Comments on: A comma, which muddles meaning

By: Comma with restrictive ‘which’ « Sentence first

Comma with restrictive ‘which’ « Sentence first — Sat, 05 Jan 2013 14:16:53 +0000

[...] by an editor schooled in the fake that/which rule? Either way, it bears comparison with this rogue comma in a recent Guardian [...]

By: This Week’s Language Blog Roundup: Dictionary scandal, names, 30 Rock cocktails | Wordnik

Fri, 07 Dec 2012 15:05:31 +0000

[...] internet dating; and Stan Carey compared anymore and any more. On his own blog, Stan considered the comma that muddles meaning, some howling ambiguities, and African American Vernacular [...]

By: That which is restrictive « Sentence first

That which is restrictive « Sentence first — Fri, 07 Dec 2012 09:20:03 +0000

[...] Sentence first, “A comma, which muddles meaning” quotes a Guardian editorial with a comma muddle that shows how obeying the rule can [...]

By: Stan

Stan — Thu, 29 Nov 2012 09:57:33 +0000

I guess it's natural for young and relatively inexperienced wordsmiths to take style authorities on faith, especially when dubious rules appear alongside more sensible guidance. The neatness of the that/which rule is also appealing: it's only when you look more closely that you see the problems it can cause and the fact that people everywhere (including the best writers) have ignored it for centuries. Your sniffer-dog abilities are an obvious advantage in editing, but I've gotten used to seeing comma splices in fiction especially, and have a growing collection!

By: Sharon

Sharon — Wed, 28 Nov 2012 22:35:18 +0000

Thank you for the welcome! I think all young editors are suckers for language ‘rules’ – not beginning sentences with conjunctions or ending them with prepositions, and so on. Then after a while you step back and realise you are mangling perfectly good writing for the sake of some narrow concept of what constitutes proper grammar. The result is often not very natural. I still have a few pet peeves – I hunt down comma splices like a sniffer dog! – but generally these days I give writers a lot more leeway to express themselves in their own voice. (Hopefully they would agree.)

By: Whilst, amongst, amidst — old-fashioned or normal? « Sentence first

Whilst, amongst, amidst — old-fashioned or normal? « Sentence first — Wed, 28 Nov 2012 14:33:47 +0000

[...] recent comment got me thinking about whilst, which is generally synonymous with while but has an older, more [...]

By: Stan

Stan — Wed, 28 Nov 2012 09:47:42 +0000

Hi Sharon, and welcome! Thanks for your interesting comment. I went through a brief phase of believing in the rule too, back when I was a writing/editing amateur. (Maybe that explains my zeal in condemning it.) Coming across the rule, knowing no better, and realising I hadn’t been observing it, I quickly added it to my stylistic arsenal. But like you I came to my senses in the face of what was natural, literate and grammatical. Your last line sums it all up very well, though I would add house style as another factor – and one that can influence writers in contexts beyond its province.