A Whole Bunch of Grammar/Style Questions

[BWFoster78]

Note: the following post is for people who like the more persnickety aspects of writing and care about tiny details.

I had some grammar/punctuation/style comments on one of my chapters that I’m not sure I agree with. Looking for input from grammar experts on the following:

Question 1:

Squirrels dashed across the path seeking to add to winter stores.

The advice is to add a comma after “path.” The reader seemed to think that pretty much any phrase placed at the end of a sentence that begins with –ing needs to be set off by a comma. I didn’t think this was the case. Thoughts?

Question 2:

If you’re using a device to grip an object, would you more commonly, in American English, spell it “vice” or “vise?” According to dictionary.com, either spelling works, but I’m not sure which is more common.

Question 3:

Modern style guides apparently say that you can omit a comma after an introductory phrase of less than five (I think) words. I go old school and include one after any introductory phrase. This method, however, has never looked right after “at least.” At least, I’m being consistent. Thoughts?

Question 4:

“Exactly. Nasty business that. I’d hate to have to kill an angry husband.”

The reader thinks a comma is needed after “business.” Thoughts?

Question 5:

I like to eliminate the word “that” whenever I can. Perhaps I went too far in the following sentences:

Hope stirred in him someone might have packed the contents of the bag.

Should I put “that” after “him?”

His blood heated as he realized he held proof the nobles were training mages.

Should I put “that” after “proof?”

Question 6:

Erick Flame Sword concluded candidates’ attributes are not distributed equally among the ten powers even given the difficulty in testing for some types.

Comma after “powers?”

Question 7:

The reader wants me to use italics rather than quotation marks to refer to words as words. Since I use italics for thoughts, I’d prefer not to comply with the request. Is there a problem with using quotes?

Question 8:

He had no idea, however, how to feel his affinity for the energy much less how to concentrate on the flow of magic.

The reader thinks I should add a comma after “energy.” I’m starting to see a pattern . What say you?

Question 9:

The only question was whether only Bermau broke the treaty or did the rot extend to all three kingdoms?

I’m not sure about the entire construction of this sentence. My reader suggests a comma after “treaty.” What say you?

Thanks in advance!

Brian

 

[Malik]

1. Comma.

2. Vise. "Vice" is wrong; it's just wrong so often that the dictionary has accepted that people are irretrievably stupid.

3. Consistency = style. If you're gonna do it, own it.

4. The reader is correct.

5. Yes but alternately you could use a semicolon, as it is two fragments joined; the answer to the second question is also yes. (See what I did there?) And if you want to put "that" after "him" in the first sentence, you could replace "as" with a semicolon in the second sentence if you feel that your phrasing is getting redundant.

6. Yes, and a "that" after "concluded."

7. Italics are the standard for foreign words. Italics indicate that the word isn't a typo. If the word sees repeated use throughout the work, the Chicago Manual of Style recommends that only the first occurrence be italicized. If the word isn't repeated often enough to become familiar, then italicize each occurrence. Of course, some people think Chicago Style sucks, so do what you want.

- If you use quotes, you are technically alluding to the idea that your language is, in fact, made up; quotes say, "This is what people call this." Italicizing fantasy words, to me, aids in the suspension of disbelief and changes the tone of the novel to a recounting of an actual tale. Using quotes makes me feel like the novel is a bedtime story that's being made up on the fly. Take it or leave it.

8. I'd use a semicolon or break those two sentences entirely and I'd probably reshape them, but that's just me. Stylistically, yes, you're falling into a trap with your comma usage.

9. I recommend two separate sentences: The question now was, did Bermau break the treaty alone? Or did the rot extend to all three kingdoms? Which brings up a whole other set of stylistic glitches about the use of the first comma, possible capitalization of "did" after the first comma, and question mark at the end of the first sentence, but that's neither here nor there. This is the kind of sentence that I'll play with for a week in my final editing. No joke.

 

[AnneL]

So here's the deal -- punctuation is designed for clarity and emphasis. If your punctuation (or lack thereof) is making things unclear/ambiguous or is causing something important to be ignored/something minor to be given too much weight, then you probably need to make a change. Punctuation is especially tricky in fiction because fiction has a different rhythm and seeks different effects than expository prose does, and what works for one doesn't always work for the other.

1. Yes, add comma in this case. Look at the word before the -ing verb. If it's a noun, you run the risk of someone reading the -ing verb as an action by the noun -- in this case, "the path seeking." "the path seeking" doesn't make much sense so reader will self-correct and refer it back to the squirrels, but that interrupts the flow of reading a bit. If the example was "He gave the left-over stew to the dog wanting it to be eaten," then it sounds like the dog is wanting the stew, which is quite possible (even likely!) so there's an ambiguity about who is wanting.
2. My American Heritage lists "vise" as first.
3. Read it aloud. Do you need a pause for breath when you read it? If yes, add comma. If not, don't. That's not a grammar rule, BTW, but it's really going to depend on how long the words are, how complicated the rest of the sentence is, what the preceding sentence is, etc.
4. This could go either way.
5A. Yes, add "that."
5B. I think you don't *need* to add "that," but it might help with sentence clarity. There are a lot of verbs in that sentence (realized, held, were training), and "that" breaks it down a little bit. Especially because "were training" is a bit ambiguous -- it could mean that the nobles were a class of people known as "training mages." Not a likely reading, and presumably the context of the story eliminates it, but it's a possible interpretation because of the frequent English usage of -ing verbs as adjectives.
6. Yes, comma. Also, bonus feedback! you have a tense inconsistency: (concluded . . . are).
7. Quotation marks for words referred to as words is standard, and I think less confusing if you're already italicizing thoughts.
8. Yes, comma.
9. Yes, comma.

Commas are tricky. People usually err one way or the other, it sounds like you omit them too often. (That is an ungrammatical comma splice, BTW, but acceptable because the two phrases are short. They are almost too long, though.) Try the read-aloud test if unsure.

 

[BWFoster78]

Look at the word before the -ing verb. If it's a noun, you run the risk of someone reading the -ing verb as an action by the noun -- in this case, "the path seeking."

This is an excellent explanation. Thanks!

Also, bonus feedback! you have a tense inconsistency: (concluded . . . are).

Hmmm. I don't know about this one. Isn't it okay if I do something like this:

Brian concluded that AnneL is a poster on the Mythic Scribes forum.

Past tense for "concluded" is okay because I came to that conclusion, and present tense is okay for "is" because you currently exist as a poster on this forum. That's what I was going for in the sentence in question.

Thanks for the comments!

Brian

 

[BWFoster78]

7. Italics are the standard for foreign words. Italics indicate that the word isn't a typo. If the word sees repeated use throughout the work, the Chicago Manual of Style recommends that only the first occurrence be italicized. If the word isn't repeated often enough to become familiar, then italicize each occurrence.

I think you may have misunderstood the situation. I'm not referring to a made up fantasy word. It's a situation like this:

Brian likes the word "that" less than Malik does.

The reader feels I should italicize "that" instead of put it in quotes.

I like your idea for 9.

Thanks for comments!

Brian

 

[AnneL]

Hmmm. I don't know about this one. Isn't it okay if I do something like this:

Brian concluded that AnneL is a poster on the Mythic Scribes forum.

Past tense for "concluded" is okay because I came to that conclusion, and present tense is okay for "is" because you currently exist as a poster on this forum. That's what I was going for in the sentence in question.

Brian

I think it depends upon whether or not the conclusion is an ongoing action or a one-shot thing. "Galileo concluded that the earth goes around the sun" but "Joe concluded the king was angry." I get what you're going for and I think your original sentence would be correct under my temporal model ("Researchers concluded that bald men are four times more likely to eat peanut butter than non-bald men") but something about it just really jarred me. Looking at my examples, I see that it could be the lack of the "that" after "concluded" led me to expect a phrase in the same narrative voice. "That" signals a conclusion by the person (not the narrator) is coming.

But now that I've read your Erik sentence about 8 times, I think you want it punchier anyway, not sounding like an abstract from a scientific article.

This is kind of rambly. Sorry.

 

[BWFoster78]

But now that I've read your Erik sentence about 8 times, I think you want it punchier anyway, not sounding like an abstract from a scientific article.

Actually, it is kind of a quote from a scientific article. The POV character is reading a bunch of information that he's trying to figure out. The statement is directly taken from one of the pages. I wanted it to sound a bit convoluted.

Thanks!

Brian

 

[AnneL]

Well there you go, then...

 

[Noma Galway]

1. Definitely add the comma.
2. Vise is the tight grip; vice is the opposite of virtue.
3. In this case, the sound is what should be considered, as Anne says. Stay consistent. I personally agree that the phrase "at least" should stay without the comma unless it really needs it.
4. I'm not sure. I wouldn't put it in there in my narrative.
5. After "him", I think you would need it. After "proof", no.
6. Definitely put a comma.
7. On this one, I am not positive. I would probably go with italics.
8. The reader is correct on this one.
9. I'd probably write "The only question was if Bermau was the only one who broke the treaty, and if not, did the rot extend to all three kingdoms?"

 

[Steerpike]

Question 1:

I'd leave the comma out.

Question 2:

"Vise" the most common spelling in American English. Outside of that, "vice" prevails: Vice vs. vise - Grammarist

Question 3:

Works for me with or without the comma. Consistency is more important here, in my view.

Question 4:

I'd prefer the comma but I think you can go without it.

Question 5:

First sentence doesn't read quite right without the "that." Second one is fine.

Question 6:

I feel it needs the comma. Disagree with the comment above, I don't think you need "that."

Question 7:

I don't have a problem with either approach. I don't think the reader is going to be confused if you use italics for both, but I think quotation marks work better.

Question 8:

Yes, I'd put the comma in.

Question 9:

Fine with or without the comma.