In your examples, fear and love are most likely nouns, not verbs. Hence they cannot stand alone as sentences; they're just phrases. In English, words sometimes do not change form when they change from one part of speech into another, such as from verb to noun.
Great question. The reason this wording is confusing is because, in this context, the word if actually means whether. It would be more clearly reworded as:
Share whether the goal was met
You should share in either case, and inform the appropriate person/people if you did complete the goal, or if you did not complete the goal.
Note that this use of the ...
Whenever two independent clauses are separated by a conjunction, it is customary to precede that conjunction with a comma:
I do not like biology, nor do I like chemistry.
I do not like biology, and I also do not like chemistry.
I do not like biology, but I really do like chemistry.
That said, this general guideline is often rescinded for short clauses:
Your rule is correct; but those aren't "two independent clauses". The clause because cancer cells are extremely diverse in their metastatic ability is dependent/subordinate, as it cannot stand on its own.
The rules for subordinate clauses are more complex and less definite. In the case of subordinate conjunctions, like because, I believe most style guides ...
It depends on who you ask. Some people think comma splices are always unacceptable, while others think that they can even be stylistically better choices in some circumstances.
The article in Wikipedia is very useful:
Comma splices are [in the main] condemned in The Elements of Style, a popular
American English style guide by E.B....
'To show this' is adverbial, so the first comma makes sense.
Then there is a list of imperatives. Commas are fine for separating them. Do not mix commas and semicolons at the same nesting level. (You might use both semicolons and commas if some of the list items have 'parenthetical' nesting.)
'It then follows that ...' is not part of the list. It ...
Tree Diagram of 'fused' relative construction, showing that both the subject and the predicative complement are NPs containing an embedded relative clause.
The pronoun "what" functions simultaneously as head of the NPs and object (in pre-nuclear position) in the relative clauses.
tl,dr: Don’t use a comma there.
Your analysis of the parse is correct. Here is a constituency tree of your sentence using the Stanford Parser:
(S (NP I)
(PP the time
(S (S (NP I)
(S (NP he)
Is leaving out the "they" between "and" and "are" just for the sake of reading with a better flow or something?
Yes, though it was probably not a fully-conscious decision; people will "just" write or speak like that naturally. Deciding not to omit the they could come across as adding an undue emphasis.
Should it have just left out the comma?
I can only find one independent clause: "this truth is ... fixed ...".
The modern correspondent to the traditional independent clause is Emonds' root sentence. Root sentences can be identified by the applicability of certain transformations, including subject auxiliary inversion and topicalization.
We can prepose and invert in this example in the clause "...
Yes, it is acceptable, it sounds very conversational (spoken style). The use of such several phrase in the row, just gives the stylistic aspect. It is about the style, not grammar, and it depends on the context.
The which-clauses in your example sentences ( ... which is quite a surprise, ... which isn't what I'd expected, ... which is difficult) are indeed relative clauses, not non-relative clauses.
A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language (p1118) refers to such evaluative or comment clauses as sentential relative clauses. For The Cambridge Grammar of the ...
Yes, it's fine. In your example, "specifically in San Francisco" is an appositive to "in California". An appositive adds information without affecting truth. Here, giving more information about where you live is not relevant to the truth of "I live in California".
The Purdue Online Writing Lab, which claims to follow APA style, gives this example that seems to match your example (except that it concludes with a period rather than a comma):
Additional Punctuation Rules When Using Quotation Marks
Put commas and periods within quotation marks, except when a parenthetical reference follows.
[Relevant example:] Mullen,...
Punctuation is a matter of typographic and orthographic convention, not of grammar.
To apply the convention described in S&W to your sentence, you would indeed place a comma before and.
Take out the trash, and stop complaining.
stop complaining is a fully formed imperative sentence, just like take out the trash.
A more nuanced rule in the case of ...
A semicolon is incorrect in this sentence, and it should in fact be a comma.
However, strictly speaking this sentence does not include a dependent clause, because there is no subject in the phrase after the word but. To illustrate this, let's remove some of the excess verbiage:
The product permits a use, but also provides a mat.
(Eliminating the modifiers ...
It depends on your teaching purpose. Notwithstanding Pitarou's comments and link about FANBOYS, it may well be appropriate for third graders to learn that sentences whose two clauses are connected by one of the FANBOYS (coordinating conjunctions) are called compound sentences. Sentences whose two clauses are joined by one of the other (subordinating) ...
First of all, punctuation is a matter of style, and you will find the rules for that style in the style guide that your employer has adopted. Which guide governs your edits, and what does it say? Different guides have different rules, but the good ones will emphasize that fiats must be tempered by the recognition of exceptions and the role of the good ...
The comma splice is generally pretty clearly defined:
A comma splice occurs when two independent clauses are connected with only a comma
In all of your examples, you have two independent clauses joined by a comma. You could either add a coordinating conjunction (not a subordinating conjunction) ...
In colloquial English, it's very common for function words to be dropped from the start of an independent clause. That sometimes amounts to an implied subject:
My wife left me. She says I don't love her anymore. Says I'm married to my work.
but often not:
You coming with us?
Looking for something?
A guy walks into a bar with a chunk of asphalt ...
The FANBOYS mnenomic has been popular in the teaching of English to native speakers (particularly in the USA using textbooks such as Warriner's English Grammar and Composition). One of the goals of instruction is to help students learn to write correctly constructed and punctuated sentences, and to avoid sentence fragments and run-ons or comma splices.
In the sentence "This is because they have already gone gone home," the main clause is indeed "This is" with an implicit complement of "true" or "correct." The "this" is being used as a substantive representing something said previously.
"This is because Y" means "[The previous statement] is [true] because Y." No native speaker will wince at "This is ...
First, but goes between conjuncts. The but doesn't go with either clause in this sentence;
rather, it connects the whole sentence with whatever came before it. So I will ignore it here.
Second, the rest of the sentence is an example of the so X/such a(n) X that S construction, which links together an independent clause:
she was so tired
and a dependent ...
Whether a clause is dependent or independent doesn't have to do with its meaning. That's where the confusion about but with even though came from. They do mean sort of the same thing.
But that fact doesn't have anything to do with whether they introduce dependent or independent clauses.
Dependent means 'hanging from' in Latin, and the idea is that one ...
Your hunch is right: the online grammar checker is wrong. You don't need a comma here. It's helpful to remember so can mean and so or so that. When it means and so and joins two independent clauses, a comma is generally considered necessary. For example, Programmers can write efficient and type-safe code, [and] so good ones are in high demand. But in your ...
I wouldn't bother about what Word suggests in this case. It often wants to insert semicolons where a comma will suffice, and other nonsensical suggestions. I don't really think it makes much difference whether you remove the comma or not. In fact, it looks fine to me as it is.
I am not good with "rule" language, and I've been having problems with "to include a comma or not to include a comma" as well.
You take out the trash. You wash the car. (Could be talking to two different people, or one person if your speech is really stunted)
Take out the trash, and wash the car. (Talking to one person and the "you" is assumed in the second ...
/Take out the trash and move your bike/ is an imperative and a compound sentence. The implied subject is you. There are no dependent clauses in it. The two sentences have a parallel structure and the /and/ is the linking word. Ergo, the comma rule to be placed before indepedent clauses does not apply here. However, one could - if one wanted to - put in a ...