Why Punctuation is Everything


I think his point is that since everyone knows that pandas don't shoot guns, no reasonable person would ever actually make the mistake of interpreting that sentence as saying that the panda ate, shot a gun, and then left. Therefore the punctuation really isn't necessary.
 
I think his point is that since everyone knows that pandas don't shoot guns, no reasonable person would ever actually make the mistake of interpreting that sentence as saying that the panda ate, shot a gun, and then left. Therefore the punctuation really isn't necessary.

In that case perhaps, but a lack of attention to punctuation could turn costly. ;)

http://shrewdnessofapes.blogspot.com/2006/08/see-i-told-you-punctuation-matters.html

A grammatical blunder may force Rogers Communications Inc. to pay an extra $2.13-million to use utility poles in the Maritimes after the placement of a comma in a contract permitted the deal's cancellation.

The controversial comma sent lawyers and telecommunications regulators scrambling for their English textbooks in a bitter 18-month dispute that serves as an expensive reminder of the importance of punctuation.

...Language buffs take note — Page 7 of the contract states: The agreement “shall continue in force for a period of five years from the date it is made, and thereafter for successive five year terms, unless and until terminated by one year prior notice in writing by either party.”

Rogers' intent in 2002 was to lock into a long-term deal of at least five years. But when regulators with the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) parsed the wording, they reached another conclusion.

The validity of the contract and the millions of dollars at stake all came down to one point — the second comma in the sentence.

Had it not been there, the right to cancel wouldn't have applied to the first five years of the contract and Rogers would be protected from the higher rates it now faces.
 
Last edited:
i don't get it
you would not believe the nonsense i had to put up with when i first came to this board, over punctuation.

i now give a decent attempt to punctuate my sentences, but ah, i still need to CAPATOLIZE (man, don't start) certain words.
 
Umm, correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't the second sentence have quotation marks around 'John', and 'has missed the point.' in order to be correct? Fraggle?
Yes.
John, said Oli, has missed the point.
This is simply incorrect. "John has missed the point," is a direct quote and must be enclosed in quotation marks. In speech we use tone of voice and other dynamics to distinguish between the sentences:
  • William said I'm an idiot for turning down a date with your brother.
  • William said, "I'm an idiot for turning down a date with your brother."
In writing we don't have those oral tools so we have to use quotation marks. Yes, I understand that in the example posted about John and Oli there's not much room for misunderstanding. Nonetheless we have to be consistent in our punctuation or reading becomes less intuitive and it slows everybody down.
It does if you remember that pandas eat eucalyptus shoots and leaves.
You're thinking of koalas, which are marsupials. They live in Australia where eucalyptus grows. Pandas live in China and eat bamboo. Pandas are indeed ursids (members of the bear family) but this was not known for certain until quite recently, through DNA analysis. When I was a kid the possibility was accepted that they might be members of the raccoon family.
you would not believe the nonsense i had to put up with when i first came to this board, over punctuation. i now give a decent attempt to punctuate my sentences, but ah, i still need to CAPATOLIZE (man, don't start) certain words.
Capitalization is a form of punctuation and it is one of the most important forms. Capital letters are the most visible signals that help us parse sentences. They are far bigger than periods and therefore are a stronger signal that a new sentence is starting.

Every language using the Roman alphabet (or a related one like Greek or Cyrillic) has its own conventions for capitalization. In German, with its complicated grammar, nested subordinate clauses and mile-long sentences, all nouns are capitalized. This helps identify the key words in the sentence without the nuances of speech. Most languages don't capitalize words derived from the names of countries like americano. English as usual takes its own unique path and capitalizes "French wine," but not "french fries." Egotists that we are, we capitalize the pronoun "I," when so many other languages politely capitalize "you."

But all languages that have capital letters use them for the first word of the sentence. It is neither difficult to learn nor time-consuming to do. Just locate the SHIFT key on your computer and practice with it for a few minutes. You can hit it with the opposite hand from the one that's typing the letter so it doesn't slow you down. It is a highly appreciated courtesy to the reader, much more so than proofreading one's own work and correcting the occasional (and original) spelling error such as "capatolize."

If you can navigate all the ridiculous menus in commercial software that require you to hit Function keys while holding down CONTROL or COMMAND (and Macintoshes have only one of each, on the left hand), you have the ability to learn to use the SHIFT KEY.

BTW, of all the subforums on this website, you picked the wrong place to call anything related to proper language "nonsense." :mad:
 
Yes.This is simply incorrect. "John has missed the point," is a direct quote and must be enclosed in quotation marks.

