Punctuation: a simple topic, but one that branches into so many directions. Recently a teacher criticized me for placing "incorrect" punctuation in a sentence similar to the following:
Kierkegaard composed the phrase "truth is subjectivity".
Okay, I totally forget what the subject of the sentence was, so I improvised. The teacher not only placed a thick red arrow guiding the period one character to the left, but she also drew a glaring red asterisk next to it. Seriously, is it even wrong? I'm aware that Americans have adopted her method as the "proper" pronunciation rule, but:
1) It doesn't make sense. The period ends the sentence, not the phrase. As a matter of fact, this use of grammar implies that the period exists as part of the phrase, no matter where in the sentence the phrase is written. From this use of grammar, one might infer the following sentence is correct.
"Truth is subjectivity." is a phrase Kierkegaard used in his books on existentialism.
Obviously it's not.
2) Don't the British still use "my" style of punctuation?
By the way, the same argument goes for parenthetical statements as well (I often punctuate such statements thusly). (However, if the whole sentence is a phrase, I usually punctuate it like this.)
I'm with you, Ani, but I'm afraid we're wrong.
stupid, isn't it?
My understanding is that the reason for putting the period inside the quotes has to do with structural mechanics of old time printing. the period haging loos outside the closing quote would tend to break off or some such foolishness. My own standard is to put the punctuation inside or outside the quotes depending on whether it's part of whats being quoted. E.g., Did you say "I'm leaving"? or I asked him, "are you going to the store?"
The question mark and the exclamation point in American English punctuation are punctuated in the senses faldage shows above, which are based on the meaning of delivery. The period goes inside quotation marks as does the comma. I don't know anything at all about British punctuation rules other than rhubarb once noted that the last two of items in a series are never set off with commas from each other, whereas in American punctuation the choice is up to the writer:
British: "Apples, oranges, grapes and pickles will suffice."
American: (Either the above or...) "Apples, oranges, grapes, and pickles will suffice."
We've discussed before here how punctuation is a byproduct of the period in which you're living. Punctuation conventions do change. You really do have to train your eye to accept punctuation conventions if your mind at first insists upon reasoning out punctuation that is contrary to the convention. Recently I've been rereading The Heart Is a Lonely Hunter and have had to suppress the red pen urge to correct McCullers' punctuation. But now that I'm several chapters into the book, I've trained my eye to see sentences punctuated the way she wrote them. It's a fairly easy task.
My kids just went through several weeks of work on identifying comma splices (in a nutshell: commas placed where they don't belong) and fused sentences (two or more sentences strung one after the other without any punctuation). Yesterday I graded about twenty papers and was happy to see that all except four students grasped the concepts. The four who didn't still can't hear complete throughts in their heads and will find acceptable as complete sentences dependent clauses such as:
"When the computer crashed."
We have to work hard on improving reading of sentences because the state writing examiners do mark writing samples down if standard punctuation is lacking. However, I don't think these examiners would mark an essay down for placing a period outside of quotation marks. That would appear to be quibbling in my view. But for formal papers for which students had ample time and opportunity for several drafts, I would expect to find the period inside quotation marks.
for some reason, I feel better about it, knowing Fald's explanation, but I wonder at the difference between periods and question marks/exclamation marks?
it all just seems so arbitrary...
So there you have it Aniami, everyone is right but your teacher. In a logical world a sentence that ended in a parenthetical statement or a quotation would end like this...
.).
or .".
or ?".
or ?)?
or .).
or...(you get the point.).
The only excuse for this not being so is comprehension and brevity.
It doesn't make sense. The period ends the sentence, not the phrase.
I'm with you, A-L.
I refuse to do anything that doesn't make sense regardless of the convention, unless I am likely to suffer some conspicuous penalty for it [like receiving a scornful arrow and surly red asterisk on an otherwise unblemished piece of work].
If you had committed an error not so conspicuously disrespectful of authority [in particular, her authority], your teacher's censure would have been far less emotive, AnimiaL. [One can forgive sins of ignorance or neglect, but not sins of presumption.]
It's my guess that your teacher has perceived an independent streak in you, AnimiaL, which she believes it is her solemn duty to expunge for the betterment of mankind.
