It's not just the British who muddy the waters for laypeople trying to get a handle on what is considered "correct" punctuation. I am training later this month for a group that adheres to a style manual very widely revered in the business world. It was one I did not know well, so I have been making my way through it in order to prepare for the training. I am eager to write to the author and find out why his style book seems to advocate the following, contrary to Chicago, MLA, and APA (just to name the ones I am most familiar with):

 

·         It advocates putting a comma in front of coordinating conjunctions but repeatedly lists only and, but, or, and nor as the coordinating conjunctions, omitting for, so, and yet.

·         It advocates the use of a colon after a sentence fragment that introduces a vertical list.

·         With singular words ending in “s,” this style book tells readers *sometimes* to add the additional “s” after the apostrophe and *sometimes* not to do so--and then goes on to claim that the choice of whether to add the “s” or not rests on the *completely subjective* test of whether or not the particular reader/writer pronounces the additional syllable!! Now there is a rule that drives the layperson CRAZY.

 

The business writing textbook that I have used to teach a business writing class at Columbia College reflects this “rule” for how to handle the possessive case of singular nouns ending in “s,” further confusing students. I am further baffled as to why a business writing textbook author would choose to reflect this particular style book on this issue when it runs counter to so many other very reputable style guides.

 

Of course, we all know that many of the so-called rules are arbitrary, and we also understand that style books often differ for good reasons that have to do with the disciplines they represent. But it is very frustrating to explain to college students (and to working adults when I train in the corporate world) why one lone—but widely respected—style book would choose to be so out of step with so many others.

 

Thanks for letting me vent!

 

Nancy

 

Nancy L. Tuten, PhD

Professor of English

Director of the Writing-across-the-Curriculum Program

Columbia College

Columbia, South Carolina

[log in to unmask]

803-786-3706

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Craig Hancock
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 7:21 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Commas in compound sentences

 

   Just to complicate the talk (after all these votes for simplicity),

British practice differs from American on this one. They don't ask for

commas here (before the conjunction linking compound sentences) or

before the final element in a series (with "and" or "or".) >

    What you would hope for, I think, is consistency, not just a sporadic

sprinkling. If the comma is included or left out DELIBERATELY and

consistently, then I don't think we should command otherwise.

 

Craig

 

 

I heartily agree with you, Linda! I think it is best to keep simple

> rules simple. When you start allowing choices when the rules are meant

> to be clear, your attempts at teaching get confusing.  Just because it

> is in print does not mean it is correct.  You would not believe how many

> books I have come across that confuse "then" and "than." My students

> delight in finding printed errors in books and newspapers.

> Barbara McLay

> ________________________________

> 

> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar

> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Linda Comerford

> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 4:38 PM

> To: [log in to unmask]

> Subject: Re: Commas in compound sentences

> 

> 

> Much to my surprise, the corporate training I've done for almost 20

> years now has often focused on grammar (written and oral) and

> punctuation.  The adults I meet in my workshops are searching for as

> many simple, close-to-almost-always rules they can follow when writing

> and editing.

> 

> One of the most typical questions I receive is the one you've just

> indicated.  You would not believe the sighs of relief I hear around the

> room when I share this simple rule:

> 

> If you have two complete thoughts, always use a comma before the FANBOYS

> (for, and, nor, but, or, yet, so).  If not, don't.  I then illustrate

> with examples like these:

> 

> Linda teaches professional writing skills, and she enjoys working with

> great groups like you.

> Linda teaches professional writing skills and enjoys working with great

> groups like you.

> 

> They grasp that easily and are so relieved to have a simple rule

> (without accompanying cluttering exceptions) they can use and share with

> others.

> 

> This rule has never failed me or one of my participants.  I hope it

> helps you too.

> 

> Linda Comerford

> www.comerfordconsulting.com

> 

> 

> ________________________________

> 

> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar

> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Spruiell, William C

> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 4:08 PM

> To: [log in to unmask]

> Subject: Re: Commas in compound sentences

> 

> 

> 

> I tell my (college) students that it's one of those rules that they need

> to apply in formal academic writing, but can take less seriously in

> other styles. Frankly, I have to admit that I tell them this mainly

> because I think other teachers / editors enforce it, not because I think

> it's a particularly valuable rule. One difficulty, though: telling

> students they need to use it in formal writing doesn't work very well if

> they've never had any exposure to the independent / dependent clause

> distinction, so even if we don't present the rule until late high school

> or early college, the groundwork for it needs to be in place already.

> 

> 

> 

>  I'm not sure of its history, but I suspect it's one of those many, many

> cases that started out as a helpful suggestion about warding off

> ambiguity and ended up being a rigid requirement.

> 

> 

> 

> Bill Spruiell

> 

> Dept. of English

> 

> Central Michigan University

> 

> 

> 

> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar

> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Michael Kischner

> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 2:32 PM

> To: [log in to unmask]

> Subject: Commas in compound sentences

> 

> 

> 

> I'm wondering how many people are still teaching that placing a comma

> before a coordinating conjunction in a compound sentence is the rule and

> omitting the comma is the exception?  I have been reading through mostly

> fiction books for elementary and middle school readers, and in those

> books it is certainly the other way around.  So in teaching kids at

> those levels to use the comma, we are up against most of what they see

> in print.

> 

> Last night, I made up some compound sentences to use in a workshop for

> elementary and middle school teachers.  I inserted the comma before each

> coordinating conjunction.  Then I read most of a delightful book,

> Clarice Bean Spells Trouble by Lauren Child.  It is full of sentences

> like this:  "Grandad has actually got manners but he doesn't use them

> that much anymore and he hasn't let the dog see them, which is why

> Cement is utterly mannerless."  This morning, when I returned to my

> carefully made-up sentences, the commas looked like clutter: "Matthew

> wanted to play soccer, but the doctor said he should rest his injured

> leg."

> 

> I know that fiction narrated in the first person is the likeliest place

> to find compound sentences without commas.  But, though I haven't

> searched methodically, I think I have noticed them all over the place,

> in both fiction and nonfiction for both younger and older readers.

> 

> I wonder  whether the comma-before-the-conjunction "rule" has become one

> of those pedagogic oversimplifications of reality we sometimes resort to

> in order to give learners something clear and secure to grasp until

> they're ready for more complexity.  Whether such oversimplifications are

> effective or justified is a whole other question.  What I think I'd

> prefer is a better rule.

> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web

> interface at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select

> "Join or leave the list"

> 

> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/

> 

> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web

> interface at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select

> "Join or leave the list"

> 

> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/

> 

> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web

> interface at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select

> "Join or leave the list"

> 

> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/

> 

> 

> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface

> at:

>      http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html

> and select "Join or leave the list"

> 

> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/

> 

 

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:

     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html

and select "Join or leave the list"

 

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/