I've never heard of the rule of no comma after "-ly" words. In fact,
I'd place a comma after "actually" in your example sentence, Ruth. I
recall that the Harbrace Handbook some years ago advised to mark off
introductory elements with a comma unless they're "slightly
introductory." In other words, a shorter element such as "actually"
might do without the comma. But I suspect that the comma is never wrong
and at times necessary, and so I usually tell my students to put it.
==Best, Reinhold
Ruth Edwards wrote:
>
> I have to tell you all that I really appreciate your very forgiving nature.
> I also appreciate your comments regarding my blunder. I'm not exactly sure
> to what I should attribute your good nature...possibly to your high level of
> education. I have participated in discussion groups, however, where there
> were a couple of people who basically "ran the show" and who were very
> intolerant and unforgiving. Thank you for being as human as this humble
> participant.
>
> Believe it or not, I even have a pertinent question. :-) I remember being
> taught something about not placing a comma after words ending in "ly" when
> they come at the beginning of a sentence with the exception of words like
> "firstly, secondly, incidentally, etc.
>
> Example: "Actually I have never been to Spain."
>
> There seems to be a natural pause after "actually" in that particular
> sentence, and it makes me want to insert a comma. Which is correct?
>
> Thanks,
>
> ~Ruth
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Reinhold Schlieper <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2000 9:03 AM
> Subject: Re: Fw: Social Security
>
>
> I am a mere lurker most of the time, but I always dislike intensely when
> one gang decides to insist on an epistemological sieve for all the
> rest. I don't think that the human mind per se or human knowledge in
> general is handicapped by serious compartmentalization, is it? Why
> would we want to handicap these phenomena in that manner artificially? I
> appreciated the missive about the self-serving senators very much. I
> even liked the quip about the analogy between sex and understanding.
> <g> After all, I live IN this world, not merely in a grammar world.
> Somehow I'm thinking of Browning's "A Grammarian's Funeral" at the
> thought of being "IN this world" . . . don't know why.
>
> Purely practically speaking, I'd say it probably wastes less time and
> bandwidth to tolerate the occasional off-topic epistle than to sputter
> on about some demarcation of orthodox subject-matter. There is always
> the DELete key.
>
> ==Reinhold
>
> Robert Einarsson wrote:
> >
> > I feel the same. This listserv should be used for our grammar
> > discussions only.
> >
> > It's bad enough that everyone is forced to see my opinions on
> > grammar, let alone politics.
> >
> > > As much as I appreciate the message on Social Security, I would prefer
> > > that the content of this list be reserved for issues directly related to
> > > grammar instruction. I don't know about you, but I already get way too
> > > much mail to handle. I really intend no offense to Ruth -- I know she
> > > posted this in the spirit of good citizenship.
> > >
> > > Anybody feel the same?
> > >
> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > Johanna Rubba Assistant Professor, Linguistics
> > > English Department, California Polytechnic State University
> > > One Grand Avenue . San Luis Obispo, CA 93407
> > > Tel. (805)-756-2184 . Fax: (805)-756-6374 . Dept. Phone. 756-259
> > > . E-mail: [log in to unmask] . Home page:
> http://www.calpoly.edu/~jrubba
> > > **
> > > "Understanding is a lot like sex; it's got a practical purpose,
> > > but that's not why people do it normally" - Frank
> Oppenheimer
> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> >
>
>
|
