Dave's ESL Cafe's Student Discussion Forums

[sortey]

Which example below is correct regarding the inclusion of commas or not?:


You can easily picture Richard Wright's new novel, "Native Son," sticking out of the back pockets of many readers. (with two commas)

-or-

You can easily picture Richard Wright's new novel "Native Son" sticking out of the back pockets of many readers. (without two commas)


What is the rule here?

Thank you for your response.

[pugachevV]

The rule is that a comma is used to indicate where there would be a slight pause in a spoken sentence.
You need the commas in your example.

[Mary W. Ng]

Question:

Which example below is correct regarding the inclusion of commas or not?:

You can easily picture Richard Wright's new novel, "Native Son," sticking out of the back pockets of many readers. (with two commas)

-or-

You can easily picture Richard Wright's new novel "Native Son" sticking out of the back pockets of many readers. (without two commas)

Answer:

Whether you use commas or not depends on what you want to say. The inclusion of commas can change the meaning of a sentence. The two sentences have different meanings.

1. In the first sentence, "Native Son" is enclosed by commas because it functions as a non-defining appositive. An appositive gives extra information about another noun or pronoun. The sentence says that Richard Wright has written only one new novel: "Native Son".

2. In the second sentence, "Native Son" is a defining appositive. The sentence says that Richard Wright has written more than one new novel. "Native Son" is the one being talked about.

I hope this helps.
_________________
Mary W. Ng
Helping students learn grammar
http:www.aimpublishing.com

[lotus]

I'm not sure how one can deduce how many novels Richard Wright had written from the sentence.

I prefer number 1.


--lotus
_________________
War does not make one great --Yoda

[Mary W. Ng]

Commas are used for a reason. Whether one uses commas or not depends on what the writer wants to mean in the sentence. I can't say which sentence is correct and which is not.

However. with the commas, Sentence 1 does tell the reader that Richard Wright has written just one new novel, namely "Native Son". Without the commas, Sentence 2 imparts the meaning that more than one new novel has been written by Richard Wright and that "Native Son" is the novel in question.

The inclusion of commas does change the meaning of a sentence.

I hope I have clarified my point.
_________________
Mary W. Ng
Helping students learn grammar
http:www.aimpublishing.com

[lotus]

It is certainly open for interpretation.

But I can only deduce from both sentences that the latest novel from Richard Wright is "Native Son." I can't tell, or deduce, that it was his only novel.

If they intended to indicate that it was his first novel, they could say "first novel." They could also clarify their statement by saying "brand new" novel.


--lotus
_________________
War does not make one great --Yoda

[Mary W. Ng]

Commas are used for a reason and their inclusion does change the meaning of a sentence; therefore, it is important to use them with care.
_________________
Mary W. Ng
Helping students learn grammar
http:www.aimpublishing.com