Forum: Author Hangout

Does this sentence need a second comma?

JoeBobMack 🚫

I have found that, when drafting fiction, I tend to omit commas between the clauses of a compound sentence far more often than in my non-fiction writing. I think it is because of flow -- commas interrupt the feeling of natural connection, especially when I'm writing about a character's perceptions or thoughts. For example, I just saw this sentence in my work:

He could tell she didn't like having all the investigative work described as hers, but she had put herself into the spokesperson role and he could use that.

Having been sensitized to this tendency by prior editing, I noticed that, technically, there should be a comma before "and." However, there is also the exception to the rule for short sentences. That's not a short sentence, but the second part could be a short, stand-alone compound sentence. So, what do others think?
1. Absolutely, positively must have a comma.
2. Ehh, it's a judgment call.
3. Commas are disruptive little buggers and should be omitted wherever possible.

Replies: Pixy awnlee jawking Pixy Switch Blayde StarFleet Carl ralord82276 joyR GreyWolf akarge

Pixy 🚫

@JoeBobMack

Not sure about a comma, but should there not be a 'that' between 'tell' and 'she'? "He could tell that she didn't like having..."

Replies: CB Dicrostonyx storiesonline_23 Grey Wolf

CB 🚫

@Pixy

I spotted the missing that also. But, I've been called a conjunctive whore by my editors.

Dicrostonyx 🚫

@Pixy

Depends on writing style. Classically, yes, but in the past few decades words like "this" and "that" have been falling out of use, especially in more concise styles.

Without seeing the rest of the text it's hard to know whether it belongs here. In general, fiction is not as concise as what you'd expect in business, but is also more informal, so most editors would probably advise against the "that" unless the author is trying to emphasize the noun or pronoun.

storiesonline_23 🚫

@Pixy

but should there not be a 'that' between 'tell' and 'she'?

If I may offer a couple of thoughts for consideration ...

First, if the reader notices the elision of the conjunction, it should have been expressed. Alas, this is as helpful, as "if you need it you need it; if you don't need it you don't." Sorry about that.

Perhaps more usefully, the conjunction can be expressed explicitly to forestall (the beginning of) an incorrect interpretation.

In JoeBobMack's example, I cannot off the top of my head think of a sentence starting "He could tell she" which could not equally well start "He could tell that she ...". Example welcome. Meanwhile, I think that that "that" (Did you see what I did there?) is entirely optional.

If instead the sentence has the pronoun "her", the situation is different: where is the reader left after "He could tell her ..."? The sentence could be

He could tell her to get to work.

He could tell her work was distasteful.

We have "her" working in two different ways. And, just to put a little more effort onto the reader, we have two slightly different meanings of "tell". An explicit "that" in the second of these would give the reader a head start on decoding the sentence. My inner nerd suffers from not knowing a way to make it clear early in the first of these that there is no "that" there. Instruction welcome. (This time it was unpremeditated. Honest, guv.)

Grey Wolf 🚫

@Pixy

'That' is overused in most writing. Most of the time, you don't need it, and people don't say it (which is one reason why you don't need it). Even in formal writing, it's often deprecated.

Here's an article talking about when you need 'that' and when you don't:
https://www.quickanddirtytips.com/articles/when-to-delete-that/

As noted, the key is often whether the use is around bridge verbs.

Read it in your head. Does it sound right, or does it make your teeth grate? Is it clear? Sometimes 'that' is necessary for clarity.

I tend to overuse it and then fix it in my first editing pass (my editing tool of choice, ProWritingAid, usually wants to stomp it out, and is usually correct about it).

Replies: Switch Blayde Pixy

Switch Blayde 🚫
Updated:

@Grey Wolf

I tend to overuse it and then fix it in my first editing pass

I hardly ever use the "that" and sometimes end up putting it in during editing.

Pixy 🚫

@Grey Wolf

Most of the time, you don't need it, and people don't say it

It could be a localisation thing. I use it and say it a lot, as do my family and those around. It's why I added it, because it just sounds wrong without it.

Replies: Grey Wolf

Grey Wolf 🚫

@Pixy

That definitely could be. There are constructions that are familiar to me, and are the way people around me talk:

A few instances:

That building is a ways off.
I headed towards the building.
and
We're having a meeting Sunday week.

In the first two, the 's' on 'way' and 'toward' is 'wrong'. However, people around here are more likely to use them than not.

