I don't know, it wasn't me who made the argument. I just think I understood what the poster was saying, so I translated. I might be wrong.
Haha, sorry for the confusion on the control thing, guys! This is accurate to what I was saying. "Still, the casual manner in which Ms. Barker held herself, gave some relief from the sorrowful reality that currently surrounded them, and that relief, was something Sarah wanted to focus on." That's the sort of "being controlled" I'm talking about. When a writer uses commas and other devises (in my early writing it was an overuse of italics) to control how I read something instead of to just tell me who the character is or how he/she talks. Not everyone breaks and pauses mentally in the same places, even when reading the same story. So which is better to you, if any: the earlier sentence, or this one? "Still, the casual manner in which Ms. Barker held herself gave some relief from the sorrowful reality that currently surrounded them, and that relief was something Sarah wanted to focus on."
I have the doggonedest time figuring out where to put a comma. Mainly because I never really learned about them in the first place so everything feels like an artistic choice rather than adhering to a rule. In fact when I get it right it's probably due to sheer accident or the mist covering something I read ( commas before conjunctions ) clearing up. Sometimes I think this is why I like short sentences.
But you're not the speaker. The speaker controls how the speaker speaks. In the Cary Grant His Girl Friday, there's a very specific sort of rapid patter. That's not controlling me. In David Mamet movies, there's a very specific sort of precise back-and-forth. That's not controlling me. When a standup comic chooses how he's going to tell a joke, that's not controlling me. They're all making choices about how they speak. I don't have to like it, but it doesn't control me. Writers who present their voice in their writing are not controlling you, they're making choices about the presentation of their material. You don't have to like it, but it's not control.
Definitely the second one is not only better, but it is correct. The comma after "herself" in the first version needlessly separates the subject ("the casual manner in which Ms. Barker held herself") from the verb ("gave"). If there's to be any commas at all between the subject and the verb, there has to be at least two of them. As in, say, " . . . in which Ms. Barker held herself, which was habitual with her, gave some relief . . . " The single comma is Just Plain Wrong. Don't dooooooooooo that!
ChickenFreak, that sentence wasn't what someone was saying. I understand in dialogue writers get away with (and rightly so) a lot of grammatically incorrect stuff to show how a character talks (although too much of that still drives me crazy, but like I said, I'm a little picky). Catrin, I agree with you that the first sentence was terrible, but I have read a number of books that did that sort of thing constantly. The example sentence was taken from my story since I couldn't seem to make one up on the spot. I placed a couple extra commas in for the first example; the second one was copy/pasted from the story. If you see an error in there, feel free to let me know.
Sure, it was. It was what the author was saying. I feel as if you're saying that the author, by refusing to allow you to control his writing style choices, is controlling you. Do you see how that sentiment doesn't work for me?
There's a difference between writing style and a "controlling comma." The way an author talks, such as using old English speech, the grammar and syntax of a German accent, or Yoda talk, is what I think of as writing style. Am I wrong? The "controlling comma" is a comma that really doesn't belong somewhere, but was put there anyway so the author could be sure readers paused where they themselves paused in their head when reading. I'm not saying authors do it to be controlling or mean, I'm just saying it's an unnecessary attempt to control how people read the book. I had a big problem in the beginning of my writing with that. Mostly, I used a lot of italics to let the reader know EXACTLY which words in a sentence should be emphasized. I did it to reduce the possibility of confusion and because I wanted the readers to understand how my characters were thinking and talking. However, what I was actually doing was controlling how the readers read the story instead of just guiding them through it and letting their own imaginations "fill in the blanks". Did any of that make sense? I mean absolutely none of this with any disrespect, and if I sound disrespectful, I am sorry.
