- He thinks that if he asks for directions, his membership in the brotherhood of men will be revoked. He would rather be lost.
- He thinks that, if he asks for directions, his membership in the brotherhood of men will be revoked. He would rather be lost.
Monday, January 31, 2011
FRIDAY GRAMMAR RODEO, MONDAY EDITION: This very special Monday episode of Friday Grammar Rodeo is brought to you by a friendly but stalemated dispute between two lawyers concerning the necessity of a comma. Please tell me which of the following constructions is correct (noting that the second entry uses a comma after the third word):
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think you can use either, but I would opt for option 1. Then I would sit around and wonder if what I had just written was gramatically correct.
ReplyDeleteI recommend the first option. The second option isolates the conditional clause. In my opinion, this isolation should be reserved for clauses that are supplement, not critical to the statement.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the foregoing commentators. When set off by commas, a statement is an unncessary appositive. Here, the appositive is necessary, rather than supplemental.
ReplyDeleteI vote option 1.
ReplyDeleteOption 2 looks like you're over-correcting.
ReplyDeleteChrisH said just what I was going to say. Option one, yeah. And I still spell out the numerals under ten. Anyone else?
ReplyDeleteAgree with the above 3, though I would posit that you could go comma-less:
ReplyDeleteHe thinks that if he asks for directions his membership in the brotherhood of men will be revoked.
No?
Option 1, but after reading the sentences over and over, I started to wonder: Do you even need the "that"?
ReplyDeleteI'd avoid it and write: He thinks that his membership in the brotherhood would be revoked if he were to stop and ask for directions.
ReplyDeleteOption 1, but you know my stance on such things.
ReplyDeleteOption 1. Although, I have would have to agree with MidwestAndrew.
ReplyDeleteThat would make sense in the example above, but it's less desirable in my brief. I want to front the "if" clause.
ReplyDeleteI thank you all for being correct. You are all smart and wonderful people. I am very glad that you are not stupid and awful.
ReplyDeleteDo you even need the "that?" "He thinks if he asks for directions, his membership in the brotherhood of men will be revoked.
ReplyDeleteOption 1 all the way.
ReplyDeleteAlways frontin'...
ReplyDeleteI lean towards number 2, but I wouldn't bat an eye at either one.
ReplyDeleteHe believes that asking for directions would result in the revokation of his membership to the brotherhood of men.
ReplyDeleteI'm with bella wifer. 1 is better than 2, but option zero (no commas) is best.
ReplyDeleteI am in for number two because I was always taught the comma goes before the if and after the if clause.
ReplyDelete<p><span>Concur with Hannah Lee and Rick. Option 1 if you must, but the edit I would suggest is close to Rick's: "He believes asking for directions will result in the revocation of his membership in the brotherhood of men." </span>
ReplyDelete</p><p><span> </span>
</p><p><span>Other people "think" because they're unsure. You always "believe" because you are confident and sure of yourself.</span>
</p>
I think that if you took the commas out entirely the sentence in question would still read just fine. Better, in fact.
ReplyDeleteI think that, if I were forced at gunpoint to choose one option over the other, I might lean towards the second option in cases where the conditional clause was intended to sound strongly improbable or otherwise to represent a thought somehow separate from or in tension with the rest of the sentence.
I think that if the conditional clause was less thematically remarkable within the structure of the sentence, I might nonetheless use a structure like that of the first option for the sake of rhythm and readability.
I concur with the no comma option, and would be perfectly happy removing the 'that' as well. I'm not sure the word 'that' automatically signifies a clause, but I'm not sure.
ReplyDeleteYep, I spell out everything from one to nine. I spell out a lot of others, thought, just because I can type letters faster than numbers.
ReplyDeleteI don't know why, but I think the "that" is necessary to be strictly grammatically correct. And option one. And this is just one of the reasons why I love this blog. I am a French teacher who has been known to refer to herself on numerous occasions as a language geek.
ReplyDeleteFWIW, I'm pretty sure option one would be correct in French, and would require "que" ("that")
ReplyDeleteOption 1. Easy.
ReplyDeleteOption 1.
ReplyDeleteMy boss and I always fight over commas... he pretty much avoids putting them in, and my job is then to fill them in as the reviewer. Sometmes he gets comma-happy and puts them in where they don't belong, and I get to take them out. I blame his British-ness... he speaks so quickly that he can't understand why us mere mortals have to pause at all.
Is option 2 wrong? I agree with the consensus that option 1 is better, option 2 uses a superfluous comma in a way that isn't wrong, just worse.
ReplyDeleteOption 1. The "that" is joining the 2 clauses "he thinks" and "if he asks directions." People omit it all the time, though.
ReplyDeleteOption 2 is wrong and makes my eyes bleed.
I do like "that" for grammatical clarity, but I'm not a dragon about it if editing someone else.
ReplyDeleteI prefer: He thinks that if he asks for directions, <span>his membership in the brotherhood would be revoked. She thinks that he should get over himself and ask that friendly gas station attendant over there for help.</span>
ReplyDeleteI feel I should clarify that I am not, in fact, sure. OY.
ReplyDeleteI preferred 2, but in reading the comments, I guess that's proof, that I over-comma.
ReplyDeleteDefinitely option one. Option two would only be necessary if the sentence would be unclear without the commas, and it's perfectly clear without them.
ReplyDeleteOption 1. However, if I were writing this to be read aloud (e.g., if I were writing a speech), I would include the comma to reflect the need for a a natural pause there. I tend to over-comma, which I attribute to the fact that my formative writing training was in high school speech and debate.
ReplyDeleteAlso: Brotherhood of men? Or brotherhood of man? I would vote brotherhood of man.
Option 1. No doubt. Option two gave me comma shivers. And not in a good way.
ReplyDelete<span>Just so you know, this precise passage does not actually appear in my brief. I am not litigating the case of the man who won't ask for directions. In the actual brief, both the if and the then clauses are substantially more complicated and involve quotes from my opponent's brief. With a short sentence, I might live without any commas. It's not possible with the two lengthy ideas I'm linking. </span>
ReplyDeleteMs. Etienne, my 8th grade grammar teacher, would insist on number two, as it sets off a phrase. However, that is old fashioned grammar and we are living in modern times.
ReplyDeleteOption 1. Option 2 looks fussy and old-fashioned.
ReplyDelete"Brotherhood of men" seems to me to indicate being rejected by all human males. "Brotherhood of man" seems to me to indicate being rejected by all humans, perhaps to go live with wolves.
ReplyDeleteThe boyfriend would like for y'all to know that he agrees with option #1, and not so much with my rewriting of sentence #2.
ReplyDeleteOption 1. It seems this one isn't even close.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jenn.
ReplyDeleteI'm an Option 1 guy. Option 2 reeks of the pacing used when quoting Monty Python in an effort to feign higher intelligence. Pause, pause, overenunciate, pause.
ReplyDeleteOPtion 1. Bob from SA, it does set off a phrase, but it's a phrase that if you took it out of the sentence (which the paired commas indicate that you should be able to do) you would change the meaning of the sentence. Thus, no paired commas. You probably don't need the second comma either, but it's not hurting anything.
ReplyDelete