Search results for 'tag:Nouns tag:Commas' matching tags 'Nouns' and 'Commas'

Re: Simple, short phrase question.

Eddie88 — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 03:44:49 GMT

Thanks.

This has helped me examine and understand the constituents of a sentence and, also see a sentence in its entirety; I never saw the relative pronoun as an object until you explained it this way.

In regards to an earlier comment you made.

Is this just a prepositional phrase, or is it a prep phrase plus an independent clause, you made?

I thought it must be more than just a prep. phrase because it has a subject you and a verb made...

Or is MADE not a verb in this case therefore making the whole thing a phrase...?

You made- doesn't seem like a clause to me. So I assume there is a reason why made is not a verb... Are verbals the only types of verbs that are not able to be the main verbs in a sentence, UNLESS there is an auxillary verb which can then make it the main verb?

If this is true (that verbals are the only verbs that can't be the main verb), then that would mean that MADE in the sentence above is either a

1)a verbal or,

2) a verb, wihch would mean that the sentence does, in fact, include a prep phrase and a clause, YOU MADE

The reason I ask this is because sometimes I struggle to determine whether the verb is the verb in a sentence-if I can't determine this, then I don't know if it is a clause, which means I struggle to punctuate the sentence correctly.

This brings me on to an earlier comment you made: you couldn't see why I believed phrases/clauses and punctuation are as strongly related as I feel.

I believe there is a relatively strong relationship. If I can determine if a group of words is a clause or a phrase, it can make punctuating a sentence far easier. Some of the comma rules are based around phrases and clauses. For example, a comma can be used to separate a clause from a phrase; however, a comma cannot soely be used to separate two independent clauses. So if I incorrectly classify a clause as a phrase, I may be placing a comma between two clauses, which is a comma splice! So this is why I feel there is a strong relationship. It is also why I want to learn about verbs; understanding whether a verb is the main verb or not can help tell me if a group of words is a clause or phrase.

For example, the words in bold show my point. I stuggle to determine the subject and verb in this sentence which can help tell me what the sentence is made up of: type of clause and phrases that exist. If I can be told the parts of the sentence, I know how to punctuate it correctly. Here is my attempt at naming the parts of the sentence.

Understanding whether a verb is the main verb or not= the subject or noun phrase

Can help tell= the verb

me=object of the verb

if a group of words is a clause= adverb/dependent clause.

Please tell me I am close, haha

Thanks again. You have truely made my English knowledge far greater!

Re: Simple, short phrase question.

CalifJim — Sat, 29 Nov 2008 01:43:36 GMT

Eddie88
main clause- made up of two prepositional phrase: to thank John and for tonight,

No. The entire main clause is

I would just like to thank John for tonight.

Also, a prepositional phrase must have a preposition followed by a noun (and its modifiers). thank is a verb, so to thank is not a prepositional phrase; it is an infinitive.

Eddie88
Along with all the other parties he has hosted = prepositional phrase, correct?

Correct.

Eddie88
Does the prep phrase in ~~bold~~ italics have to be separated by a comma from the clause?

The problem is that the sentence is not very well formed to begin with. It should be something like this instead:

I would just like to thank John for tonight, as well as for all the other parties he has hosted.

I would use a comma, yes.

Eddie88
can you please answer my last question 'commas between clauses'

Sorry. I'm not very good at the punctuation rules! But I notice that you seem obsessed lately by attempts to connect facts about phrases and clauses with facts about punctuation. I don't think I see these two topics as closely related as you do!

Re: Question- please help!

Eddie88 — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 00:32:13 GMT

That is so helpful!!!

My first mistake was that I forgot that the second when is omitted, and therefore, I took it as an independent clause instead of a dependent clause. Hence the comma. Thanks for clearing that up.

1) You say that which is the relative pronoun. Does the pronoun not have to be the antecedent of the noun? What is the noun as which does not seem to re-state the noun? I didn't feel it was a relative clause. Can you please explain why I am wrong to say which is not the pronoun of the antecedent.

