#300859

Postby Itsallaguess » April 15th, 2020, 2:59 pm

I've done so before and, although only in some circumstances, thought it quite acceptable to do so...

Cheers,

Itsallagues

chas49
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1935
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:25 am
Has thanked: 216 times
Been thanked: 456 times

Re: A question of grammar...

#300860

Postby chas49 » April 15th, 2020, 3:01 pm

Changeable wrote:More than 55 year ago I remember my English teacher, (a certain Mrs Crump) telling our English language class that you must never, never, ever, on pain of death, place a comma after an "and."
Today I regularly see commas before as well as after an and.
What is the correct grammatical rule relating to this?

Thanks in advance,

Changeable


I think Mrs Crump was wrong.

Comma after 'and'
For example: Mrs Crump's rule is incorrect and, in my opinion, exaggerated.
(I.e. where the comma is used to separate a subordinate clause).

The Comma before 'and' is an Oxford comma.

dealtn
Lemon Half
Posts: 6072
Joined: November 21st, 2016, 4:26 pm
Has thanked: 441 times
Been thanked: 2324 times

Re: A question of grammar...

#300861

Postby dealtn » April 15th, 2020, 3:07 pm

Changeable wrote:More than 55 year ago I remember my English teacher, (a certain Mrs Crump) telling our English language class that you must never, never, ever, on pain of death, place a comma after an "and."
Today I regularly see commas before as well as after an and.
What is the correct grammatical rule relating to this?

Thanks in advance,

Changeable


Very rarely.

It can be used when "and" is a noun, and in a list. Such as. "The words or, and, but, and so are conjunctions". But that's cheating really.

Alternatively it wouldn't be considered wrong to place a comma after "and" when preceding a short phrase of a word or two that introduces an emphasis. For example. You caught the virus at work and, somewhat unluckily, will die. Many might prefer the sentence to be written differently, thus. Somewhat unluckily, you caught the virus at work and will die. But the act of "unlucky" is in the dying, not the catching, so the former is correct. That is you can catch the virus by being unlucky, but because not everyone that catches the virus will die, you are unlucky to do so (because you took all precautions and received the best medicines etc.)

Lootman
The full Lemon
Posts: 18674
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
Has thanked: 628 times
Been thanked: 6557 times

Re: A question of grammar...

#300869

Postby Lootman » April 15th, 2020, 3:23 pm

dealtn wrote:
Changeable wrote:More than 55 year ago I remember my English teacher, (a certain Mrs Crump) telling our English language class that you must never, never, ever, on pain of death, place a comma after an "and."

Today I regularly see commas before as well as after an and. What is the correct grammatical rule relating to this?

Very rarely.

It can be used when "and" is a noun, and in a list. Such as. "The words or, and, but, and so are conjunctions". But that's cheating really.

Alternatively it wouldn't be considered wrong to place a comma after "and" when preceding a short phrase of a word or two that introduces an emphasis. For example. You caught the virus at work and, somewhat unluckily, will die. Many might prefer the sentence to be written differently, thus. Somewhat unluckily, you caught the virus at work and will die. But the act of "unlucky" is in the dying, not the catching, so the former is correct. That is you can catch the virus by being unlucky, but because not everyone that catches the virus will die, you are unlucky to do so (because you took all precautions and received the best medicines etc.)

I think the part of the original question that you are missing there is "Today I regularly . . ".

In other words he is saying that the rules have changed with contemporary usage. The stricter "old" rule is as he and you assert. But the more modern use is broader. In my view people now use grammar to mirror how one would speak a sentence, rather than technically how you would write it. And thus a comma is often used to indicate a brief pause in the word flow that doesn't warrant a full stop, colon or semi-colon.

In other words the idea that the rules of grammar are timeless does not reflect the evolution of communication. And of course you can notice the same thing with the meaning of individual words as they can change their meaning over time.

I liberally use commas in longer sentences to aid comprehension by providing natural breaks, as if to breathe when speaking. Perhaps pedantry itself has become less fashionable, as people focus on the true purpose of communication rather than what many now see as somewhat pointless nitpicking? Then again I often start sentences with "And" or "But", which I also recall being taught never to do at school. But somehow it just sounds right, which makes it right.

By the way, that last paragraph is using commas in the way I describe.

Changeable
2 Lemon pips
Posts: 140
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 7:02 pm
Has thanked: 87 times
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: A question of grammar...

#300876

Postby Changeable » April 15th, 2020, 3:53 pm

Lootman, Itsallaguess, chas49 and dealtn.

So the new rule is, there are no rules!
Or to put it another way, rule today and gone tomorrow!

Thank you all for the clarification.

Have a pleasant evening and quarantine, if possible...

Changeable

Lootman
The full Lemon
Posts: 18674
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
Has thanked: 628 times
Been thanked: 6557 times

Re: A question of grammar...

#300880

Postby Lootman » April 15th, 2020, 4:04 pm

Changeable wrote:Lootman, Itsallaguess, chas49 and dealtn.
So the new rule is, there are no rules!

Or to put it another way, rule today and gone tomorrow!

Thank you all for the clarification.

A better way of putting it might be that rules change over time. They are not fixed and rigid.

And that the importance of rules for such things has declined as so much more communication now is informal (taken to extremes with text speak, for instance).

Pedantry itself is out of vogue. What was once seen as an indicator of education and erudition is now perceived as a rather negative kind of anal retentiveness. The modern style is to focus on the content and the intent, rather than the petty details of semantics and syntactics. Pedantry itself has become less fashionable as people focus on the true purpose of communication rather than technicalities. And correcting others for minor infractions can be seen as rudeness or aloofness.

This corner may become a very lonely place.

dealtn
Lemon Half
Posts: 6072
Joined: November 21st, 2016, 4:26 pm
Has thanked: 441 times
Been thanked: 2324 times

Re: A question of grammar...

#300885

Postby dealtn » April 15th, 2020, 4:22 pm

Changeable wrote:More than 55 year ago ...


Disappointingly, given the post is on this board, the missing "s" hasn't yet been commented on and, whilst mistakes are allowed, perhaps it is now right to point it out.

tjh290633
Lemon Half
Posts: 8207
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:20 am
Has thanked: 913 times
Been thanked: 4096 times

Re: A question of grammar...

#300886

Postby tjh290633 » April 15th, 2020, 4:27 pm

I once had occasion to rewrite a clause in a contract. The Russian interpreter complained that, as originally written, it was ambiguous and could not be translated correctly.

It reminds me of that Guinness advert:

"Caesar entered on his head, his helmet on his feet, his sandals in his hand, his good sword in his eye, a fierce look."

Lawyers often avoid punctuation, to avoid ambiguity. Sometimes it creates it.

TJH

Changeable
2 Lemon pips
Posts: 140
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 7:02 pm
Has thanked: 87 times
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: A question of grammar...

#300893

Postby Changeable » April 15th, 2020, 4:36 pm

Indeed you are correct.
I tend to speed read the text I write on the small screen of my smartphone and have difficulty to see my own typos.
Though other peoples typos are something else !


Changeable

panamagold
Lemon Slice
Posts: 614
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:31 pm
Has thanked: 124 times
Been thanked: 178 times

Re: A question of grammar...

#300897

Postby panamagold » April 15th, 2020, 4:50 pm

Changeable wrote:Though other peoples typos are something else !

Changeable


Ahem, people's perhaps?

kiloran
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4092
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:24 am
Has thanked: 3233 times
Been thanked: 2827 times

Re: A question of grammar...

#300903

Postby kiloran » April 15th, 2020, 4:55 pm

panamagold wrote:
Changeable wrote:Though other peoples typos are something else !

Changeable


Ahem, people's perhaps?

I think that reads better with a comma after people's ;)

--kiloran

Changeable
2 Lemon pips
Posts: 140
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 7:02 pm
Has thanked: 87 times
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: A question of grammar...

