At 05:16 PM 9/22/2004, Stewart McCoy wrote:
>Although it is true that an introductory passage may be separated
>from what follows by a comma, it would be incorrect to use a comma
>after "passage", as you suggest for a sentence in my last e-mail,
>since "Throughout that passage" is not an introductory passage, but
>an integral part of what follows. If I had written the words in a
>different order, for example, "There is a distinct absence of commas
>throughout that passage", you would, I think, be less inclined to
>precede "throughout that passage" with a comma, since those words
>would clearly belong to the main part of the sentence. It was
>necessary to order the words as I did, beginning my sentence with
>"Throughout that passage", because the following subordinate clause
>("which are used ...") refers back to "comma", not to "passage". In
>other words, I don't want another comma. :-)However, "Throughout this passage" is a prepositional phrase that is modifying the noun "commas" (which in turn is the object of a prepositional phrase modifying "absence"). As such, its ordinary place would be following "commas." In relocating it to the front (and I agree with your decision to do so), it is functioning as an introductory phrase. As it is a brief introductory phrase, I think most grammarians would agree that comma use is optional. >You mention Strunk and White. There are many such authorities >regarding the English language, and they almost invariably disagree >with each other somewhere along the line. The English language >remains wonderfully flexible, however much grammarians try to >straight-jacket the way we speak and write. I will concede that there are almost as many grammar authorities of the English language as there are people who write in English, and many published sources do disagree to varying degrees. I have at least six or seven texts on my shelf that, in whole or part, address the written elements of style; they range from very general (e.g., the previously cited Strunk & White) to very specific (e.g., Pechenik. J.A. 1997. A short guide to writing about biology, 3rd ed. Longman, New York.). Strunk & White certainly is my favorite for its clarity and concision. Whatever the case, I think you write very well, Stewart (certainly better than I do), so who cares? But let's get back to the business of plucking, eh? (Note my atypical use of a conjunction to open this sentence with dramatic effect.) E To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
