Proper english writing syntax

Factual Questions
1

Can anyone tell me which is the proper way to write a sentence out of the following examples? I always get these rules confused

  1. With a parenthesis (is the question mark in the right place?) Like this?
    -Or should it close outside (like this)?

  2. What about with a “quotation mark?” Like this?
    -Or should the question mark be “here”? Like that?

  3. When I grew up, I learned that when you have a list of three or more things, the comma has to precede the “and” in front of the last item. Apples, oranges, cherries, and grapes. Not like apples, oranges, cherries and grapes. But I’ve seen a lot of magazines, newspapers, and articles violate this rule. Has it been redefined?

  4. What’s the deal with semi-colons? Are they sort of like a period substitute? Cause that’s how I use it

2

It depends which part of the sentence constitutes a question. If the question is wholly parenthetical, then the question mark goes inside the parentheses (but the sentence still must end with a period, question mark, or exclamation point). If the entire sentence is a question, then the question mark goes at the end.

Unlike with commas and periods, there’s no difference in American and British style here (I think). If the entire sentence is a question, but not the quoted matter by itself, then the question mark goes outside. If only the quoted matter is a question, then the question mark goes inside the quotation marks.

This has always been a matter of style. The Associated Press style has always omitted the comma before the “and.” That’s why most magazines and newspapers don’t use it.

An argument can be made that this should be a matter of common sense. There are times when using the comma before the “and” makes the meaning clearer. Other times, it doesn’t matter.

Kind of. A semi-colon allows you to put two independent clauses together without a conjunction (and/but/or/nor/for/yet).

3

Dude - wars have been fought over lesser things than the serial comma. This could go on for hours.

As for me (technical writer), I always use the serial comma (meaning, I always add the comma before the final “and”). It lessens confusion as to what’s included: did he eat broccoli, beans, and rice (three things) or broccoli, beans and rice (two things). However, journalistic types tend to leave out that final comma. They’re wrong, but just don’t know any better. :slight_smile:

4

acsenray basically covered it, but I wanted to add:

When you have two or more independent clauses (think of these as ‘sentences’ that can stand alone) that you want to join together, you have to do one of two things: (1) Use a comma + conjunction. If you can remember the acronym FANBOYS you won’t have much trouble. For, and, nor, but, or, yet, so. (2) Use a semi-colon.

Failing to insert the comma in instance (1), even if you have the conjunction, results in a run-on sentence.

Failing to insert the conjunction in instance (1), but including the comma, results in a comma splice.

When using a semi-colon, there should be a relationship between the clauses (just as there should be a relationship between them when using a comma and a conjunction).

Here are two independent clauses: 1. “Jim Lovell was on board Apollo 8.” 2. “He commanded Apollo 13.”

I could leave them separate, but since we’re referring to the same person and the same space program, it makes sense to combine them.

Instance (1): “Jim Lovell was on board Apollo 8**, and** he commanded Apollo 13.” This use of “and” suggests that I’m simply giving you the information. Compare that to: “Jim Lovell was on board Apollo 8**, but** he commanded Apollo 13.” The use of “but” suggests that I’m emphasizing Lovell’s command of the second mission.

Instance (2): “Jim Lovell was on board Apollo 8**;** he commanded Apollo 13.”

Either way is acceptable from a grammatical perspective. Stylistically, you should mainly stick with Instance (1) because the semi-colon is more stilting. Excessive use is distracting, but that is a matter of style.

You’ll see, often, that Instance (1) confuses many people into thinking that anytime there is an “and” or “but” that there must be a comma. See: “I enjoy swimming, and fishing.” The first part is independent–“I enjoy swimming.” The second part, “fishing,” is not complete (it lacks a subject.)

Vis-a-vis the serial (or Oxford) comma, as noted it sometimes avoids confusion. This: “I enjoy sausage, bacon, eggs and coffee.” suggests that the sausage and bacon are separate elements that I enjoy by themselves, but the combination of ‘eggs and coffee’ is something I enjoy mixed together, which would be pretty gross.

5

Ahem.

While it’s true that we journalistic types leave out the final comma, we know enough to leave it in when confusion might ensue. Far from ignorance, we are using a Talmudic wisdom to ascertain the true meaning of the comma.

6

I was told that complete sentences retain their punctuation within parentheses.

7

Wikipedia has a good article on the serial comma, by the way. Also, it should be emphasized, as has been suggested, that these are all matters of style, rather than syntax.

8

The rule is there is not rule, just style. The important thing to remember is whatever style you use, to apply it consistantly throughout your writing.

I was always taught in grammar school that the period and comma always go in the quotes. The exclimation point and question mark go outside of the quotes. But this varies form nation to nation.

Unlike some languages like French, there is no one centralized standardization board to govern English.

9

While many of the English style “rules” are matters of opinion and consistency, I am annoyed at the perpetuation of quotation mark usage. There is no good reason to ever put the close quotation mark after the closing punctuation of a sentence. Period. It’s one thing to be pedantic over a split infinitive. It’s quite another to perpetuate ambiguity.
I am lobbying to put what is being quoted inside the quotation marks and put the closing punctuation for the sentence at the end of any sentence which includes a quoted item. Doh. Any other usage rule diminishes clarity, which should be the cardinal principle for every usage guideline:

Hearing that, he said, “I’ll be damned!”.

