Ever since I started hanging out in these sites where lots of unedited stories exist, I noticed that a lot of people really love to use semi-colons, often in what appears to be the wrong way. But I've been noticing people use it so often lately that I question my own understanding. My current understanding is that the semi-colon has two primary functions. One is to connect two closely linked independent clauses, and the other is to create a list of items. I don't see the latter very often but I did see it once from a short story that was written circa 1950. Can't remember the title, though. Anyway, I'll provide some examples in order to ask some questions. I'm confident that the above example is correct. Both clauses are independent and closely related, so they can be linked with a semi-colon. This time, both clauses are independent, but they aren't related in anyway. Does this make this use-case grammatically incorrect? Is that a requirement for the independent clauses to be related in someway? And does that relation have to be necessarily close? My next question comes from my confusion with what makes a clause. I used to think that a sentence gets split into clauses the moment you use a comma, but some research on the topic revealed this isn't necessarily the case. An independent clause needs to have a subject and a predicate to stand on its own, that is true. But certain types of predicates can include multiple commas, which means that a sentence with multiple commas can be an entire, independent clause. Or so I think. My above example includes a compound predicate. Showered, shaved and dressed are all verbs that describe actions of a single subject (David), so the clause is independent. The next one is too. So does this make it a valid use case? If so, it looks really awkward either way. The above example looks wrong. If anything is a dependent clause because it has a subject (anything) but no predicate, and therefore not usable with a semi-colon. He felt happy has a different subject (a person) so it is its own clause. By the way, this is an actual example from the wild. This is another example from the wild. It's interesting because there is a piece of dialogue, so I'm not sure how that affects the usage of a semi-colon. Assuming that it doesn't have an effect and we can just ignore it, this also appears to be wrong. The first clause includes a subject and a complete predicate (smiled back at the boy), to be precise. A warm, yet sad smile doesn't sound independent though simply by feel. But the technical reason is that it contains a verb but no predicate, and it is therefore a dependent clause. Do I have this right? Here's another example from the wild. This time, it starts with a dependent clause, and then an independent one. Does that dependent clause in the beginning affect the independent one in terms of semi-colon conjunction? Because it looks valid otherwise. Both linked clauses include subjects and predicates. Are my verdicts correct? Are there other complex examples you can think of that I didn't show here? Thank you!
Semi-colons are used between related clauses when you want to draw attention to the connection between them. Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way. Sometimes, an em dash works as well, especially when the tone of the clauses differ. It wasn't my fault—it was his fault! In the other examples, I personally wouldn't use a semi-colon. David showered, shaved and dressed in fine clothes. Then, he left home. That wasn't a problem by any means. If anything, he felt happy. "You never have." He smiled back at the boy, a warm yet sad smile. A Simon thought about this, Hera keenly observed Jay. That terrible feeling in her stomach only grew stronger. Sometimes semi-colons are used to bring clarity to long, convoluted sentences. In East London, where the zombie infestation is at a critical level, the army, in spite of its most coordinated efforts, has been unable to extract the remaining citizens; and the people, starving, terrified and desperate, are themselves turning to cannibalism to survive. But again, I prefer the em dash. In East London, where the zombie infestation is at a critical level, the army has been unable to extract the remaining citizens, in spite of its most coordinated efforts. Meanwhile, the people—starving, terrified and desperate—are themselves turning to cannibalism to survive. Semi-colons can also be used to separate elements in a list in which the elements contain commas. The most effective way to kill a vampire is by drenching them in holy water, water infused with garlic or petrol (and setting them alight); piercing their heart with a wooden stake made of oak, beech or yew; exposing them to sunlight, fire or holy images; or starving them of blood until they turn to dust. https://www.liminalpages.com/semicolons-fiction
Thanks very much for your reply! I wouldn't either. I think semi-colons should be used very sparingly, but some people seem to use them a lot. I'm not worried about misusing them but since sometimes I write critiques that include grammar corrections, I want to make sure that I fully understand this. I'm cautious because I once wrongly made a correction about dialogue. So, obviously, I want to avoid this kind of thing in the future That's one behemoth of a paragraph! I found something like it during my research on Grammar Monster. Apparently, you can do something like this because there is a conjunction. Mainly, it's used to separate two comma-filled sentences as you say.
