I'm trying to use this thing correctly but microsoft word is being awfully picky. Half the time I think it doesn't need one it does. Half the time I think it does need one it doesn't. The rest of the time Microsoft Word doesn't check the whole sentence for context. (though it's pretty bad about that in general if I'm being honest) I think I'm inching toward figuring it out, but I dunno man I think Microsoft word is bi-polar sometimes. Like I'm not even joking, a lot of times it will try to convince me that 'your' is 'correct' in a sentence, when I'm usually using 'you' properly. Little things like that is why I wind up turning most of the grammar checks off. It only checks for the error itself, not the entire sentence, small rant aside does anyone have any tips for using this thing correctly?
Tips for using the grammar checker in Microsoft Word? I do what you have done -- I leave it turned off, because it's brain dead. The grammar checker in WordPerfect 30 years ago was light years better than the grammar checker in Word today. I only turn it on when I need a word count, then I immediately turn it off again. I recommend this book: https://www.amazon.com/Elements-Style-Fourth-William-Strunk/dp/020530902X/ref=sr_1_4?dchild=1&keywords=the+elements+of+style&qid=1620446878&sr=8-4 It's affordable, and it covers the basics very well. It should answer almost all the grammar and punctuation questions that most writers will have -- most of the time. For the rest, there's the Chicago Manual of Style -- but that costs $35. BTW -- don't feel too badly. I have read that the comma is the most misused and misunderstood punctuation mark in the English language. Much of the problem comes from assuming that a comma should/must be inserted where there's a pause in speech. That all too often results in commas in the wrong place, or sentences with twice as many commas as needed for clarity and grammatical correctness.
When you have a question about anything grammar or punctuation-related, google it or bing it. There are excellent sites stuffed full of all the info you need.
There’s not really a single rule. The link shared by @EFMingo is fantastic and breaks this rule down in an easy and comprehensive way. But there are sometimes differences between American and British grammatical habits The use of the Oxford comma is one example. It is generally not used in Britain but more frequently used in the US. So I guess whether you use this bit of punctuation or not depends on whether you’re using American or European writing habits. Microsoft Word would support its use because it would proofread your work using the U.S standard. You can ignore these rules if you’re going by the UK standard. This link provides more info on some of the differences https://proofreadmyessay.co.uk/writing-tips/differences-british-american-punctuation/
Curious. It is, after all, called the "Oxford comma," not the "Chicago comma." This again shows how language evolves. When I attended high school shortly after the signing of the Magna Carta, we were taught that American usage was to omit the serial comma and that British usage was to include it. Indeed, I correspond by e-mail on almost a daily basis with two friends in Greece who learned British English. One of them, in particular, sprinkles commas through his writing as though he had bought several gross of them and needed to use them up before they reached their expiry date. If the serial comma is now more favored here in the colonies and less so in the UK, that strikes me as pretty much an about face from what I learned as a youth. Sic transit gloria mundi.
Other than the serial (a.k.a. "Oxford") comma question, what I perceive as a major misuse of commas occurs when writers drop commas into sentences where they would (perhaps) make a pause if speaking out load. The resulting sentence fails the grammatic rule that a "parenthetic" (or subordinate) clause set off by commas should be able to be removed from the sentence and the remaining words should read like a coherent sentence. Over the course of my misguided life I have read a great many western books by the prolific author Louis Lamour, and ol' Louis was very prone to doing this. So, it can happen to the best of us. I don't have one of Louis' books at hand, so I'll try to construct a sample sentence to illustrate. Louis might have written something like, "Texas Jack drew down on the defenseless homesteader, and drawing back the hammer on his Colt six-shooter, shot him in the left knee." See where the first comma is misplaced? If we remove the subordinate clause, the remaining words read "Texas Jack drew down on the defenseless homesteader shot him in the left knee." That doesn't work, does it? However, if we shift the comma to follow the "and," we get the following if the subordinate clause is extracted: Texas Jack drew down on the defenseless homesteader and shot him in the left knee." Now that's a sentence. Lamour's books are chock full of this error, and the books are still selling well decades after his death. The reality is that only a nerd (like me) is likely to ever spot those misplaced commas as the errors they are. What mystifies me is how the editors at his publisher overlooked them. I suspect it's because he was so popular and so prolific that they didn't do any real editing, they just rushed each new book into print and sat back to collect the money as it rolled in. But Lamour is hardly the only author who makes this mistake. I see it in a great many books and magazine articles, and I confess that I do it more often than I care to admit when I'm writing. Sometimes I catch it as I'm doing it, more often I catch it on the second or third edit -- and, too often, I miss it until after the article has been published. Since my main editors are the wholesale comma sprinklers, I can't count on them to spot it so I have to try to police it for myself.
Word is a pain in the ass sometimes. Try this if word isn't being helpful: https://www.reverso.net/spell-checker/english-spelling-grammar/
Sorry to use this thread for my own question, but it's about comma usage and I didn't want to create a new one. The following is a sentence from Dune: He gestured for an aid to pass him a folder, opened the folder on the table in front of him. I've read this sentence multiple times, and for whatever reason it continues to trip me up. Can someone explain how the comma is being used here? Thanks in advance.
Yeah that is wonky. Sounds like Herbert started out thinking he'd add a third verb to "gestured," and "opened," changed him mind, and went with the little fragment clause instead. And his editor, after having an aneurysm navigating all the head hops and thought quotes, probably glossed right over it. Or didn't have the energy to argue with Herbert over it. Chalk it up to style, I guess. But definitely weird.
Yeah. That's not a sentence. The second half is a fragment, an incomplete clause. At least that's my understanding.
It's a stylistic device called an asyndeton. Asyndetons drop conjunctions and only use commas. (I haven't ever seen one without commas, but now I wonder.) The and is dropped from its normal position. It doesn't read well here because it gets tangled up with "to pass . . ." That comma isn't enough to save it. (Sorry, Frank, but it's true.) This would have worked: He gestured for an aid, opened the folder on the table in front of him. Though it still seems slightly off and unnecessary. You only break standard grammar for a reason. There's voices where it's perfect though: I lit a Chesterfield, inhaled, tipped my Fedora low. This is a syndeton (what you normally expect, one conjunction where it is needed) He gestured for an aid and opened the folder on the table in front of him. This is a polysyndeton (uses many conjunctions) He pulled his Beretta and aimed and fired.
Comma, comma, comma, comma, comma chameleon. It comes and goes, it comes and go-o-o-oes. Wait, what were we talking about again? Oh, that. Dang, they got a word for everything, don't they? Thanks! I just learned something.