Hearing that, he said, “I’ll be damned!”!

Hearing that, he said, “I’ll be damned.”!

Hearing that, he said, “I’ll be damned.”.

Hearing that, he said, “I’ll be damned!”?

Hearing that, he said, “I’ll be damned?”?

etc.

This is non-standard. Defensible, and a vast improvement on the work of pedantic twits, but non-standard.

10

In addition to Blake Tyner’s masterly summary of semicolonic stylistics, let me add that the two independent clauses should be at least tangentially related. “Douglas Murphy was born in Lima, Ohio, in 1946; he graduated from Kent State University” is poor writing outside the covers of Time magazine (whose style uniquely permits this sort of disjunctive conjoining). On the other hand, a second clause detailing his family’s move to Toledo when he was six, would be sufficiently related.

As a good general principle of style, Use a semicolon to join two moderately long clauses; break two longer clauses into discrete sentences; use a conjunction/comma construction for fairly short clauses. But if internal commas are required in one or both clauses, prefer the semicolon over the conjunction/comma construction to emphasize the shift to a new, related concept. And semicolons are also used, awkwardly, to separate items in lists that require internal commas: “Famous Illinois residents include Abraham Lincoln and Barack Obama, who were Presidents; Stephen Douglas and Everett Dirksen, United States Senators; and the Daleys, father and son Mayors of Chicago.” Whenever possible, such a sentence cries out in pain for recasting; use the commas-and-semicolons construction only when necessary.

And one penultimate comment: “Caesar wrote, 'I came, I saw, I conquered”; it is the most arrant pedant who would insist on semicolons to separate such brief clauses. There are many examples in English prose of ultra-short clauses set in parallel for effect, and the oral pause and written punctuation are the shorter, comma usage, not the semicolon usage that weakens the intensity of the parallelism.

Finally, do not forget that the colon, besides introducing a list, also is properly used to join two clauses of which the second is the logical consequence of the first. “The saddest words of tongue or pen / Are only this: ‘It might have been.’”

11

Thanks for the grammar lesson guys. I knew I should have paid more attention in school :smack:

Let’s say it wasn’t a question in the parenthesis. Usually, when I use one, it is to especially highlight a short statement, when it isn’t simply a single word I mean. Such as: “I like my new dog (but he’s a scrawny little mutt).” The words in parenthesis is not a complete sentence, but long enough so that it could be. For these kinds of half-sentences, would I still put the period within the parenthesis or outside of it?

What if the quoted matter is only part of the sentence, and not a complete sentence? Such as: When I asked him what he thought of the movie he said it was “just ok”

Where does the period go in that sentence above?

I also have a question regarding speech quotations. When a character is speaking, and his quoted dialogue is placed in the middle of the sentence, does a comma precede the first quotation mark or is there a comma at all? For example:

Dave said to Bob, “Hey man, help me bury this dead body.” but Bob replied “I don’t know you that well.”

In that instance, is it correct that there’s a comma right before Dave’s dialogue or correct when no comma precedes Bob’s?

12

Well, the words in your parentheses are a complete sentence. You have a subject (“he”) and a verb (“is”) and convey a complete thought. I know we’re mostly taught never to begin a sentence with a conjunction, but there’s no rule about it. Speaking for myself (an English professor at a small junior college) I prefer the guidelines mentioned in previous posts: periods and commas go inside, as do question marks that are inherent to the quote, but everything else goes outside.

For me: When I asked him what he thought of the movie, he said it was “just okay.”

It’s pretty standard that both of those need commas: Dave said to Bob, “Hey man, help me bury this dead body,” but Bob replied, “I don’t know you that well.”

You’ll also notice that, even though Dave’s line of dialogue is complete, I have a comma instead of a period there, because my sentence goes on.

And, of course, we generally start a new, indented paragraph whenever a new speaker begins to speak, but the structure of your example would, I think, allow for the style we’re using. I’d have to check Strunk & White to be sure.

13

My English professor told me that was more of a story format thing. Of course, I used it while writing a narrative essay, so he may have just thought it looked like padding.

14

This is one of those “Know the rules, so you’ll know when to sensibly break it” sort of maxims. In general, always start the direct quotation of a new speaker in a fresh paragraph. whether you are writing fiction or reporting a factual incident. But there will be occasions when related comments call for same-paragraph status.

“I have over a hundred letters, telegrams, and e-mails,” Senator Upright said, “calling for the immediate passage of this much needed measure. I so move!” he exclaimed, as his friend Senator Dowell rose and called out, “Second!” to the cries of other Senators: 'Hear, hear!"

Breaking the above according to the "rule’ about new speakers calling for new paragraphs loses the intensity and immediacy of the near-simultaneous support conveyed by the style used. But be aware that you are violating a narrative custom for dramatic effect, and don’t use it randomly to excuse slipshod writing.