Is that really wrong? 'If anything' seems like a subordinate clause to 'he felt happy' so isn't it the same as "That wasn't a problem by any means; he felt happy if anything."
I'm not a hundred percent sure, hence why I'm asking You're right that it is a subordinate clause, also known as a dependent clause. A semi-colon cannot link dependent clauses, so this seems to be wrong. But, again, this isn't a write-up on how to use the semi-colon. It's me asking questions, so I might very well be missing something here. Edit: Actually, I am indeed missing something. I just read the rules again and there is an exception when it comes to transitional phrases. 'If anything' appears to be a transitional phrase.
I am not as devoted to the semi-colon as I am to the Oxford comma, but I am fond of it. Its presence contributes to the rhythm of reading, indicating a brief pause in thought rather than a full stop.
I suppose that's correct. It's also why you don't want to use it too much. It'll get very distracting.
I don't have much to add except to refer you to one of the standard books on punctuation, or to Benjamin Dreyer's Dreyer's English: an Utterly Correct Guide to Clarity and Style. Do be advised that British and American writers differ with each other, and even among themselves, about the proper use of this punctuation.
I use semi-colons now and then and don't mind seeing them used in moderation, but I don't like to see them in dialogue.
I've heard that exact sentiment from several people over the years, and it always makes about as much sense to me as "I don't like to hear half-rests in overtures". Like, what is it about dialogue that makes them especially egregious? Especially since we use them in real speech all the time?
I agree they are okay in moderation; are good sometimes in lists. If you are accumulating conjunctions and independent clauses you might want to opt for a semi-colon instead to reduce redundancy, and don't forget that semi-colons and conjunctions are mutually exclusive.
Huh. I didn't notice the responses here. Did I miss the alerts? Honestly? Ever since I became conscious of their existence, I see them everywhere. And I can't see them as anything but the author trying to vary the sentences in order to add 'character' to the text. Well, they're okay in moderation as you say, but if its done every other page... ugh. Dialogue and speech are very different things. Sure, they're closely related, but they take different forms. Speech is verbal, dialogue is visual through a text medium. And semi-colons stand out. A lot. Because they aren't nearly as common as other punctuation marks like the full stop. Which can indeed be used in place of a semi-colon. I'll go outside; you go inside. I'll go outside. You go inside. I like the last example much better. It's simpler and there's basically no need for a semi-colon. Honestly, that can be said about authors who use the semi-colon on the spot without much thought. A half-baked effort. That makes it sound as if I'm vilifying it, lol. I don't mean to. But when I see it used so many times... it sorta bothers me
Not so much egregious as overly formal, for most characters speaking. I'll admit it's a personal preference as a reader and may depend on the character in question. They're certainly preferable to the current maddening love for sentence fragments in description.
I don't mean to act like a grammar wiz (because I'm not and I could be wrong) but... using semi-colons to link fragments is grammatically wrong except in certain cases. But creative writing is creative writing for a reason. You don't always have to stick to the rules. A fragment by itself is grammatically wrong but people do it anyway because it has a dramatic effect. Which raises the question of what is and isn't acceptable when it comes to grammar errors.
