| |
return
to list of language debates
Links in this essay will take you to information about the usage experts and their work. Numbers in parentheses are page references.
To read about this topic in The Bedford
Handbook, see section
20. |
|
All usage experts endorse the
general rule outlawing comma splices (sentences joined
with a comma but no coordinating conjunction). The only
debate concerns which exceptions to the rule, if any,
are allowable. Because comma splices are considered
serious errors, drawing the line between acceptable and
unacceptable use is fraught with danger. And the line is
not always easy to draw.
Why are comma
splices condemned as serious errors? First, they suggest
that the writer lacks basic literacy—the
ability to comprehend the boundaries of a sentence. The error
is common in the work of schoolchildren
but, as Bryan Garner points out, “very rare
in print” (580). Second, comma splices can cause
misreadings, as in the following passage from Garner:
The remnants of Hurricane Opal will move north. . . . Winds
near the center of the storm will diminish
rapidly, however, wind gusts over 60 miles per
hour will persist around the storm center.
(580)
Readers at first think that however goes with
the clause they have just read, but in fact it goes with
the next clause. A semicolon before however would
prevent such a misreading. Other revisions would solve
the problem as well (such as replacing however
with but).
Although the
unintentional comma splice is a serious error, many
experts agree that in the hands of an experienced
writer, a deliberate comma splice can be effective—but
only if no possible misreading results.
William Strunk Jr.
and E. B. White say that a comma splice is acceptable
“when the clauses are very short and alike in form”
(6–7), as in these examples:
Man proposes, God disposes.
The gates swung open, the bridge fell, the portcullis
was drawn up. (7)
When clauses are very closely parallel, skilled
writers sometimes use a comma splice even when the
clauses are not so short, especially to draw a sharp
contrast:
The pleasures of the intellect are permanent, the
pleasures of the heart are transitory.
—Henry David Thoreau
Think like a man of action, act like a man of
thought.
—Henri Bergson
Wilson Follett
accepts and even recommends comma splices that resemble
“not only . . . but also” constructions. In such
constructions, he writes, “the comma bids us turn back
and gather up what precedes” (295). Consider one of his
examples:
This was not only his first concerto, it was his
best.
Follett likes the effect of the sentence, which he
calls “swift and emphatic,” and he argues that a
semicolon would ruin this effect (295).
Admitting that the
distinction between a “desirable and deplorable” comma
splice is “often subtle and paper thin,” Follett
cautions inexperienced writers to “seek safety through
semicolons, conjunctions, or separate sentences”
(295–96). Bryan Garner cautions all writers, no matter
their sophistication, to be careful. Even when a comma
splice may be justified, he writes, “some readers are
likely to object” (580).
Conclusion: When you
use a comma splice deliberately—for effect—you are
taking a risk. Only you can decide whether that risk is
worth taking.
|
