...........Lack of capitalisation is another major annoyance, although I can quite understand some people referring to themselves with a lower case 'I'.
My excuse is that my laptop's getting on a bit, and the shift key sometimes doesn't work. Hence I take care at the start of a sentence, but usually use lower case after that.
The problem with that is it's a contrived sentence like the one presented earlier in the thread. Having to contrive it and present it without context undermines the point being made. Another favourite is "Let's eat Granny."
What's wrong with a contrived sentence to illustrate a point? To use a sentence in context merely increases the amount of text to be read, without adding anything.
Having said that, there's a sentence in the bible I'm trying to remember. It's on the lines of "go and preach", and it's only a few words long, but you can put a comma in various spots and change the meaning completely.
What's wrong with a contrived sentence to illustrate a point? To use a sentence in context merely increases the amount of text to be read, without adding anything.
It adds context, of course, which helps infer meaning Specifically presenting the sentence without context is done to manufacture ambiguity. In practice the context provides the necessary disambiguation. It's the very act of contrivance which undermines the point that there is ambiguity.
Having said that, there's a sentence in the bible I'm trying to remember. It's on the lines of "go and preach", and it's only a few words long, but you can put a comma in various spots and change the meaning completely.
I'm curious as to how many completely new meanings one could make out of a sentence along those lines, and whether this is another example of only being able to do so in the absence of context.
Commas are essential in the written word, however I do see a case for getting rid of semi-colons.
Does anyone actually use these in everyday life?
The semi-colon (and it's full sibling) are wonderful bits of punctuation; I use both regularly.
At school, I had an English teacher who was fierce about the use of a dash between clauses in a sentence. She used to say it was only used by people who were too lazy or ignorant to decide whether they needed a comma, a colon, semi-colon or parentheses.
I agreed with her when I was 10, and still do 48 years on.
As the author of the sentence let me assure you that I intended no pause and thus had no use for a comma.
Two words: monotony, ambiguity. Without commas, that's the future of the written World. There are a few such examples on this very page.
One reason for the decreasing use of commas in online social interaction, text messaging etc., is the enforced use of the shift key to get at the comma on many mobile devices. What we need are better designed "keyboards" on such devices and, perhaps, a "keep the comma!" campaign. :cool:
Do you mean all punctuation is being repurposed sometimes or some punctuation is being repurposed a lot?
A classic case of faux confusion if ever there was one. Are you seriously suggesting that had I written "punctuation, in general, is being repurposed" instead of "punctuation in general is being repurposed" it would have made any difference to whether I meant "sometimes" or "some punctuation"?
It adds context, of course, which helps infer meaning Specifically presenting the sentence without context is done to manufacture ambiguity. In practice the context provides the necessary disambiguation............
Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't.
There are many posts in DS which quote a question, and provide an answer which begins with the word "No", not followed by a comma.
A classic case of faux confusion if ever there was one. Are you seriously suggesting that had I written "punctuation, in general, is being repurposed" instead of "punctuation in general is being repurposed" it would have made any difference to whether I meant "sometimes" or "some punctuation"?
It depends on the context.
The test is whether you can remove the clause or phrase within the commas, and the commas themselves, and still have the sentence make sense, and be truthful.
There are many posts in DS which quote a question, and provide an answer which begins with the word "No", not followed by a comma.
As in : "No pandas eat bamboo".
Surely the context infers the meaning.
As in: "Do pandas eat rice?" "No[,] pandas eat bamboo."
Is the comma useful in that sentence? Yes. Is it essential? No.
It depends on the context.
The test is whether you can remove the clause or phrase within the commas, and the commas themselves, and still have the sentence make sense, and be truthful.
In the case of the sentence in question you can, can't you? "Punctuation in general is being repurposed." The meaning isn't changed or even made ambiguous by lack of commas as far as I can see. Punctuation in general (as opposed to commas specifically) is being repurposed.
As in: "Do pandas eat rice?" "No[,] pandas eat bamboo."
Is the comma useful in that sentence? Yes. Is it essential? No.
yes context is important, but what if someone really wants to say 'no pandas eat bamboo.' and they mean it? By removing the use of commas we would reduce our ability to say things that someone, only using context, would misunderstand.
Comments
My excuse is that my laptop's getting on a bit, and the shift key sometimes doesn't work. Hence I take care at the start of a sentence, but usually use lower case after that.
What's wrong with a contrived sentence to illustrate a point? To use a sentence in context merely increases the amount of text to be read, without adding anything.
Having said that, there's a sentence in the bible I'm trying to remember. It's on the lines of "go and preach", and it's only a few words long, but you can put a comma in various spots and change the meaning completely.
Either you're being sarcastic/ironic, or you don't know the joke.
The right to arm bears? But it's in the constitution!
I'm curious as to how many completely new meanings one could make out of a sentence along those lines, and whether this is another example of only being able to do so in the absence of context.
;-) This I totally agree, I think, the comma is very useful.
A lot of people, I have noticed have stopped using it, makes me SAD.:(
If I wanted to pause, I would pause.
That doesn't make it grammatically correct though.
As the author of the sentence let me assure you that I intended no pause and thus had no use for a comma.
The semi-colon (and it's full sibling) are wonderful bits of punctuation; I use both regularly.
At school, I had an English teacher who was fierce about the use of a dash between clauses in a sentence. She used to say it was only used by people who were too lazy or ignorant to decide whether they needed a comma, a colon, semi-colon or parentheses.
I agreed with her when I was 10, and still do 48 years on.
Confusion about whether "repurposed" is a proper word or just one of those bollocky, management-speak terms, perhaps?
Well the smiley gives a big clue. If that doesn't help, I'll leave it to your good judgement.
Two words: monotony, ambiguity. Without commas, that's the future of the written World. There are a few such examples on this very page.
One reason for the decreasing use of commas in online social interaction, text messaging etc., is the enforced use of the shift key to get at the comma on many mobile devices. What we need are better designed "keyboards" on such devices and, perhaps, a "keep the comma!" campaign. :cool:
A classic case of faux confusion if ever there was one. Are you seriously suggesting that had I written "punctuation, in general, is being repurposed" instead of "punctuation in general is being repurposed" it would have made any difference to whether I meant "sometimes" or "some punctuation"?
Easy to say that now
Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't.
There are many posts in DS which quote a question, and provide an answer which begins with the word "No", not followed by a comma.
As in : "No pandas eat bamboo".
It depends on the context.
The test is whether you can remove the clause or phrase within the commas, and the commas themselves, and still have the sentence make sense, and be truthful.
As in: "Do pandas eat rice?" "No[,] pandas eat bamboo."
Is the comma useful in that sentence? Yes. Is it essential? No.
In the case of the sentence in question you can, can't you? "Punctuation in general is being repurposed." The meaning isn't changed or even made ambiguous by lack of commas as far as I can see. Punctuation in general (as opposed to commas specifically) is being repurposed.
yes context is important, but what if someone really wants to say 'no pandas eat bamboo.' and they mean it? By removing the use of commas we would reduce our ability to say things that someone, only using context, would misunderstand.