[alvaro.alarcon]

You guessed it! This guy who has spent his life in an scholastic straightjacket, applying to the nation's most competitive colleges and one Canadian school (only to become disgusted by academia), as well as having entered the newspaper industry, knows all to well the importance of maintaining a Standard Written English.

In fact, I've been offered an chance to take the copyediting internship test at the local Hearst paper today.

Despite this, there is a concept called poetic license, in which the writer, as artist, manipulates the language to further his ends or the ends of the work being created.

In the fiction forum, there is a tendency to keep to a very conservative Strunk and White usage rules regarding commas and semicolons.

Despite this, I have studied some acting, have read Shakespeare, enjoy poetry readings, and with all the poets on this site (yeah that 95% of the members), share an enjoyment of the oral art of poetry reading.

So then, is it alright to say that a comma and a semi-colon not only function to separate similar clauses to different degrees, but also function to give the reader a signal as to how long he or she should read or "breath" in considering a passage? Can the rules be bent? Should they? I, of course, am a beginning writer.

This problem just came up as I was writing.

Also my formal training in the cello accentuates the importance placed on breathing in conveying any artistic piece to an audience.

Thank you,
Alvaro

[This message has been edited by alvaro.alarcon (edited April 01, 2004).]

[Tim Love]

Can the rules be bent? - if there's a house style, you follow it.
is it alright to say that a comma and a semi-colon not only function to separate similar clauses to different degrees, but also function to give the reader a signal as to how long he or she should read or "breath" in considering a passage? - yes, though the 2 styles may not sit together well. From "Reading and Listening", B. Engler, Franke Verlag Bern, 1982.
o punctuation may be grammatical-logical or rhythmical-oratorical. Lack of punctuation "may create ambiguities and force the passive reader to become active", p.27.
o "there was a movement away from rhythmical- oratorical punctuation to grammatical-logical usage between about 1580 and 1680....It was only in the decade of the 1840's that the grammatical-logical theories finally triumphed.", p.55 (quoting Mindele Triep).
o The text may reflect whether it's for listening or reading - visual/aural elements, difficulty, length, poet/audience relationship.

[Robt_Ward]

Alvaro,

My capsule response to this would be:

1. Edit the poem for grammar first; the punctuation should serve first as a tool to eliminate grammatical/syntactical ambiguities that the author does not desire to be present.

2. That done, review the poem from an "aural" perspective and introduce, as needed, punctuation to reinforce a certain "phrasing" in the work, provided that such "additional" punctuation (or removal of same) does not introduce unwanted grammatical/syntactical ambiguities.

3. In any event, within a given poem remain consistent to whatever "rule" of punctuation you adopt/devise.

Hope this helps...

(robt)

[carterj98]

Alvaro--

"Logical" punctuation, the kind taught by Strunk & White, works in
prose to keep the language clear and understandable. It's always
"safe" to stick to those rules. In formal prose, such as formal essays,
dissertations, and the like, anyone would do well to follow the rules
strictly.

But "oratorical" punctuation--the use of punctuation marks to affect
rhythm and sound in prose--has a place, too. Sometimes, in fiction or
in personal essays, dropping a mark or adding one does good work. I
always recommend that fiction writers read their works aloud and
listen to the way they sound, if they can't do it in their heads. I find it
astonishing that in critique groups prose rhythm is so seldom
mentioned, for it's vital to good writing.

Only the most dedicated purists insist that people always follow the
logical rules for commas; for that one mark, the rules are simply too
restrictive. The trouble is, people often forget the "oratorical"
function of commas. I just gave Sherri hell in the Fiction forum for
leaving out way too many--that lack made her work hard to
understand on first reading. The last thing you want to do is make the
reader stop to figure out what you're on about.

Punctuation is, alas, an art. Good writers use it to advantage, but they
know the rules, and, usually instinctively, know exactly when to break
them.

Carter

[alvaro.alarcon]

I think I've been reminded by you guys of the need to remain vigilant in writing, to never become complacent, and to be one hundred per cent sure of how I use a comma or semicolon. It sounds easy, but now that I've taken the copyediting test, I know that the English language has many nuances that only a select few people have a clear conception of.

As a writer, I think it is imperative that I have a clear conception of when and how to use a semicolon; I hope all goes well.

Alvaro

[Robert J. Clawson]

I agree with Carter here:

"The last thing you want to do is make the
reader stop to figure out what you're on about."

UNLESS, of course, the punctuation is meant to make the reader stop and reconsider. Generally, standard punctuation guides the reader.

Reading aloud is another matter. The text you read from should be considered your SCRIPT, and you should mark it up whatever way helps you to deliver an excellent reading.

Bob

[Robt_Ward]

Clawson,

"Hear! Hear!" chants the deaf-man-who-reads...

(robt)

[Henry Quince]

Alvaro, I hope you won’t be offended if I point out that there are more basic matters to examine in your use of English than the nuances of commas and semicolons.

Your initial post on this thread reveals a number of basic "mechanical" problems if we go by generally accepted current standards of correctness or literacy. I’ll list them below. If you had made only one or two errors I might have assumed them to be typos, but there are quite a number. A writer or editor needs to be at home with all the basics, so you have work to do. Perhaps the copy-editing test you mention will have given you the same message.

I offer the following in a spirit of helpfulness, and as someone with substantial experience in writing and copy-editing.

Para 1 of your post has "an scholastic straightjacket" (need "a" before a consonant sound) and "all to well" (should be "too").

Para 2 has "an chance" (needs "a" again).

Para 4 has "a... usage rules" z(no article needed).

Para 6 has "alright" (still, I believe, unrecognized as a legitimate English word — use "all right"). And the word "breath" is the noun (breth); the verb is breathe.

Forgive me: I don’t even know if English is your native language. But if you are making these errors after a normal school education in English, you probably need to read more attentively — not on the Internet, where faulty English is rife, but offline prose by good writers.

There is no way to be "one hundred per cent sure" about comma or semicolon use. Robert and Carter have made some good observations. Rules are just generalisations: your decision may coincide with a rule most of the time, but you need to develop your own judgement.

For example, some people condemn the "comma splice" — using a comma instead of a semicolon (say) to join independent clauses or sentences. By this rule it’s wrong to write "I came, I saw, I conquered" even though that’s the usual rendering of the Latin original. But try replacing the commas by semicolons or periods. Don’t you lose some of the essence of the boastful claim, namely the implication that the conquering was an inevitable consequence of the coming and the seeing?

Or consider a sentence like this in a story: “He fretted, he sweated, he trembled, his heart raced.” I wouldn’t hesitate to use commas there, as each short clause really underlines and develops the same idea, which the pace reinforces. But possibly you might want semicolons or periods — depending on the context, the general style, and what you’re trying to convey. In these matters, a rule is only a general guide.

Henry


[This message has been edited by Henry Quince (edited April 02, 2004).]

[alvaro.alarcon]

Henry you're right as I made many mistakes, but then again this is the Internet, so who gives a hoot?!

Alvaro

[This message has been edited by alvaro.alarcon (edited April 02, 2004).]

[Michael Cantor]

If that's your attitude, Alvaro, then why in hell should anybody give a hoot about responding to your questions?