In the third, no one would be confused by that usage around here, but it's very confusing for a lot of people (it means the Sunday within 'next week'). Similarly, for nearly anyone here, 'this Sunday' is the Sunday within the current week, where 'next Sunday' is the Sunday within the next week (also defined as 'the Sunday following the Sunday of "this week"'), even though that literally means 'next Sunday' is never the next Sunday. That usage, I am assured, is also confusing :)

Replies: Switch Blayde awnlee jawking

Switch Blayde 🚫

@Grey Wolf

the 's' on … 'toward' is 'wrong'

Depends on where you're from. What I found in my research is that "toward" is more common in the U.S. while "towards" is in the UK. I'm constantly editing my "towards" to "toward," "backwards" to "backward," etc.

Replies: awnlee jawking

awnlee jawking 🚫

@Switch Blayde

What I found in my research is that "toward" is more common in the U.S. while "towards" is in the UK.

Since they're synonymous, I was surprised to find my dictionary claiming the derived from OE toweard and OE toweards respectively.

In the example in question, I'd use towards. It's easier to say 'towards the' than 'toward the'.

AJ

awnlee jawking 🚫

@Grey Wolf

We're having a meeting Sunday week

From where I live, if today were Saturday, 'Sunday week' would mean in eight days time.

AJ

Replies: Grey Wolf

Grey Wolf 🚫

@awnlee jawking

Same here, but I'm reliably told that it's confusing for more than enough readers to cause me to not use that construction (even though it's what my characters would actually say). Dialogue does tend towards :) the mean simply because there's no sense speed-bumping a reader over a minor verisimilitude of that sort.

awnlee jawking 🚫

@JoeBobMack

'and he could use that' is an independent clause so superficially it should have a comma, but closely-related and short clauses get a comma-free pass from most style guides.

But I would argue that the clause isn't truly independent. Take out the independent clause 'but she had put herself into the spokesperson role' and what's left is dependent because they share the same subject.

I don't think anyone could complain too much whether you put the comma in or not, but I would choose to omit it.

As to the missing 'that', minimalist writing pundits would say that it's to correct to omit it because it makes the sentence more wonderful in some sort of nebulous way. I would include 'that' if I wanted to slow down the pace of the story but it's a long sentence so I wouldn't bother.

AJ

Pixy 🚫

@JoeBobMack

but she had put herself into the spokesperson role and he could use that.

Why not use a fullstop instead of a comma and remove the 'and' altogether? So the above becomes "but she had put herself into the spokesperson role. He could use that."

For me that would be an improved situation, because it now makes 'he could use that' a definite statement of intent. For me it adds more....gravitas? To the line.

Replies: JoeBobMack

JoeBobMack 🚫

@Pixy

Yeah. I thought about that, and I think I agree. The full stop so that, "He could use that." becomes a stand-alone sentence puts emphasis on the manipulation that is going on in the scene, and that's the point of the scene. So, probably the best choice from a storytelling point of view regardless of grammar!

Switch Blayde 🚫

@JoeBobMack

I do not see the need for the comma.

StarFleet Carl 🚫
Updated:

@JoeBobMack

He could tell that she didn't like having all of the investigative work described as hers, but she had put herself into the spokesperson role. He could use that.

I normally don't edit, I just vomit out the sentences. I've been known to call the same person Steven, Stephen, and Stephan it the same chapter, even. (Which is what happens when you're writing and you're tired.) However, the changes I've made in the quotes to your original sentence make it, to me, read better.

Replies: helmut_meukel Grey Wolf

helmut_meukel 🚫

@StarFleet Carl

He could that tell she didn't like

Isn't the 'that' you inserted in the wrong position?

HM.

Replies: awnlee jawking

awnlee jawking 🚫

@helmut_meukel

the changes I've made in the quotes to your original sentence make it, to me, read better

He acknowledged it was his personal choice ;-)

AJ

Replies: StarFleet Carl

StarFleet Carl 🚫

@awnlee jawking

Word dyslexia is such fun. I'll be typing a sentence, then change what I'm planning to say in the middle of the sentence - and leave the previous word or two in there. Sometimes I catch it, most of the time the editors catch it. A repeated the the, or something similar. I can still think faster than I can type - and I can still type pretty fast quick, even if it's now called keyboarding. (And yes, I did that last one deliberately.)

Grey Wolf 🚫

@StarFleet Carl

I seldom edit while writing. Editing is a second pass, and I need a week or two to pass between the two.

That said, if I'm going down the wrong track and I recognize it, I edit.

ralord82276 🚫

@JoeBobMack

depends
"and he could use that" isn't clear as to the subject of "that"...
if "that" refers to "she had put herself into the spokesperson role" then no comma needed...
if "that" refers to "she didn't like having all the investigative work described as hers" then technically yes there should be a comma... but I personally would judge it based more on the flow of the writing. IMPO, if you only have 1 or 2 of those compounded compound sentences, then no don't put in a comma...if you have a lot of those compounded compound sentences, then either use the commas or restructure the writing as too many of them makes the writing "clunky".

joyR 🚫

@JoeBobMack

Does this sentence need a second comma?

