if that were true, there would be no pulitzer, pen, nobel oscar, et al. prizes for the written arts, would there?... nor any editors at publishing houses, magazines and literary journals... and anything anyone writes at any level of competence [or its opposite] would be considered equal, from toilet stall scribblings to classics such as the iliad and shakespeare's best...
I still don't consider those places authorities on the written word. I consider them authorities on what people like to read. Just a thought.
Hmm, interesting analogy, though it seems a little. . . non sequitur. I prefer the analogy comparing length of pauses and strength of the mark. A comma is a slight pause, wherein you might take a breath, or just for the lilt of your words. It's a weak mark. Semicolon is just a bit weaker than a period, making itself readily known, but not completely stopping a sentence.
Then what is the subtle difference between a colon and semi-colon??? Just wondering because I would like to learn to use them so I can vary my sentences as I write.
from http://andromeda.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Writing/s.html : and from http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/grammar/g_overvw.html :
Maybe because they are transvestite hermaphrodites. Google the two last words and you'll find the full quote and know who said that. Of course there's also Noah Lukeman who is a strong defender of the semicolon and his "cement and marble" analogy. Both sides have good arguments, though. Punctuation is actually quite secondary when it comes to fiction writing (in it's submitted form). You can make a punctuation error at every turn but if the writing is still entrenching, many a publisher will overlook the mistakes and leave it to the editor to weed out the mistakes. Key word here is entrenching and I don't condone gratuitous grammar mistakes.
Read mamma's general usage of the colon and semicolon first, then the examples below carefully. Since the use of the colon and the semicolon, although simple in principle, presents so many difficulties to uncertain punctuators, it will be helpful to contrast them here. Consider first the following two sentences: Lisa is upset. Gus is having a nervous breakdown. The use of two separate sentences suggests that there is no particular connection between these two facts: they just happen to be true at the same time. No particular inference can be drawn, except perhaps that things are generally bad. Now see what happens when a semicolon is used: Lisa is upset; Gus is having a nervous breakdown. The semicolon now suggests that the two statements are related in some way. The likeliest inference is that the cause of Lisa's annoyance and the cause of Gus's nervous breakdown are the same. Perhaps, for example, both are being disturbed by building noise next door. (Remember, a semicolon connects two sentences which are related.) Now try it with a colon: Lisa is upset: Gus is having a nervous breakdown. This time the colon shows explicitly that Gus's nervous breakdown is the reason for Lisa's distress: Lisa is upset because Gus is having a nervous breakdown. (Remember, a colon introduces an explanation or elaboration of what has come before.) Consider another example: I have the answer. Mike's solution doesn't work. Here we have two independent statements: my answer and Mike's solution may possibly have been directed at the same problem, but nothing implies this, and equally they may have been directed at two entirely distinct problems. Now, with a semicolon: I have the answer; Mike's solution doesn't work. The semicolon shows that the two statements are related, and strongly implies that Mike and I were working on the same problem. Finally, with a colon: I have the answer: Mike's solution doesn't work. This time the use of the colon indicates that the failure of Mike's solution is exactly the answer which I have obtained: that is, what I have discovered is that Mike's solution doesn't work. If you understand these examples, you should be well on your way to using colons and semicolons correctly. Summary of colons and semicolons: € Use a colon to separate a general statement from following specifics. € Use a semicolon to connect two complete sentences not joined by and, or, but, yet or while. reference: http://www.informatics.sussex.ac.uk/department/docs/punctuation/node18.html
i'm puzzled... 'entrenching' means digging a ditch [as done in wwi], or encroaching/infringing, so did you mean 'entrancing'?
I must have been on the moon and I made the mistakes twice. Mind you, happens to me all the times and I know the difference very well. I guess in my memory, those two words are in very close proximity. A good conjecture considering I also confuse "death" and "depth" when I don't give my full attention to my writing.
Just out of curiosity...I find that a lot of the times you focus more on what grammatical and technical errors are being made rather than the actual meaning of what is being said. With that being said, I was wondering why you never voiced your opinion on the post in which I expressed the view that writing is an expression of self and instead focused on who is and isn't an authority on writing.
i respond to what catches my eye, lynne... and i don't always have the time or the inclination to spend on lengthier feedback re the entire post, as some have... when i have something to say about it that i feel is worth saying, then i do...
I just made a post about this on my new website, (un)Enlightened English. Check out the guide here. Thanks!
Isn't it possible that a semicolon substitues for a conjunction? He never pitched for practice; he was mugged at the station. He never pitched for practice because he was mugged at the station. He was mugged at the station; he never pitched for practice He was mugged at the station, therefore he never pitched for practice. Just my two cents worth. vanhunks
They both join a related pair of complete sentences, so in a sense you are correct. However, each conjunction carries meaning of its own, whereas the semicolon leaves te meaning unspecified. More often, where a semicolon could be used, a period is a better choice. If a connection between a pair of sentences is what you mean to convey, a conjuction is usually superior. Failing that, the sentences should remain separated, delimited by a full stop. Excessive use of semicolons usually represents an inability to decide between joining sentences with a conjunction or separating them with a full stop. Be decisive. Just say no to semicolons.
vanhunks, I personally wouldn't use a semicolon in those sentences. Because works better in that case. When I use a semicolon to connect two sentences it is because a full stop doesn't carry the same feeling and the weak generic conjunction and doesn't add anything, and I already have a compound sentence in the paragraph using the conjunction and. Here is an example where I used it. She wasn’t just saving up for rent; she was also saving up for tuition. Using and to connect these two sentences doesn't add anything. The word but changes the meaning. A period places a full stop between two ideas that I don't want a full stop between. I already have a compound sentence close to this one and didn't want another of the same type. It is the only semicolon I used in chapter 1, which is 6,500 words long.
Architectus, not to nitpick...but you could change that and get rid of the semicolon. "Not only was she saving for rent, but also for tuition." That simple However, the way you have it written is a good example of when a semicolon may become necessary. Just never forget most sentences can be reworded so that the semicolon is completely unnecessary. ~Lynn
My personal opinion: don't use semicolons if you can get away with something else. I've experimented with them in some of my current writing, and I don't think they've added anything at all. I've actually gone back and cut them all out, and I've found that those sentences sound better now. XD Anyway, this web page explains when to use semicolons and other "rare" puncuations, and this one explains commas vs. semicolons. I hope they help.
