Job Discussion Forums

[stillnosheep]

How simple can I make this?

Atassi,

1. You wrote (originally) that one should mark a pause in speech with a comma when writing.

And

2. Many pauses in speech are caused by stress for emphasis.

But

3. According to your 'rule' all pauses should be marked by a comma.

So

4. According to your rule all pauses for stress (as well as all other pauses) should be marked by a comma.

But

5. A pause in speech caused by stress for emphasis can occur just about anywhere in a sentence.

So

6. According to your rule a comma can be placed just about anywhere in a sentence depending upon what exactly the speaker may wish to emphasise.

Which of the above steps do you find invalid?

Since then you have changed your position to "sometimes it is permissible to write a comma at the same place in the sentence where a pause would occur if the sentence was spoken" which is true, but empty.

Of course a comma sometimes [pause] may [pause] occur in such a place but that is not a rule; neither is it anything that can be usefully taught to anyone at all.

Henry_Cowell never wrote that all pauses were caused by stress. You placed those words in his mouth (or, more accurately, under his fingers).

The technical term for a pause in speech not caused by stress for emphasis is 'a pause in speech not caused by stress for emphasis'.

I certainly would not agree that commas should be used when they are not needed. They can be used just about anywhere. However non-standard use of punctuation risks making it difficult - or in some cases well nigh impossible - for all but the most patient and sensitive reader to have the slightest clue as to what on earth you are wittering on about.

[Atassi]

Justin said:

[Henry_Cowell]

sns,

It's useless. This guy has proven that he's incapable of grasping the nature of this issue.

Here's what Lynne Truss recently wrote in Eats, Shoots and Leaves:

Two particular stupid uses of the comma are proliferating and need to be noted. One is the comma memorably described in the "This English" column of the New Statesman in the late 1970s as "the yob's comma": "The yob's comma, of course, has no syntactical value: it is the equivalent of a fuddled gasp for breath, as the poor writer marshals his battered thoughts."

Oh, here's another (from Write Right, by Jan Venolia):

In their search for an all-purpose rule, some writers place a comma wherever they would pause or take a breath when speaking. This heavy-breathing school of punctuation may leave readers feeling somewhat winded.

************

Atassi should realize that pauses in oral/aural speech are not identical to markers (i.e., punctuation) in written language.

[Atassi]

[Atassi]

The Yob's Comma from the late 70's huh...yeah and contractions caused an uproar when they became common. Oh, and don't start saying now that I said that contractions are normal in writing.

You're still intent on saying I said things I didn't say I see. Pathetic...

Funny thing is I never disagreed with you about what you are now saying. I was originally trying to say that a comma was not necessary; I never said to add them with any breath. Get accurate already...I repeated myself enough.

[Henry_Cowell]

[Justin Trullinger]

[Atassi]

Yes, I said that.

"normally" does not refer to stress

you're carrying on with this way too much

and I'm just responding to a misunderstanding at best

why is it that some insist

on interpreting incorrectly

and carry on and on

making this discusson and thread a mess

Yo se en su vida no tiene amor

Justin feel free to make a new thread we'll all adore

[Atassi]

[Henry_Cowell]

[Atassi]

[Henry_Cowell]

Can you write ten examples for us in which a native English speaker would "normally" pause?

[Henry_Cowell]

[Atassi]

Can I? Yes. Will I? No Why? It's not necessary, although it's a great way to teach which i applaud you for (really).

The fact is, the word stress you were talking about originally is not "normal" and therefore does not fall under the "normal pauses" I was talking about. I was trying to be very specific, and I believed the context to be sufficient in ensuring clarity.

How is it that you are saying I think commas should go anywhere, when really I originally said the opposite? If you remember, I was the one that did not want a comma placed where you thought it should be. If you put it there is it wrong? Microsoft word doesn't think so (both are correct). But I still stand by my previous point: if a comma is not needed, it's probably better for it not to be there.

Why keep carrying this on? My posts are clear enough I think.

[Atassi]