[title]Family quotes[/title] [description]Welcome to our family quotes section! Here you'll find some of the funniest (and wisest) quotes on the subject of family life![/description]
Learn English and meet people on the world’s largest EFL social network

We have partnered with TradePub to bring you free industry magazines and resources - no coupons or credit cards required!

Visit: englishforums.tradepub.com


Share this topic:
This question is Not Answered
Latest post Tue, Jul 14 2009 11:07 PM by Mister Micawber. 7 replies.
Suggest an answer | | |
Anonymous  +  785346 Fri, 19 Jun 09 02:35 AM
Hi. Would you say there should be commas in nos. 1, 2, and 3? Would you say the comma between the words "any more" and "but" are placed to allow a breathing room eventhought what follows the conjunction "and" share the same subject? I am sure but I think I would place a comma after the word "Suddenly" in two places. (why would a person read through without stopping to take a breath?) (I think the adverb "suddenly" marks a transition) (On second thoughts, I think a person might read the part with the word in it without stopping.)  I am confused.

 

Suddenly (1) I wasn't at school any more, but riding the bike as if went away from the school.... Suddenly (2) from behind (3) someone appeared, with a big backpack on his back.

Mister Micawber  +  785592 Fri, 19 Jun 09 06:36 AM
No comma after 'anymore', since 'riding' shares the subject 'I'.


'Suddenly from behind someone appeared' is awkwardly structured and leaves us in a comma dilemma; it should be restructured:  'Suddenly, someone appeared from behind with a big backpack'.


There is no call for the comma before 'with'.

Joined on Wed, Aug 4 2004
Yokohama
Veteran Member 30,841
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master-- that's all.'
Anonymous, 160 days ago

Hi. Thank you.

 You wrote:

 

 No comma after 'anymore', since 'riding' shares the subject 'I'.

 

I think if what comes before the conjunction is long and quite involving in content, then I think a comma can be justifiably (?) used even though the two parts before and after the conjunction "and" share the same subject. I think (if I am not mistaken) I have seen a good number of sentences over the years to support my position (if I could call it that). What do you think?

Mister Micawber  +  785663 Fri, 19 Jun 09 07:56 AM
I don't agree.  I would rather an awkward sentence were restructured than a comma come between a subject and its verb.
Anonymous, 158 days ago
Hi. Would you use commas as the sentences are? Thank you for your anticipated help.

 

1. She has 6 or 7 paid holidays a year, and usually spends them in Mexico relaxing on the beaches.

2. I like watching football games on TV, and want to be a football player.

Mister Micawber  +  788553 Sun, 21 Jun 09 07:47 AM
'No' to both.  They should read:


1. She has 6 or 7 paid holidays a year and usually spends them in Mexico relaxing on the beaches.

2. I like watching football games on TV and want to be a football player.


Anonymous, 135 days ago
No. 2 is fine. No. 1 should have a comma after the word Mexico.
Mister Micawber  +  819976 Tue, 14 Jul 09 11:07 PM
A comma cannot be used in #2 because it has a compound verb; it is not 2 independent clauses.  A comma is unnecessary in #1.  Please do not answer students' questions if your English level is not high enough, Anon.
© MediaCet Ltd. 2009, v5.0.3616.28671. All content posted by our users is a contribution to the public domain, this does not include imported usenet posts.*
For web related enquires please contact us on webmaster@mediacet.com, status updates are available at status.mediacet.com.
*Usenet post removal: Use 'X-No-Archive'. You may not have understood that your posts would end up in the public domain. Please send proof of the poster's email, we will remove immediately.