Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : SI Grammar and Spelling Lab -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: B.C. who wrote (3152)	7/15/1999 8:54:00 AM
From: B.C.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4711

...and the implied "then" is a conjunction. (I guess it would be helpful to point that out with regard to the rule and how it relates to your sentence!)

To: B.C. who wrote (3152)	7/15/1999 11:30:00 AM
From: The Philosopher	Respond to of 4711

But the rule you actually came up with is irrelevant to the case. I agree that if I had inserted the "then," I would need a comma (as I just did after an "if" clause). But I don't agree that the comma is necessary if the conjunction is elliptical. If Strunk and White don't say it, I ain't gonna believe it! <g>

To: B.C. who wrote (3152)	7/15/1999 7:10:00 PM
From: B.C.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4711

Chris: "If a conjunction is inserted, the proper mark is a comma." I was quoting Strunk and White, and I used that rule to point out their example of that sentence! Had they written it your way, they'd have omitted the comma. I think they're clear where they stand on this one! Without the comma, the sentence is awkward and slows the reader down. With the comma, the sentence is perfectly clear the first time around. "Clarity, clarity, clarity." (Strunk and White) Edwarda and I will use the comma and be clear. [Sotto voce: And Chris and Joan can omit the comma and be awkward! I just hope that when they omit the comma, it's because they really want the sentence to be read twice!]