(I'm having trouble with my editor, so I'm just going to quote you from here on out with "Re:"'s) Re: The "controlling comma" is a comma that really doesn't belong somewhere, but was put there anyway so the author could be sure readers paused where they themselves paused in their head when reading." I don't see it that way. I see it as the author writing in their own voice, putting a comma where they pause. Would you say that Yoda is being controlling because he forces you to translate his grammar? Or would you say that he speaks the way Yoda speaks, and since he's Yoda, he's allowed to speak the way Yoda speaks? An author is allowed to speak the way that the author speaks. The fact that the author is writing, not talking into a microphone, doens't change that. I think that the issue may be (this is purely theory) that you are separating tempo (the best word I can come up with for pauses) from grammar and word choice. Because grammar and word choice go to the page unaltered, you are accepting that the author has a right to use his choices there. But perhaps you are seeing tempo as something only related to sound, and so you don't grant the writer the same creative control there. But the very fact that the comma is communicating a pause to you means that you CAN record tempo in the written word, just as you can record grammar and word choice. So why is it seen as more controlling? Sure, you have to recreate tempo in your head. But you have to recreate a fictional setting in your head, too. Why is tempo more controlling than telling you that a dress is red or a voice is gravelly? Is it because it's the author's voice, rather than a character's voice or the setting that the author is creating? I can see a difference there, but I can't see that the author has fewer rights over his own voice than over those other things. Re: "I'm not saying authors do it to be controlling or mean, I'm just saying it's an unnecessary attempt to control how people read the book." And so is a red dress, a gravelly voice, and a word choice. So is Yoda's mode of speech. Every single bit of an artistic work is intended to convey a particular experience to the reader. Why is it that only punctuation choices are controlling? Re: "Did any of that make sense? I mean absolutely none of this with any disrespect, and if I sound disrespectful, I am sorry." It's not disrespectful, it's just... confusing to me. I feel that it's OK for the author to choose his own words, and his own fictional dress colors, and his own pauses.
@ChickenFreak I'm glad you don't find what I'm saying disrespectful. Unfortunately, I also find what you're saying a little confusing. Maybe that's why we seem to be shooting in different directions while trying to hit the same target of understanding. When I hear someone talking to me, I don't notice all the comma splices and run-on sentences they say. There are no ellipsis or periods or other such writing devises. There are voice fluctuations, expressions, and movement. Even talking on the phone brings voice fluctuations and speed variance. Hearing someone speak is very, very different from reading. In general, we speak differently than we write; that's why grammar rules can be so hard to understand. The part of my brain that listens hears differently than the part of my brain that reads. When I listen with my ear, I hear the other person's voice putting words into my mind. When I "listen" with my eyes through reading, I hear my voice putting another person's words into my mind. I don't hear the author talking to me. Most of the time I don't even know if the author is male or female. The concept of the author talking to me while I'm reading a story is new to me. It sounds like you think of the author as another character. I think of the author is someone who had a great idea and put it into a book. If my recent study of Point-of-View is correct, authors shouldn't put their voice into a story unless they're writing that story in narrative, and even then the narrator is theoretically going to have a different voice than the author. It took me a while, but I think I understand your question about the red dress and gravelly voice. I'll do my best to answer it. "Red dress" and "gravelly voice" are descriptive adjectives and nouns that help the reader understand the world in the story and plot. Putting a comma to create tempo does not enhance a reader's understanding of the story or characters. All it does is help the reader understand the tempo within the author's head. Since I might think with a different tempo, it can distract me from what the author wants me to pay attention to: the characters, plot, and world inside the book. Totally off topic, but I LOVE your avatar and name. I had chickens for about two years--they're hilarious!
(Still unable to quote properly.) I begin to maybe perhaps see your point of view. It sounds like you want the author to be essentially a clear window through which you view the story. (I pause to note that I think I stole that metaphor from someone.) You don't want to be aware of the author or the writing--you want them to just get out of the way. Is that approximately right? While I rarely like a really flowery authorial voice, and I don't like being aware of the author as an actual entity, I do often appreciate a distinctive authorial voice. Rumer Godden's voice is very distinctive, as is Robert Barnard's, Dorothy Sayers', and so on. I see the author's voice as part of the artistic work--rather like you might recognize the distinctive look and feel of a movie by a particular director. So, Re: "If my recent study of Point-of-View is correct, authors shouldn't put their voice into a story unless they're writing that story in narrative, and even then the narrator is theoretically going to have a different voice than the author." I obviously disagree on the above. I still don't accept the "control" idea, but I can certainly accept that a person might prefer works where the authorial voice is more transparent.
Yes, that's correct. There are very few books that can pull off the "author's voice" enough for me to enjoy them. I can definitely see why we weren't understanding each other! I'm beginning to wonder if reading has its own style like how writing has its own style. To each their own, I guess! Glad we could clear all that all! And now, it is my bedtime. Good night y'all!