I've probably already said it on this thread, but to me semi-colons are very formal and belong more in certain kinds of essays than in fiction, but were very common in fiction in the Victorian age. They seem to fit with the cloying curlicues the Victorians put all over the wrought iron railings and the ornamental furnishings (like the claws and talons that adorned so many 'feet' on desks and bathtubs). It was an ornate and over-wrought age, and it's faded into the past now, though it remains enshrined for us to ponder over in literature, architechture, old photographs etc. I enjoy seeing that kind of stuff in those venues, but I balk at seeing it in a more modern context. In fiction anyway. Unless there's a reason, like for instance an author is spoofing Victorian literature or maybe emulating it in some more serious way. I know some branches of modern fiction do favor ridiculously long sentences and elaborate structures like the Victorians were so fond of. For the most part, aside from the aforementioned spoofs or possibly the occasional more serious emulation, those genres exist outside of my normal reading range. I agree with McKee—the kind of writing I prefer in the contemporary age is mostly simple, straightforward words without a lot of curlicues or multisyllabic words, rendered in such a way that the simple wording and basic structures suggest more than they seem to be saying (as in the case of subtext). So a lot of the heavy lifting is being done by the spaces between words—the pauses, the emphasis, or by what's not being said as much as by what is. Or by what's being implied. At least it's the way I prefer to write and mostly to read as well. A few well-chosen and well-arranged words, mostly rather short ones, that carry a lot of meaning, rather than the other way around. In other words the opposite of what I'm playfully doing here. Though occasionally I do enjoy a nice Victorian-esque jaunt through jungles of sentences that twist on for several pages, assuming it's skillfully done. Mostly as an oddity though. And I don't mind those being littered with semi-colons. All that said, I will admit I have a bit of an em-dash addiction myself, that I'm trying to get under control. But at least the em-dash is oriented the right way (horizontally) to not baffle the reader's roving eye, but to propel it along in the direction it's already moving in. I feel the colon and the semi-colon—those cumbersome, vertically-oriented behemoths, are like litte perforated walls one has to squeeze through like a narrow point in a tunnel where you must lie down and pull yourself to the other side. A veritable obstacle if you ask me.
I agree too! But I didn't always lean towards those simplistic styles. I used to make long strings of sentences. Not quite page-long ones but it was still overkill. And yet I still didn't use semi-colons. Well, maybe sometimes if I felt like it. On that note, I picked up a copy of "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" and out of curiosity I flipped it to a random page. The first thing I notice is a semi-colon. Going to enjoy this one it seems. Its genuinely interesting.
That's a fascinating aspect that I had never thought of, especially considering how much time I've spent railing against SPAG errors because they bring my reading to a screeching halt when my eye/brain encounters one, and pull me out of the story.
But they're different statements. They have different rhythms. "I'll go outside [full rest] You go inside" vs "I'll go outside [halfrest] you go inside". They sound different and they read different and they'd be spoken differently. Character voice isn't just about their diction and vocabulary; it also includes speed and rhythm. Saying "no semicolons in dialogue" is saying "Characters cannot speak in a certain rhythm." It's not an author's fault that the reader hasn't been sufficiently exposed to more advanced forms of punctuation, anymore than it's an author's fault that a reader hasn't been sufficiently exposed to more advanced forms of vocabulary. Saying "I don't like semicolons [in places where they are perfectly grammatically appropriate]" is very similar to "I don't like words larger than three syllables [in places where they are perfectly contextually appropriate]." Semicolons are perfectly legitimate punctuation marks with valid functions, just like "perspicacity" and "insouciant" are perfectly legitimate words with valid functions. The only time I've ever noticed a semicolon without looking for them was when I was reading C.J. Cherryh's Fortress in the Eye of Time; she frequently uses two or even three semicolons in a single sentence. Which I felt was absolutely glorious and I wish I had the kind of positive audacity that would allow me to do that.
Oh no, I don't mean to say that they're wrong. They have their place as you say. I just personally dislike their over-usage. And the above example is simply how I would do it because I'd avoid the semi-colon. In fact, I was asking about what's correct and what isn't when it comes to using them. This is what the original question was about. Because I really am confused about them from a grammatical standpoint. But you're right that they affect rhythm. Still, written dialogue and speech are different, and sometimes we write like we speak. This is bad practice. I do it and I notice it during editing.
This is all true, but it's also largely a case of strong personal opinions. Semicolons are one of those very divisive subjects—some people like them, some hate them. There's no point trying to convince people to use a punctuation mark they can't stand. I mean fine, I have absolutely no problems with you or anyone else using them, but I probably never will myself (though I've spotted a few in some of my older writing), and I know many others feel the same way. We're just all stating our opinions here, nobody is trying to persuade anybody else to do anything.
My favorite way to write is the way the character speaks (which often is pretty close to the way I speak). It's why I favor the first person approach where all narration is done in character voice, like Huckleberry Finn or True Grit. Of course even then, you can't allow as much slack and empty words as people actually use when they're talking, you need to tighten it up and make every word pull its own weight (and a little more if possible).
