# Punctuation distinctly separate from grammar? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [October 22, 2006, 10:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/punctuation-distinctly-separate-from-grammar/377433 "2006-10-22T10:34:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 11\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Hogwash](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a88e57/32.png) [@Hogwash](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hogwash)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2006, 10:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/punctuation-distinctly-separate-from-grammar/377433/1 "2006-10-22T10:34:40Z")
Dopers, help settle an ‘argument’. I was enjoying an alcohol-saturated dinner with some old college friends in Chiquitos the other night and noticed that half of the waiters were wearing T-shirts that proclaimed in faux Mexican font: “Famous for fajita’s!” Groaning, I told one of my friends, an English teacher in training, to look at the servers’ shirts and tell me what was wrong. She noticed the extraneous apostrophe almost immediately and we all shared a drunken titter. Later on, when our waiter was over at our table, my friend started asking him (he was called José, natch) about it, saying that it was poor grammar. At this point, I interjected with ‘Is it not a matter of punctuation, not grammar?’ She said that punctuation was grammar. I then mumbled something about being marked for Spelling, Punctuation _and_ Grammar in school exams and that _Eats, Shoots and Leaves_ was a book on the topic of punctuation, not grammar. They (another friend had teamed up with her at this point) mumbled something back and that was pretty much it. Not wanting to be an arse and being a natural self-doubter, I admitted defeat and returned to my chimichanga. So, who was correct? Is punctuation a subset of grammar, allowing you to refer to it under the parent term, or is it a distinctly separate language constructor? ---
**Author:** ![Alive\_At\_Both\_Ends](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/73ab20/32.png) [@Alive\_At\_Both\_Ends](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alive_At_Both_Ends)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2006, 11:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/punctuation-distinctly-separate-from-grammar/377433/2 "2006-10-22T11:15:37Z")
Punctuation is clearly a separate thing from grammar. You can speak ungrammatically, but you cannot punctuate spoken words at all. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2006, 11:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/punctuation-distinctly-separate-from-grammar/377433/3 "2006-10-22T11:54:11Z")
None of the above. Since English is largely an analytic language (with a few surviving synthetic characteristics), punctuation, grammar, and syntax are inextricably intertwined. Some elements of each survive independently of the others, but all three are involved in an interplay. Consider the following: “My parents made me a(n) \_\_\_\_.” The word that fills the blank clarifies (or, occasionally and humorously, fails to clarify) whether the meaning of the sentence is “My parents made [for] me a(n) \_\_\_\_” or “My parents made me [into] a(n) \_\_\_.” The “me” is in one case functioning as indirect object, beneficiary of an action, and in the other as direct object in a predicate copula – Subject acts in way specified by verb to transform direct object into ‘secondary object.’ (Grammarians will have a better term for the “product” noun in a predicate copula than the one I learned 40+ years ago, I’m sure.) “Research indicates that gays who engaged in promiscuous sex were largely responsible for the early spread of AIDS” vs. “Research indicates that gays, who engaged in promiscuous sex, were largely responsible for the early spread of AIDS.” The first sentence suggests a debatable proposition in social epidemiology; the second implies an insulting indictment of all persons with same-sex orientation. “Bulgaria’s avifauna includes many species of turkeys” vs. “Bulgaria’s avifauna includes many species of Turkey’s.” Galliform fowls or species from a neighboring country? “ **Colibri** ’s expertise is more extensive than **Miller** ’s.” (Comparison of two Dopers.) “ **Colibri** ’s expertise is more extensive than millers.” ( **Colibri** has expertise in more fields than one family of lepidoptera.) “ **Colibri** ’s expertise is more extensive than Miller’s.” ( **Colibri** has a wider expertise than some person named Miller, not the Doper.) “ **Colibri** ’s expertise is more extensive than millers’.” ( **Colibri** has a more extensive expertise than people who grind grain for a living.) And, of course, the old canard about the girl uttering a _pro forma_ faux protest to her boyfriend: “Don’t! Stop! Don’t! Stop! Don’t stop! Don’t stop!” (_Please_ don’t take this into a seduction/date-rape argument; it’s a relict of a time when a girl was _supposed_ to make a protest to satisfy the proprieties, a social artifact of an older set of mores.) “Randy loved one tin soldier.” (a boy’s attachment to a toy) “Randy loved ‘One Tin Soldier.’” (he was enamored of the Ronstadt song) “Randy loved _One Tin Soldier_.” (presumably a book this time) One could also construct a sentence in which the singular, plural, singular possessive, and plural possessive were all properly used in an otherwise-identical structure, carrying distinctly different meanings. All these examples are, of course, chosen for maximum value as examples, but illustrate how English grammar, syntax, and punctuation (and sometimes capitalization and typography) interact to modify meaning. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2006, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/punctuation-distinctly-separate-from-grammar/377433/4 "2006-10-22T15:27:15Z")
Excellent post, **Polycarp**! ---