I agree with you in most cases. What does bother me is when a writer makes these kinds of 'errors' when they're not doing it on purpose. I think there's a difference. As you point out, if the run-on sentence comes only when the child speaks, then you'll know the author was aware of what they were doing. It's indicative of how the child is speaking, and it 'works' ...unless you're a grammar nazi! If these kinds of sentences occur on every page, however, then you'll know it really is a mistake that should be pointed out and corrected. I maintain that anything can be done on purpose in fiction. How that clashes with my own preference as an author to remain invisible is still up for discussion!
Yeah, ellipses. Overuse of them is a bad habit, and one I've worked hard at breaking in myself. I was using them a LOT, probably because my first computer keyboard didn't have a good m-dash key, and I was using them to substitute for dashes—which can also be a bad habit. I still use them while I write, but now I go through my MS afterwards, removing most of them. Aaargh. They're so easy to write with, but they do call attention to themselves. They are very useful when a trailing-off note is required, but probably shouldn't be used any other time.
I'm looking at this from a musical point of view. If I hear a piece of music, I hear how the musician has interpreted it (I've got one particular piece played by three different musicians, three very different interpretations). When I read a musical score, I see how the composer has written it. And it comes complete with instructions on how it should be played. Pause here. Play this note for that long. Now louder. Now softer. Short stabbing notes. Now, smoothly, gliding each note into the next one. A comma is just a way of spelling out what the words in between mean. As a reminder of the importance of punctuation in getting your meaning across; "Mr Speaker, I said the honourable member was a liar it is true and I am sorry for it. The honourable member may place the punctuation where he pleases." - Richard Brinsley Sheridan MP, on being asked to apologise for calling a fellow MP a liar
For both reading and writing, here are my rules of thumb: Punctuation makes meaning clear. If it doesn't, it changes to whatever will make it clear. When in doubt, revert to Oxford comma. On a side note, I often sprinkle semi-colons throughout a first draft, or at least, I have in the past. While rewriting, I get rid of as many as possible using whatever method best suits the rhythm of the paragraph at hand. Other than that, I rarely think about punctuation. I have similar rules for grammar.
I'm with you. The only time I keep a splice is for a kind of stutter effect in action sentences. Example: He tumbled over rocks, down the hill, smashed into a tree, moaned in pain. (not a great example, but that's the gist of it)
Good point. I think flow, as well as implied pause length, far outweigh any correctness considerations.
I read this, too (and about the same time) but the article I read was talking only about magazine writing. I thought it was bad practice, especially for magazine articles/stories, because rereading several times to get the meaning doesn't fit the philosophy of a fast read, which was--apparently--the whole point of leaving out the commas. It's like some executive wanted to save a few micro-pennies (no commas = less ink = bigger bonus) and sold it to the rest of us as a faster reading experience. But then, it was during the 1980s that magazines went from providing information to existing solely to sell. Meaning wasn't relevant any more. When examined closely, it's surprising how many trends started with some executive's desire to increase his annual bonus. LOL! If you won't, I will... I tried to read The Old Man and the Sea and gave up on page two. To me, Hemingway's writing is stilted and hesitant because he refuses to use contractions. I cannot deal with that. Not using contracts should be reserved for adding emphasis or to show, in dialogue, that someone's got a ramrod up his ass. Just my opinion, of course. I gotta go along with that. The spell-checker doesn't flag 'gotta,' but it should. I use Word 2003 and I had to teach this word to its dictionary.
Not so much contrived as archaic. It was common in conversation up until the 20th century. "and indeed such a fellow, to say precisely, were not for the court; but for me, I have an answer will serve all men." All's Well that Ends Well - Wm. Shakespeare
This obviously doesn't apply to you, dear Tea@3, but since you broached the subject, I'm using your post as a jumping off point. Hope you don't mind. I'm not sure I'm an actual Grammar Nazi, but if I'm reading something (no matter how interesting) after about the fifth grammar/spelling mistake, I'm out of there. For me, the annoyance factor gets in the way of enjoying/taking in the subject matter. Even on this forum. Especially on this forum. I do my best to SPAG the crap out of my posts and expect the same of others. We are writers, after all. Hmmm... maybe I am a Grammar Nazi.
But I think you made the best interpretation possible given the information available... Which fits in quite well with the discussion, actually.
How'd you do that? I've been trying to figure out to do m-dashes in forums since the Internet was knee-high to DARPA Usenet.