It does not require ANY commas.

:)

Replies: JoeBobMack

JoeBobMack 🚫

@joyR

Wow. I'll take that as a vote for option 3 in my original post, and I have surely read books where the authors send to subscribe to that philosophy. I confess, despite the exception I have noted above, to being a comma lover. I find that as a reader, most times, sentences that omit commas for introductory clauses, etc. are harder to read, making me more often so and reread to parse the meaning. I even hold to the Oxford comma. Just in the example above, to me the second comma woke hinder making the connection between the two clauses. But, as others suggested, breaking the sentence into two is probably the better choice. Still I think it fun that there is room for a divergence of approaches!

Replies: joyR

joyR 🚫

@JoeBobMack

I'll take that as a vote for option 3 in my original post,

Please don't.

You asked:

Does this sentence need a second comma?

(My bold)
To which the correct answer is no. It needs no commas.

If you had asked if the following sentence needed a second comma you would have received a different, and more useful answer.

Replies: JoeBobMack

JoeBobMack 🚫

@joyR

Ahh... My apologies, wise one! I was inadequate to receive the wisdom you so graciously supplied!

GreyWolf 🚫

@JoeBobMack

I would probably punctuate the way that you have it. My reasoning is that the 'and' bridges two connected thoughts. Placing the comma after 'and' might create the false impression that the 'but' clause is optional.

I would, however, leave the first comma for two reasons. First, it's useful in setting off the entire 'but' clause (including the and clause) from the main thought. Secondly, with no comma that's a very long sentence and most people would pause and take a breath. The 'but' is the logical place for them to do so.

If I read it out loud, it sounds most correct to be with the comma/pause at 'but'. It sounds less correct, but also correct, without that pause - but I tend to run out of breath unless I'm very conscious of sentence length. It sounds the least correct with a pause before the 'and'.

One of my current back-and-forths with my editor concerns commas after leading adverbs, e.g.

Hopefully, she would be happy in the spokesperson role.

In that case, I would leave in the comma, because the emphasis is on the writer's hope of her happiness.

On the other hand, from my own writing,

Ultimately she wound up happy with the role.

That puts the emphasis on her happiness. 'Ultimately' is a non-essential word that adds texture rather than meaning, so emphasizing it is pointless. That might mean you should delete it, but losing too many adverbs makes things flat and boring.

The same logic applies to commas after 'of course'. If the emphasis is on this being an 'of course' sort of thing, it gets a comma. If the emphasis is the thing itself, no comma.

Note that, at least per the Chicago Manual of Style, this is fine in formal writing as well.

Replies: Pixy

Pixy 🚫

@GreyWolf

Ultimately' is a non-essential word that adds texture rather than meaning

I had a think about this and tried saying both versions repeatedly:

1: "She wound up happy with the role." I see that as 'She had one option, and is happy with it (eventually)'.

2: "Ultimately, she wound up happy with the role." I see that as 'She had several options, couldn't make a clear choice between them, plumped for one at random and now, down the line, she is happy with her choice.'

In that context, 'Ultimately' isn't non-essential and adds meaning rather than texture. 'Ultimately' alludes to a degree of decisional angst within the character 'that' allows the reader to empathise with the individual, because, well, we have all been there when faced with the dilemma of making a decision out of a multitude of choices.

Replies: Grey Wolf

Grey Wolf 🚫

@Pixy

In that case, 'ultimately' may also be confusing :) But, then, confusion can add texture.

I agree that there's a subtle difference, but I also think the subtle difference may be in the eye of the beholder as much as the intention of the author.

Replies: Pixy

Pixy 🚫

@Grey Wolf

Agreed, and localisation 'quirks' just makes the whole situation muddier. But then, history is full of people saying one thing and being misunderstood to mean something else... *

* (Not to be confused with people who say one thing, meaning a certain thing who get correctly interpreted as saying said thing, and then backtracking on said thing with the excuse that they were 'misunderstood'. For example, Jennifer Lawrence claiming recently that she was the first female to ever be cast as the lead in an action movie. Only to claim that she was miss-interpreted when the rest of the world basically went, "Fuck off....")

akarge 🚫

@JoeBobMack

Judgment call, in my opinion. However as others have commented, it also needs the missing THAT,(also in my opinion)

Reply to topic

Forum: Author Hangout

Does this sentence need a second comma?

WARNING! ADULT CONTENT...