Wahey - I'm outdated: (although I will check my copy of Oxford English Use and Abuse).
The one I was taught (and it was regarding punctuation) was:

"The pupil said the teacher is a fool", which, punctuated gave, "the pupil, said the teacher, is a fool".

Old-style grammar school - nobody uses the old ways any more :bawl:

Umm. addition. I just googled and English as spoken/ used by the English (and taught as a second language) does do it:

Indirect Speech (also referred to as 'reported speech') refers to a sentence reporting what someone has said. It is almost always used in spoken English.

* If the reporting verb (i.e. said) is in the past, the reported clause will be in a past form. This form is usually one step back into the past from the original.

For example:

o He said the test was difficult.
o She said she watched TV every day.
o Jack said he came to school every day.

No quote marks.
Maybe a difference between English and American English?

In indirect speech, the exact meaning of the speaker's words is given, but the exact words are not directly quoted.
Dean said that he didn't know what to do.
From:
http://english.unitecnology.ac.nz/resources/resources/exp_lang/speech.html
An resource for English teachers (from New Zealand by the .nz. address!).
 
Wahey - I'm outdated: (although I will check my copy of Oxford English Use and Abuse).
The one I was taught (and it was regarding punctuation) was:

"The pupil said the teacher is a fool", which, punctuated gave, "the pupil, said the teacher, is a fool".

Old-style grammar school - nobody uses the old ways any more :bawl:

Umm. addition. I just googled and English as spoken/ used by the English (and taught as a second language) does do it:



No quote marks.
Maybe a difference between English and American English?


From:
http://english.unitecnology.ac.nz/resources/resources/exp_lang/speech.html
An resource for English teachers (from New Zealand by the .nz. address!).

I have to agree with Oli here, that's how we learned it too. Our grammar bible was Wren and Martin; its an excellent comprehensive resource for the intricacies of English grammar and composition.

Not so easy to get online, it would seem, though its standard for Indian schools

http://www.amazon.com/High-School-English-Grammar-Composition/dp/8121904005
 
Last edited:
I think his point is that since everyone knows that pandas don't shoot guns, no reasonable person would ever actually make the mistake of interpreting that sentence as saying that the panda ate, shot a gun, and then left. Therefore the punctuation really isn't necessary.

Yes, but isnt that like... missing the point ? ;)
 
BTW, of all the subforums on this website, you picked the wrong place to call anything related to proper language "nonsense." :mad:
a bit touchy about your forum ay?
anyway, capitalization, for me, is more of a pain than, say, commas and apostrophes. at least i know how to break up a sentence to convey the meaning.
 
She said she watched TV every day. No quote marks.
Maybe a difference between English and American English?
No, it's just a confusing principle to explain. That is obviously an indirect quote! If it were a direct quote, it would be

She said, "I watch TV every day."

It would be in the first person, it would be in the present tense, and it would have quotation marks.

And the punctuation is vital to understanding. If you write...

She said I watch TV every day.

...then she is talking about your habits, not hers.
a bit touchy about your forum ay?
Well sure. The "New Moderator Syndrome." :)

But this is indeed where people come to discuss language seriously, and people who discuss language seriously aren't likely to think that any of its fine points are nonsense. To walk in and say so is not the best way to introduce oneself to the community.
 
They're both evidence of the same lack of respect for civilization. They announce to the world that you were out getting stoned or playing videogames while the other kids were paying attention in school.

you forgot to mention having sex:bugeye:
 
No, it's just a confusing principle to explain. That is obviously an indirect quote!
Nope: example of reported speech :)
Apologies for not posting the link I got it from, and I can't find it now (busy at work). :(
 
Nope: example of reported speech :)
I'm not sure what the difference is between "reported speech" and "indirect quotation," except perhaps that one is a subset of the other. My primitive high school in the Wild West didn't go into such subtleties fifty years ago because they concentrated on teaching us how to protect ourselves from stampeding buffalo and ornery Injuns. Nonetheless, in both cases quotation marks are not only inappropriate but incorrect, because:
  • They are not a faithful word-for-word transcription of what the speaker said.
  • They change the meaning of the sentence.
In cases where both of these conditions are satisfied, quotation marks may be optional, although other conditions also apply such as not using the conjunction "that."
 
Apologies: I misread your previous post as suggesting that reported speech SHOULD have quotes around it (my fault - hectic time at work).
 
Yes, but isnt that like... missing the point ? ;)
Well, the entire point of that sentence is that it’s supposed to be an example of why punctuation is necessary – but clearly in that particular example punctuation isn’t actually necessary.
 
Back
Top