Punctuation

[peter]

Sometimes, when posting in these pages I struggle with the obscure and arcane art of punctuating my posts, such that the meaning I wish to convey comes across in all of it's unadulterated and unambiguous glory [hem-hem]. A case in point, and of particularly frequent occurrence to me, is the use of the comma. Should they, like daisy's on a lawn in summer, be liberally spread, far and wide, used with carefree abandon; or should they be limited to the absolute minimum, used only for example where the word 'and' might otherwise be reasonably inserted in a particularly long and otherwise difficult to iterate sentence? Should a question mark be used in what is essentially a rhetorical question, and when should one use [parentheses] over and above simple commas? What is the formal difference between a colon and a semi-colon - and how does one decide whether to use one [or the other, or indeed which] rather than say a hyphen?

A small amount of research rapidly establishes that this particular branch of orthography does not lend itself to the strictures of hard and fast rules, but must to a degree at least, be left in the hands of the author to 'make it up as he goes along'. The trouble is that authors are apparently notoriously slack when it comes to punctuating their work - and so much of the drudgery of this particular work inevitably falls to the editor, or more specifically the copyist and proof-readers of the manuscript work in progress. That there are pitfalls a many in this rather haphazard process goes without saying; some publishers will follow the maxim that the function of punctuation is chiefly that of rendering the text such that it may be read aloud in a coherent and comfortable way [in the belief that if this is achieved then it will also 'sound well' when read by the internal voice of our mind's making]. Others will adhere to the use of it as chiefly one of establishing correct meaning - we have all heard examples where the meaning of a string of words can be completely reversed by the particular form of punctuation that is applied to it - and the manner in which the two will punctuate a given piece of writing may differ in the extreme depending on which path they follow. One wonders how many works have been completely altered in their reading by a failure of communication, back-and-forth, between authors and their publishers! Many eminent authors apparently never even looked at their works again once they had submitted them to the publisher, and Shakespeare himself never made any attempt to punctuate his work, let alone adhere to a formal and consistent application of marks. So let us spare a quick thought for those unsung heroes of the literature we all now enjoy, the copyists, proof-readers, editors and publishers whose invisible work behind the scenes is as much responsible for the heights to which the art of writing has ascended as the very authors themselves.

[aTOMiC]

I am woefully uneducated with regard to punctuation and sentence structure.

If I ever manage to sell a manuscript to a publisher it warms the heart to know the Editor or someone on staff will make up for my deficiencies.

[Sorus]

The book I am reading right now has some very idiosyncratic punctuation and sentence structure. I found it a bit annoying at first because my mind wanted to keep pointing out stuff that was wrong, but I've gotten used to it. I know I can be a bit idiosyncratic at times, but I don't think I could deliberately write an entire novel in a style that felt so unnatural. I could start it, but once I take a break I can't pick it up again and then it's just a mess.

[Avatar]

I'm a big fan of the comma.

Barely use semi-colon's. But my commas are spread liberally, far and wide. I even use them as parenthesis sometimes, (although I'm fairly fond of parenthesis as well).



--A