I have a phrase that reads:

Section 8.01, entitled "Polar Bonding in Basic Organic Compounds," provides, in pertinent part, that due to the slight electro-negative bias of fluorine, the carbon-fluorine bond has an electronegativity that slightly favors the Fluorine pole.

The first part of the sentence is what I'm concerned with. Should I remove the commas separating "in pertinent part"? What's the grammatical justification?

  1. Keep the commas. They delimit a clause that could be removed without messing up the sentence. Commas also delimit the clause that follows ('that due to the slight electro-negative bias of Flourine'). It would be awkward to remove the commas of one phrase without removing those of the other phrase, but if you eliminated all three commas, that might make it harder to follow the sentence's logic.


  1. Spell 'fluorine' correctly! (No caps; 'ou' should be 'uo'.)

  2. Prefer 'because of' to 'due to'.

  • What is the difference between "because of" and "due to"? – franklin Jan 27 '15 at 21:06

If you include the phrase, then you can include the commas.

Consider removing the phrase entirely and replacing "Section 8.01" with a reference that specifically points to the "pertinent part" of that section.

  • If the commas are removed does it in any way effect the meaning of the sentence? – franklin Oct 20 '14 at 17:18
  • It does not effect the meaning. – Gary's Student Oct 20 '14 at 17:19

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.