0

My question deals specifically with this example:

I was extremely excited, so it was hard for me even to grab the doorknob and turn it—I kept on missing and my hand was shaking, you see—but once I finally got that done, I flung the door open and scurried outside.

Should there be a comma after missing so that it looks like the following?

I was extremely excited, so it was hard for me even to grab the doorknob and turn it—I kept on missing, and my hand was shaking, you see—but once I finally got that done, I flung the door open and scurried outside.

Thanks!

Improve this question

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
1

A comma can serve a grammatical purpose in that the same words with a comma can have a different meaning to those words without a comma. In this example, a comma would not have any grammatical meaning, it would only signify a pause if those words were read aloud. How would you say those words? If you would pause after 'missing' then put in the comma, if not, then not.

Improve this answer
6
  • To make sure I understand, what if the two independent clauses were their own sentence? In other words, what about the following sentence: "I kept on missing, and my hand was shaking." Is the comma necessary here as well, or does it just depend on whether there should be a pause when read aloud? Thanks!
    – The Editor
    Commented Jun 17, 2019 at 16:08
  • In that example the only function that a comma might have would indeed be to signal a pause. If I were reading that sentence aloud in isolation, I would certainly insert a pause. In context there might be reasons for not pausing particularly at that point.
    – JeremyC
    Commented Jun 18, 2019 at 8:26
  • Okay, I thought two independent clauses separated by and would always require a comma, but looking it over, I did find that this source mentions an exception: grammar.com/commas-and-independent-clauses. Does the example I gave fall under this article's exception, being the reason the comma is unnecessary?
    – The Editor
    Commented Jun 19, 2019 at 19:59
  • It all depends on how you wish the reader to perceive the ideas in what you write. That in turn depends very much on the context, which is why I used the words 'in isolation' when I said that I would insert a comma. With or without the comma your sentence makes perfect sense; we are talking here about nuances of meaning that you, the writer, may not care about or the reader be interested in.
    – JeremyC
    Commented Jun 19, 2019 at 22:00
  • In general, whether or not you put a comma between two independent clauses isn't merely a matter of style but a rule, as the article I mentioned discusses: grammar.com/commas-and-independent-clauses. However, it does give an exception. Since both clauses are short (and followed by a comma with "you see"), I'll probably omit the comma after all. Thanks for your time!
    – The Editor
    Commented Jun 21, 2019 at 15:52

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .