Timeline for Based on where I put a comma in a long sentence, can it confuse the readers from the way its supposed to be read?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 10, 2019 at 9:23 | comment | added | Auspex | No, commas are about pacing. If you can structure a sentence such that its meaning is clear you don't need commas. They're always optional, though as the OP demonstrates they might help with understanding. Those authors who skip commas successfully are the ones I didn't notice doing it until somebody pointed it out to me. | |
| Jun 7, 2019 at 9:51 | comment | added | Lauren-Clear-Monica-Ipsum | @Auspex Of course some writers "get by" with no commas, but that isn't the point. If the sentence requires commas, either use commas or restructure the sentence. Leaning forward is one complete action. Intrigued by X is a second complete action. They have to be separated. Each action needs its own clause. Clauses are set off by punctuation. You are free to ignore those requirements if that's your writing style, but you cannot then expect to appeal to the mass of readers who are accustomed to the standard rules of composition. | |
| Jun 6, 2019 at 13:41 | comment | added | Auspex | Mostly right, but I totally disagree with the idea that "leaning forward" must be separated from "intrigued". Many writers have got by with a minimum, even no, commas. In the first example, "leaning forward intrigued by what was going to happen" is a fine parenthetical expression. | |
| Jul 15, 2015 at 12:00 | vote | accept | Gabby | ||
| Jul 15, 2015 at 10:12 | history | answered | Lauren-Clear-Monica-Ipsum | CC BY-SA 3.0 |