CHAPTER IX

MISCELLANEOUS USES OF MARKS

ADJECTIVES BEFORE A NOUN

When two or more adjectives come before a noun, and are not connected by a conjunction, the meaning to be conveyed determines the punctuation:

75. This is a large wild grape.

75-1. This is a large, wild grape.

The punctuation is correct in each of the above sentences; but the two sentences do not mean the same.

Sentence No. 75 says that the grape is a large one in the class of _wild grapes_, confining the comparison to wild grapes.

Sentence No. 75-1 says that the grape is large and is wild. It is large in comparison with all kinds of grapes.

In No. 75 we give the language its natural meaning. In No. 75-1 we use a comma to show that the natural meaning is not the meaning we wish to convey; we disconnect “large” from “wild grape,” as, in Sentence 1-1, we disconnected words standing in an _apparent_ relation which was not the _real_ relation.

Other examples at the end of this chapter will further illustrate the punctuation.

DOUBLE OBJECT

We have already seen that nouns standing together require some mark between them if their apparent relation is not their real relation. This principle was illustrated especially in Sentence 8-1.

The so-called double object furnishes an apparent exception to the principle. The relation, however, between such words is as regular as the relation between an adjective and a noun when the former precedes the latter. Thus the following sentence requires no mark between the nouns constituting a so-called double object:

76. They elected John Smith president.

A similar relation is seen when the first noun in a sentence like the above is followed by an adjective. The relation is regular, and calls for no mark:

76-1. They called John Smith wise.

In some cases the relation may be more idiomatic than regular, the mark being omitted because there is no real need for its use. The next sentence exhibits such relationship:

77. I myself will undertake the work.

A “LONG” SUBJECT

When a subject is composed of two or more words, and these words do not readily group themselves, a comma may be helpful to group them as a subject. This failure of words to fall readily into a group is generally due to one of three causes: the subject may be somewhat long and contain marks of punctuation, or it may end with a word that seems itself to sustain grammatical and sense relation with the word or words following it, or it may end with a verb. In either of such cases the comma serves to show the end of the subject; and its use is therefore helpful punctuation:

78. Whatever is, is right.

79. He that sees a building as a common spectator, contents himself with speaking of it in the most general terms.

The use of the comma after “spectator” simply warns the reader that “the spectator contents himself” is not the meaning of the language at this point. The comma disconnects “spectator” and “contents,” just as the comma disconnects certain words in Sentence 1-1. Thus the punctuation of this sentence depends upon the fundamental principle of _grouping_ and _disjunction_.

This principle also explains the value of a comma at the end of several subject-nouns not connected by a conjunction:

80. Ease, indulgence, luxury, sloth, are the sources of misery.

With the conjunction “and” before “sloth,” the comma after “sloth” would not be needed, as “and” and the comma before it would give notice of the ending of the group.

The value of a comma in No. 79 is unmistakable; but is such punctuation helpful when the subject clearly ends itself, either because of its manifest completeness or because there is no apparent relation between the last word of the subject and the predicate verb? Probably a definite and satisfactory answer to this question cannot be given, for the mental capacity and alertness of the reader are involved.

DOUBTFUL MODIFIERS

Perhaps more obscurity in language, often resulting in hurtful misunderstandings and expensive litigation, grows out of doubtful modifiers than out of any other source of bad construction. A knowledge of punctuation here serves a very useful purpose, not always by putting the proper mark in the proper place, but generally by showing the writer the necessity of recasting his sentence, thus removing the cause of any possible wrong interpretation. Punctuation points out the danger; the writer removes it.

What did Smith write according to the wording and punctuation of the following sentence?

81. Smith wrote part of the preface and Chapter I.

It says clearly that Smith wrote _part_ of the preface and _part_ of