Otherwise I understood everything, thanks.

2) Hence the comma- In bold above, is this the right way to use hence? Hence means 'therefore.' So it doesn't sound right saying 'therefore the comma' but I here people say it like that all the time... I know not to say 'hence why' as this is incorrect. I know to use it like this: I spent all my money. Hence, I worked for the whole week.

Thanks again for the clarity in your answers!

Re: Question- please help!

AlpheccaStars — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 23:57:00 GMT

Here is better punctuation:

Also, when you have a verb form (no comma) and it is the ing form, (comma) is it always a non-finite/verbal (no comma) which means it is a phrase -either a gerund or particple?

The main clause is: is it always a non-finite/verbal

Introductory dependent clauses. There are 2, with the same subordinating conjunction (when) joined by "and". I would interpret "also" as a simple adverb, as in I am going also. :

Also, when (conjunction - subordinating) you have a verb form and (when) it is the ing form,

I would actually end the question before the next clauses, and make a following question.

Does this mean that is either a gerund or participial phrase?

However, you have written it as a relative clause

which (relative pronoun, subject) means (verb)

(that) - omitted (relative pronoun)

it is a phrase (clause, direct object of verb "means")

either a gerund or particple - I would call this an appositive phrase, since it is a restatement of "phrase".

Comma after the phrase "for example"?

Anonymous — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 14:16:47 GMT

Hi, Do we need to place a comma or not in situations like these?

We use the word "some" for both countable and uncountable nouns, for example "I have some money."

He seems to have a lot of trinkets in his pocket, for example a plastic necklace, a rubber watch and plastic ring.

He has been confronting many issues that require immediate attention, for example, worsening crime rates, high delinquesnt rate of high school students and loose hygene habits of local people.

Phrases- Please help.

Eddie88 — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 03:10:15 GMT

Hi,

1) Beginning a sentence with the word FOR. For the majority of the time I have known Matt, I have been friends with him.

What type of phrase is this? If it isn't, what is it?
Is it alright to begin with the word FOR?
Is the comma essential?

2)Being- Is this a gerund?

If so, it should be 'my being here', and not, 'me being here,'correct?

3) It is a battle we may never win highlighting what a great guy Matt really is.

This is a participle phrase, correct? A particple modifies a noun or pronoun- in this case the phrase is describing Matt, but he is not mentioned in the main clause, so what is it modifying? So is it still a participle?

4) We have actually become great friends sharing passions which include poker, clothes, music, drinking

Because the word sharing is the ing form, it is a verbal/non-finite verb, correct?
What type of phrase is this then?

Thanks a lot.

Re: Is this "that" a determiner or a relative pronoun?

CalifJim — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 06:43:00 GMT

exodejavu
Is the "that" a determiner or relative pronoun?

A determiner goes with the following noun.

What is the noun following that? reactions. A plural noun.

The determiners that and this are singular; they go only with singular nouns. these and those are plural. They go with plural nouns.

So, does that go with reactions? No. that is singular, and reactions is plural. So that is not a determiner in this sentence.

______

A relative pronoun stands for the noun that the relative clause modifies. The relative pronoun replaces a noun phrase and usually acts as the subject or object of the relative clause.

If that reactions can happen slower at lower temperatures is a relative clause, that replaces the preceding word lesson.

So the relative clause means

Lesson reactions can happen slower at lower temperatures.

What are lesson reactions? There is no such thing as a lesson reaction. This is nonsense. Is lesson a subject or object in that relative clause? No. reactions is the subject and there is no object because happen is intransitive. It can't take an object.

So this clause is not a relative clause, and that is not a relative pronoun.

_____

Does that introduce a whole clause? Yes. The clause is Reactions can happen slower at lower temperatures.

that is a complementizer. (Some people call it a conjunction.) It links a whole clause into a larger sentence and makes the whole stucture, including that, a noun phrase.

_____

It doesn't matter a lot in this case whether there is a comma after lesson or not. What you have here is a content clause that is an appositive to lesson.