#300905

Postby Changeable » April 15th, 2020, 5:05 pm

Yes.
I thought about that apostrophe, but decided that peoples was plural and as such didn't need it.
You see, I know nothing and stand corrected once again.
English grammar was never my strong point... :(

Changeable

chas49
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1935
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:25 am
Has thanked: 216 times
Been thanked: 456 times

Re: A question of grammar...

#300913

Postby chas49 » April 15th, 2020, 5:38 pm

Changeable wrote:Yes.
I thought about that apostrophe, but decided that peoples was plural and as such didn't need it.
You see, I know nothing and stand corrected once again.
English grammar was never my strong point... :(

Changeable


The noun people is plural (according to the Cambridge Dictionary - https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictio ... ish/people). That doesn't mean it can't have an apostrophe S after it to denote possession.

Confusingly there's also the plural form peoples

See this for a discussion: https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-diffe ... es?share=1

AJC5001
Lemon Slice
Posts: 447
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 4:55 pm
Has thanked: 161 times
Been thanked: 158 times

Re: A question of grammar...

#300919

Postby AJC5001 » April 15th, 2020, 6:40 pm

Lootman wrote: And of course you can notice the same thing with the meaning of individual words as they can change their meaning over time.


Sir!
Sir!
Please Sir, he's started a sentence with an 'And'!

Then again I often start sentences with "And" or "But", which I also recall being taught never to do at school.


Sir!
Sir!
It's getting worse! He knows it's wrong but he still does it!

:)

UncleEbenezer
The full Lemon
Posts: 10689
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 8:17 pm
Has thanked: 1458 times
Been thanked: 2964 times

Re: A question of grammar...

#300931

Postby UncleEbenezer » April 15th, 2020, 7:29 pm

And another thing: never use a preposition to end a sentence with.

quelquod
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1015
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 12:26 pm
Has thanked: 195 times
Been thanked: 187 times

Re: A question of grammar...

#301062

Postby quelquod » April 16th, 2020, 11:43 am

UncleEbenezer wrote:And another thing: never use a preposition to end a sentence with.


Ah yes - the old "That is the sort of nonsense up with which I will not put" or one of its many variants supposedly by Winston Churchill.

Dod101
The full Lemon
Posts: 16629
Joined: October 10th, 2017, 11:33 am
Has thanked: 4343 times
Been thanked: 7534 times

Re: A question of grammar...

#301074

Postby Dod101 » April 16th, 2020, 12:16 pm

Other peoples' typos are something else.

Dod

bungeejumper
Lemon Half
Posts: 8063
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 2:30 pm
Has thanked: 2845 times
Been thanked: 3938 times

Re: A question of grammar...

#301129

Postby bungeejumper » April 16th, 2020, 4:03 pm

Chas49 is absolutely correct, the added comma in a list of items is an Oxford comma, which is there to avoid potential ambiguities.As in the Daily Telegraph's historic howler: “Highlights of [Peter Ustinov's] global tour include encounters with Nelson Mandela, an 800-year-old demigod and a dildo collector.:lol:

quelquod wrote:
UncleEbenezer wrote:And another thing: never use a preposition to end a sentence with.
Ah yes - the old "That is the sort of nonsense up with which I will not put" or one of its many variants supposedly by Winston Churchill.

Or the child's complaint to its mother at bedtime:

"What did you bring that book that I do not want to be read to out of up for?"

BJ

gryffron
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3604
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:00 am
Has thanked: 550 times
Been thanked: 1582 times

Re: A question of grammar...

#301663

Postby gryffron » April 18th, 2020, 11:01 pm

tjh290633 wrote:"Caesar entered on his head, his helmet on his feet, his sandals in his hand, his good sword in his eye, a fierce look."
Lawyers often avoid punctuation, to avoid ambiguity. Sometimes it creates it.

Try writing in short sentences. Like The Sun. Go on. Give it a try. It's really quite hard. Never room for commas. You can do a short bit. Like this one. But it gets difficult. I don't know how their writers do it. Do they go on a special course? Is it done by a computer?

Gryff


Return to “Pedants' Place”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests