Thread: Obsessed with a comma, need help

Hello everyone!

I've written a sentence that may or may not be using commas correctly. I used Google to search for information on comma usage, but haven't found exactly what I'm looking for. I'd love to get your opinions on the comma usage in the following sentence.

The weather seemed to be playing games with Vincent, raining when he didn't have his umbrella, and clearing up when he did.

Do I need the second comma?

It's not parenthetical, not really items in series, and they're not independent clauses, but I seem to prefer it there. It may be that the first comma should be a semicolon, but I seemed to find more evidence that it shouldn't be than it should.

It may also be that I've structured the sentence poorly. I'm an ex-software developer, so my ideas of syntax are not exactly optimal for this kind of writing, but I'm trying to improve.

Thanks, everyone!

-Joe

Your usage is correct, but if you delete the comma you haven't destroyed your sentence.

Technically neither are wrong. The last part of the sentence is not directly related to the middle part, so it could be argued that you need a comma. There are those that say it's still related and therefore doesn't need a comma. It's a matter of personal choice.

Thanks for the replies!

I like commas, lol, so I'd keep the second one.

In sentences structured this way, the test is to remove the middle clause. If what's left can stand alone and make sense, you don't need the second comma. If it doesn't, you do.

Originally Posted by The Backward OX

In sentences structured this way, the test is to remove the middle clause. If what's left can stand alone and make sense, you don't need the second comma. If it doesn't, you do.

Good test! Did anyone else scroll back up and apply it? I thought the comma should be removed and according to the Ox Surgery Test I was right.

Personally, I'd take it out, I think it flows smoother, but neither are wrong. It's up to you me thinks

Originally Posted by The Backward OX

In sentences structured this way, the test is to remove the middle clause. If what's left can stand alone and make sense, you don't need the second comma. If it doesn't, you do.

Thanks for the info, but it raises another question (for me). When applying this test, do I simply remove the middle clause, making

The weather seemed to be playing games with Vincent, raining when he didn't have his umbrella, and clearing up when he did.

become

The weather seemed to be playing games with Vincent, [and] clearing up when he did.

or would I modify what remained to reveal the meaning and intent of what's left, making

The weather seemed to be playing games with Vincent, raining when he didn't have his umbrella, and clearing up when he did.

become

The weather seemed to be playing games with Vincent, clearing up when he [had his umbrella].

?

I realize that this will look like a silly question to those of you who understand the process, but I always like to be sure. Asking a silly question and feeling a bit embarrassed by the obvious answer is still better than feeling too sheepish to ask and walking away with a misunderstanding.

Thanks again to everyone for the responses!

You want to be understood, obviously. The only reason for the test is to decide whether to keep the comma or get rid of it. When you got rid of it the sentence no longer made sense so you can either:
1. Take the comma out and leave the sentence otherwise exactly as it was

The weather seemed to be playing games with Vincent, raining when he didn't have his umbrella and clearing up when he did.

or

2. restructure the sentence. I think restructuring it might be good. It strikes me as being a little unweildy and it's nice to tighten that kind of thing up when you find it.

Original: The weather seemed to be playing games with Vincent, raining when he didn't have his umbrella, and clearing up when he did.

Another Possibility: The weather played games with Vincent, raining when he didn't have his umbrella and blamelessly clear when he did.

It looks superfluous. I'd yank the first part altogether.

The weather seemed to be playing games with Vincent, raining when he didn't have his umbrella, and clearing up when he did.

He expected rain and had his umbrella when he didn't need it, and it rained when he did. If you're trying to preserve the playfulness of the weather, how about this?

The playful rain stayed away whenever Vincent remembered his umbrella.

or hid away

Originally Posted by mgencleyn

He expected rain and had his umbrella when he didn't need it, and it rained when he did. If you're trying to preserve the playfulness of the weather, how about this?

I had to laugh when I read your post, mgencleyn, because I think it cut closer to the heart of the matter than I was prepared for. The truth is, I was envisioning the weather being spiteful rather than playful, but after reading your post I can see that technically proper syntax is the least of my worries in this case. I simply didn't do a good job conveying the essence of my thoughts.

I suppose I could argue that the next few sentences would have cleared that up, but I'd be lying.

Thanks for the feedback!

Well, I'm glad that's cleared up now. I'd hate to think that damned rain might have fooled everyone here!

I like commas.

Originally Posted by RM Americano

I like commas.

Commas are fine, but I think semicolons are where its at. Unfortunately, semicolons scare me, or rather, the rules around them do, so I don't use them much, even though I'd like to, and its more often than you'd think, I'd wager.

Oops that was my last comma.