Timeline for Should I use a comma after "it should be noted that"?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 2, 2016 at 8:59 | comment | added | Araucaria - Him | In addition, the OP's sentence mirrors the one that they give as an example. It too has a fronted prepositional adjunct at speed bumps. The case for setting off the prepositional adjunct in commas (or not) is the same in each example. They are exactly parallel. | |
| Jul 2, 2016 at 8:51 | comment | added | Araucaria - Him | No, the comma after it should be noted that is the first comma delimiting the fronted prepositional adjunct at extremely high or low levels of anxiety. It has nothing to do with it should be noted that at all. Elementary grammar skills will tell you that this is the case. The Subject of the whole sentence is the word it. The verb functioning as Head of the predicate is the verb noted. So they are obviously not part of a parenthetical phrase in any standard analysis. | |
| Jun 25, 2016 at 5:50 | history | edited | Kris | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 4 characters in body
|
| Jun 25, 2016 at 5:45 | history | answered | Kris | CC BY-SA 3.0 |