**Author:** ![RealityChuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitychuck/32/195_2.png) [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2006, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/punctuation-distinctly-separate-from-grammar/377433/5 "2006-10-22T16:13:07Z")
But **Polycarp** isn’t talking about grammer; he’s talking about meaning. That punctuation changes meaning is irrefutable, but in none of his examples does he include anything that is an issue of incorrect grammar. For example: The “Randy loved one tine soldier” example has different meanings depending on the punctuation, but the sentence is grammatically correct in all cases. If the sentence were “Randy loved one tin soldiers” there would be a grammatical error (plural noun with “one”). Grammar involves the use of words in sentences: subject-verb agreement, number agreements, pronound agreement (\*They are my mother), the proper form of verb tenses (e.g., \*He will go to school yesterday), forming plurals (\*There were two deer’s), proper adjective use (\*He is a man tall), ellipisi (_His suggestions made John happy but his suggestions Mary angry)_, etc. Most English speakers internalize grammar so completely that they know not to make these errors even without knowing that the are errors. Back to the OP, using the 's for the plural can be called either a punctuation error (because the wrong punctuation is used) or a grammatical error (because you’re using a possessive when the plural is required). That would depend on the intent of the writer. If they thought the phrase was possessive, then it’s a grammar error. If they thought it was the correct way to make a plural, then it’s a punctuation error. Punctuation is an adjunct of grammar; Quirk and Greenbaum\* give 14 chapters and over 400 pages to describing the rules of grammar, but punctuation is relegated to a single appendix of just over three pages. Clearly, grammarians consider it separate from grammar. \*Randolph Quirk and Sidney Greenbaum’s “A Concise Grammar of Contemporary English,” one of the best authorities on the subject. ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2006, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/punctuation-distinctly-separate-from-grammar/377433/6 "2006-10-22T16:35:15Z")
[QUOTE=Exapno Mapcase] Excellent post, **Polycarp**! [/QUOTE] I disagree with this. Punctuation is not grammar at all, but merely a writing convention like orthography. Linguists consider grammar to be an attribute of the spoken language. ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Drake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ad7895/32.png) [@Dr.Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Drake)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2006, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/punctuation-distinctly-separate-from-grammar/377433/7 "2006-10-22T16:58:16Z")
[QUOTE=Spectre of Pithecanthropus] I disagree with this. Punctuation is not grammar at all, but merely a writing convention like orthography. Linguists consider grammar to be an attribute of the spoken language. [/QUOTE] But the written language is an attempt to record the spoken language. In English, the convention we maintain for separating the singular possessive case from the plural subject case, identical in sound, is the apostrophe. fajitas : more than one fajita fajita’s : of or belonging to a fajita. The apostrophe here isn’t really the same as the apostrophe in _don’t_.\* Imagine if we spelled the homonyms like this: fajitas : more than one fajita fajitaš : of or belonging to a fajita A lot of languages do things like this to distinguish homonyms in writing; cf. Spanish _si_ (if) _sí_ (yes). Would the (v) over the [s] be considered punctuation, or a diacritic? I agree with **Polycarp** , but if you had to pick one, I think ['s] is more grammar than punctuation, or perhaps grammar-as-expressed-through-punctuation. \*Though they have the same origin, they are functionally different. ---
**Author:** ![Nametag](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nametag/32/406_2.png) [@Nametag](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nametag)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2006, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/punctuation-distinctly-separate-from-grammar/377433/8 "2006-10-22T17:10:42Z")
You’re killing me. Let’s look at some definitions, shall we? > [@Merriam Webster](#): > > Grammar… 1 a : the study of the classes of words, their inflections, and their functions and relations in the sentence b : a study of what is to be preferred and what avoided in inflection and syntax > 2 a : the characteristic system of inflections and syntax of a language b : a system of rules that defines the grammatical structure of a language It should be clear that the misplaced apostrophe is neither a matter of inflection nor syntax (unless you actually believe that these people don’t know the difference between the plural and the possessive). It should be equally clear that it’s not a punctuation error (Webster again: “Punctuation… 1 : to mark or divide (written matter) with punctuation marks”). What we have here is a _spelling error_. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2006, 3:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/punctuation-distinctly-separate-from-grammar/377433/9 "2006-10-23T03:04:44Z")
Writing (orthography) is not a linguistics issue. It’s an anthropological issue. ---
**Author:** ![panache45](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/panache45/32/64_2.png) [@panache45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panache45)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2006, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/punctuation-distinctly-separate-from-grammar/377433/10 "2006-10-24T01:06:58Z")
[QUOTE=Hogwash] . . . in faux Mexican font . . . [/QUOTE] What, exactly, is a faux Mexican font, and how would it be distinguished from a \*real \*Mexican font? > [@Alive At Both Ends](#): > > . . . you cannot punctuate spoken words at all. You’ve obviously never heard of Victor Borge. ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2006, 1:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/punctuation-distinctly-separate-from-grammar/377433/11 "2006-10-24T01:30:10Z")
[QUOTE=Dr. Drake] fajitas : more than one fajita fajita’s : of or belonging to a fajita. The apostrophe here isn’t really the same as the apostrophe in _don’t_.\* Imagine if we spelled the homonyms like this: [/QUOTE] Yes, but the error in the OP is not a grammatical one, but a punctuation/orthographical one, in my opinion. It’s clear that the writer wasn’t trying to use the possessive form of fajitas. The writer merely misused the apostrophe and effectively misspelled the plural form of fajita. Spoken aloud, the sentence is clearly grammatical. There was an error in the transcription. Hence, I agree wholeheartedly with **Nametag**.