Re: Is this "that" a determiner or a relative pronoun?

Avangi — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 06:42:51 GMT

I'm not really into the "determiner" definition, but my ear tells me that "which" in this case would be a relative pronoun, and would make no sense here, since the clause already has a subject, "reactions." "That" works fine, so I guess it must be a determiner, by default.

Again relying on my ear, there's a difference in meaning without the comma. With the comma, the following clause appears to be in apposition to "lesson." That is, we already know which lesson we're talking about, and the following clause simply confirms it.   Without the comma, the clause becomes essential, actually telling us which lesson we're talking about.

- A.

Edit.

They'll understand this if they studied the lesson   -   that water expands when it freezes. (assumes they should know which lesson we're talking about - i.e., it's obvious.)

They'll understand this if they studied the lesson that water expands when it freezes.   (There are several possible lessons. If they have not studied, it may not be obvious which lesson applies.)

I'm not comfortable saying the lesson is X (although it's sometimes used that way). I'd prefer on or about X.

Anyway, somehow my ear has trouble taking the second one as an appositive.

Is this "that" a determiner or a relative pronoun?

exodejavu — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 05:48:29 GMT

Hello,

What follows is an inquiry posted on a Taiwanese-BBS board.

--

However, they do not have to "cry" if they know the short science lesson,
__ reactions happen slower at lower temperatures.

--

The given answer for that blank is "that."
S/he is wondering why "which" cannot be filled in that blank.

What is strange is that I find on the Internet a document in which there is no comma after "lesson," but the poster said there is one in his/hers. (The same wording)
I am not sure if the sentence conveys the same meaning with or without the comma after "lesson."

Is the "that" a determiner or relative pronoun?

Best Regards

Re: What type of phrase is this?

Avangi — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 00:21:38 GMT

Eddie88
Hi,

'The average illegal patient is 25 years old giving birth to her second anchor baby.'

Is 'giving birth to her second anchor baby' a present particple phrase? Yes.

Secondly, to be grammatically correct, does it need to have a comma separating it from the sentence? Not necessarily. It's not a very good sentence, and suffers from some ambiguity. Sometiimes the author has a choice, depending on whether or not he wants the phrase to be "essential" to the meaning. If he wants it to be essential, no comma. Does he intend these to be two separate statistics, or one? So it's easy to calculate the average age. What they're in for is a different process. You'd set up categories that seem to fit, and see which category has the most. That might be typical, but I don't think it can properly be called average.

'The average illegal patient is 25 years old, giving birth to her second anchor baby.' It's going to be best with the coma, since the logic is so confusing.

Thirdly, Is it even better to write it like this as I understood that the phrase should generally come straight after the noun (patient)?

'The average illegal patient, giving birth to her second anchor baby, is 25 years old This one doesn't work. It doesn't convey the same meaning.

Finally, is it best written like this?

'The average illegal patient is 25 years old AND IS giving birth to her second anchor baby.' This is the best. (We don't actually know the average age of these women.)

Finally, 'IS 25 years old' is this an appositive? It could also be separated from the noun by commas as it is non essential information, correct? It's not an appositive. It's the main sentence. You simply have a compound predicate in which you repeat the same verb. It's like saying "I am old, and am fat." If you were to repeat the subject also, you'd have a compound sentence. "I am old, and I am fat." "The average illegal patient is 25 years old, and the average illegal patient is giving birth to her second anchor baby." The subject of both clauses is "The average illegal patient," but in your example you only need it once, because it serves both predicates.

Sorry I got out of the loop here. Had to field an emergency call from my daughter who was hoplessly lost, and Google Maps was misbehaving.

After just reading CJ's post, I see we disagree significantly on your final revision. My feeling was that in the author's original, there was nothing to indicate that one statistic was more significant than the other. Prior context may make it clear. The thing I liked about your final revision was that it removed the ambiguity, making them two different statistics, which I believe they are.
Ironically, my objection to your penultimate revision was that it reduced the importance of the age statistic below its position in the original.