Viewing Thread:
"That damn comma."

Grix Thraves wrote (on the 15/05/2001):

Right, time to finish this.

"Instead of that weirdo irritating us all the time, I say we kill him."

This is how it was originally written.

This is how Your Honour thinks it should be written.

"Instead of that weirdo, irritating us all the time, I say we kill him."


Now... surely it DOESN'T need a comma? Please, discuss and argue this.

I know this is a pointless topic... but I don't think this one is going to make much of a difference to the already made mountains of rubbish topics...

- - - - - - - - - - -


Now, as we can all clearly see, my way of writing it was best.

:-D

Read it out loud - it is quite obviously the first one i.e. "Instead of that weirdo irritating us all the time, I say we kill him."

If you put the other comma in the "irritating us all the time" stands alone fine, but what surrounds it doesn't. With the two commas you are really saying the middle bit almost like an after thought, which suggests the surrounding sentence should flow together without it.

Example: "Instead of that, wierdo, I say we kill him". "Wierdo" is removed from the rest of the sentence as it is almost an after thought and not totally relevant to the rest of the sentence (in that it refers to who you are talking to, not about).

Spods.

No, it wouldn't.

Insane Bartender wrote:
> Yes, he is.


Would that read better without the comma?
:D

Your Honour wrote:
> No, you're not. :-P

Yes, he is.

I'm not too sure about "Instead of that werido, irritating us all the time, I say we kill him."
It suggests that the "irritating us all the time" is an attribute of the wriedo added as an afterthought, but then this makes it unclear what the "Instead" actually refers to, if anything. If you removed the "Instead of" then I'd go with that one. Otherwise, probably not.

In the other option - "Instead of that weirdo irritating us all the time, I say we kill him" - it's clear what "Instead of" refers to. I'd go with this version myself.

Grix Thraves wrote:
> Knew what this was all about just from the title... you'll never give
> in, will you? ;0D


I was going through the archive, looking for something else, but I spotted this and couldn't resist it. :-D


> I still think I'm right though. :0)

No, you're not. :-P

If the whole sentence is just that, with no follow on then it should be written as
"Instead of that weirdo irritating us all the time, I say we kill him"

This is saying "We should kill him instead of him irritating us"


If you write it as:
"Instead of that weirdo, irritating us all the time, I say we kill him."
This is saying "We should kill that weirdo who is irritating us all of the time"

--

Using the comma suggests that killing the weirdo is an alternative to his following.
Whereas using commas after "weirdo" and "time" indicates that you are going to kill him regardless, he just happens to irritate.

It's a small difference but it does change the structure and meaning of the sentence enough to be worth mentioning.

Knew what this was all about just from the title... you'll never give in, will you? ;0D

I still think I'm right though. :0)

Actually on second looks, Grix may be right. But maybe change the comma to a full stop?!?

Your both right really, it's all about the tone of voice you are saying it in.