Your teacher wants to bring you, not your period, to heel, AnimiaL.
Don't let her streak you out. But don't lose any marks over it either. :)
That independent streak will mark you as a leader in the future, AnimiaL -- whatever marks it may cost you nowadays in the classroom.
Ruh roh, Aniam; look what this site gives as examples:
Quotation Marks
Also known as: Inverted Commas or Speech marks
The use of Quotation Marks are to show:
A quotation
i.e.: He said: "We will close early on Friday."
Announcement
i.e.: Notices stating "Silence" are often found in libraries
Titles
i.e.: This page of the web site is known as "Skills Development"
Direct Speech
i.e.: The speaker said, "The comma is used to introduce direct speech." http://www.crazycolour.com/os/punctuation.shtmlAnd, from Purdue University:
Put commas and periods within closing quotation marks, except when a parenthetical reference follows the quotation.
He said, "I may forget your name, but I never remember a face."
History is stained with blood spilled in the name of "civilization."
Mullen, criticizing the apparent inaction, writes, "Donahue's policy was to do nothing" (27). http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/grammar/g_quote.htmlWell, I guess that settles it for me. My memory was so vague on what was correct, that I fear I have vacillated between that and what makes sense, which is your version:
The period ends the sentence, not the phrase. I believe it was Faldage who tried to straighten me out on that a long time ago, and I persisted in trying to kick over the traces.
Judging by the ".edu" in the address, I'm guessing this is a teacher or professor who agrees with
Wordwind :
The rules of punctuation are not static; they have changed throughout the years and will continue to change. What once might have been considered improper punctuation may now be considered correct. The rules of punctuation are created and maintained by writers to help make their prose more effective, and their exact meaning changes over time... http://www.stpt.usf.edu/pms/intro.htmlHowsomever, I reckon the period-inside-the-quotation-marks one hasn't, yet. Sigh... Maybe we could start a campaign!
The only rule I really don't agree with is
The English word nuance comes from a Middle French word meaning "shades of color."
AND
History is stained with blood spilled in the name of "civilization."
http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/grammar/g_quote.html
The rest are a bit more logical. Sticking a period both inside the quotation and outside of the quotation looks silly.
Campaign? That's a great idea. Let's brainstorm for some campaign slogans.
Punks pushing punctually for practical punctuality
(or simply Punctual Punks for Punctuality)
Colin's colon coalition!
We won't stand for this period!
As in "we won't stand for this period" (before the end of the quotation) and also "we won't stand for this... no matter what!"
Man, I love being cheesy.
Well, somebody pass the crackers!
Don't the British still use "my" style of punctuation?
If the British were to put the period inside the quotes they'd never get to the close quote since they call the period a full stop.
A full stop? It must be tough to read any British authors when you have to stop reading after the first sentence!
earlier in this thread I was going to add a post saying that this issue has bothered me for "donkey's years."
no, that doesn't look right; let me try again: earlier in this thread I was going to add a post saying that this issue has bothered me for "donkey's years."
well d'oh!. I just cut and pasted that simple sentence into a more complex one, without changing a bloody(!) thing.
here, I'll just quote myself; that should help: "earlier in this thread I was going to add a post saying that this issue has bothered me for "donkey's years."". there.
now that was just silly; here: earlier in this thread I was going to add a post saying "this issue has bothered me for "donkey's years".".
anyway, like I was saying (typing -- no, keyboarding -- is what i *really mean to say.. er.. keyboard), "earlier in this thread I was going to add a post...". [notice how I deftly sidestepped putting "saying" in there again]? but, in the event, I resisted, fearing that it would be perceived that I didn't know that of which I spoke [drat!]!
so, having waited a bit, I -- the effable I, that is, -- feel satisdicted.
"Earlier in this thread I was going to add a post saying that this issue has bothered me for 'donkey's years.' "
[American]
'Earlier in this thread I was going to add a post saying
that this issue has bothered me for "donkey's years." '
[British]
...at least that's my understanding of differences between American and British punctuation conventions. Please do correct me here if I'm in error.
Don't completely understand the "full stop" bit - does that mean it would be:
'Earlier in this thread I was going to add a post saying that this issue has bothered me for "donkey's years" '.
>Please do correct me here if I'm in error.
Shirley, you guessed.
Goodness gracious, I do believe you have baited a wit.
Colin's colon coalition!
"Colin's colon coalition" will get a colonoscopy around here. :)
I’m a little late on this, but I was more or less snowed in yesterday. It was lovely and I slept very well after all my shoveling, snow blowing and moving-college-man-back-to-his-dorming.
Kierkegaard composed the phrase, "truth is subjectivity".
With the comma, seems correct or is at least clearer.
"truth is subjectivity" is not a sentence in itself and is not worthy of its own period.
That's the Owlbow rule anyhow and it makes the meaning of your sentence more clear and (no comma needed after an and) that's what's important isn't it? (Did that sound too arrogant?) Ah, you know what I mean.
>"truth is subjectivity" is not a sentence in itself and is not worthy of its own period.
Not so. It is sentence. So is the preceding sentence. Subject, verb, object, except in the case of the verb to be I think they call it something other than object.
TEd
*They call it a predicate nominative. And I agree with Ted: "Truth is subjectivity" is a sentence.
No you're not. Not from the British perspective, anyway.
Not that most people know how to punctuate over here, anyway. (Goes into grouchy old woman mode.)
Oh dear! I don't think I ought to stay in here. I can feel a 'Portable Soap Box Moment' coming on. Best go to bed with a cup of hot milk and calm down.
Oh dear, got that wrong -- forgot to quote what I was replying to. Sorry.
I should have started: I'm with you, Ani, but I'm afraid we're wrong.
(etaoin's post, way back on page 1.)
And then I could have gone on about British punctuation.
It would have been even better if I'd read what everyone else had written first, as I think other people put it better and clearer. This is what happens when you get carried away when you should be asleep.
If you see what I mean.
hi, Milly. I'm glad you're here.
Hi, etaoin!
Where's everyone else? Probably at work or something. I need rows of International Clocks up on the wall to keep track of the different times.
It's 11.20pm here. Which means I must go to bed! I'm going to have to ration myself with this forum, aren't I? Brilliant place to be, though
well, there'a few pub crawlers in your neck of the woods that'll probably be around soon, and it's supper-time for us East Coast US'ns, but there's folks from all around this little planet that are bound to show up sooner or later...
In reply to:
This is what happens when you get carried away when you should be asleep.
Who is carrying you away when you should be asleep, Millymax? Where to? Why? Should we all have a lie down while we ponder these questions?
Bingley
Ahh, Bingley, if only there were an interesting answer to that question!!
But if anyone ever wants to ponder, having a lie down is the correct -- and best -- position to be in to do it.
MM :)
Man, all you people have put five thousand posts here since I last looked!
But I'll respond to Milly before I get to my own thing: Milly, I noticed that you put
etaoin's post, way back on page 1 . If you (and all other newcomers) want to read more faster (that's read more, faster; not read more-faster) go up to the top of the page and click on Edit Profile, then Display Preferences. You'll see a line:
Total posts to show on one page when viewing a thread in flat mode . Change that number to 99, and you'll be able to see 99 posts on ONE page. Dunno what to tell you threaded-mode newbies; I find threaded mode both frustrating and impossible to follow.
Now: I have an actual question, and, as with the question that started this thread, I think I know the answer but I don't like it so I'm hoping it will change this time(!): do you put the period/full stop inside or outside the ) when a phrase in parentheses ends the sentence? And question/exclamation marks?
Is this an example of what you mean, Jackie (in the post above?)
And how did you want the answer to be (perhaps like this)?
I woulda said:
Is this an example of what you mean (in the post above), Jackie?
oh, sure, bend the steenken' rules...
typical of a bloody tenor...! :}
I used to have a book called Men, Women and Tenors. Don't know what happened to it. I ain't sayin, I'm just sayin.
now counter-tenors are a whole nother kettle of fike
> counter-tenors
try getting 'em to do only 9 in the bar, that confuses them!
Who caterwauls on the corrugations?
Tenor C Williams
>Tenor C Williams
Stellar!
http://webster.commnet.edu/grammar/marks/quotation.htm is a pretty good summary of what we've been talking about.