MISCELLANEOUS USES OF MARKS
ADJECTIVES BEFORE A NOUN
When two or more adjectives come before a noun, and are not connected
by a conjunction, the meaning to be conveyed determines the punctuation:
75. This is a large wild grape.
75-1. This is a large, wild grape.
The punctuation is correct in each of the above sentences; but the two
sentences do not mean the same.
Sentence No. 75 says that the grape is a large one in the class of
_wild grapes_, confining the comparison to wild grapes.
Sentence No. 75-1 says that the grape is large and is wild. It is large
in comparison with all kinds of grapes.
In No. 75 we give the language its natural meaning. In No. 75-1 we use
a comma to show that the natural meaning is not the meaning we wish to
convey; we disconnect “large” from “wild grape,” as, in Sentence 1-1,
we disconnected words standing in an _apparent_ relation which was not
the _real_ relation.
Other examples at the end of this chapter will further illustrate the
punctuation.
DOUBLE OBJECT
We have already seen that nouns standing together require some mark
between them if their apparent relation is not their real relation.
This principle was illustrated especially in Sentence 8-1.
The so-called double object furnishes an apparent exception to the
principle. The relation, however, between such words is as regular as
the relation between an adjective and a noun when the former precedes
the latter. Thus the following sentence requires no mark between the
nouns constituting a so-called double object:
76. They elected John Smith president.
A similar relation is seen when the first noun in a sentence like the
above is followed by an adjective. The relation is regular, and calls
for no mark:
76-1. They called John Smith wise.
In some cases the relation may be more idiomatic than regular, the
mark being omitted because there is no real need for its use. The next
sentence exhibits such relationship:
77. I myself will undertake the work.
A “LONG” SUBJECT
When a subject is composed of two or more words, and these words do
not readily group themselves, a comma may be helpful to group them
as a subject. This failure of words to fall readily into a group is
generally due to one of three causes: the subject may be somewhat long
and contain marks of punctuation, or it may end with a word that seems
itself to sustain grammatical and sense relation with the word or words
following it, or it may end with a verb. In either of such cases the
comma serves to show the end of the subject; and its use is therefore
helpful punctuation:
78. Whatever is, is right.
79. He that sees a building as a common spectator, contents himself
with speaking of it in the most general terms.
The use of the comma after “spectator” simply warns the reader that
“the spectator contents himself” is not the meaning of the language
at this point. The comma disconnects “spectator” and “contents,” just
as the comma disconnects certain words in Sentence 1-1. Thus the
punctuation of this sentence depends upon the fundamental principle of
_grouping_ and _disjunction_.
This principle also explains the value of a comma at the end of several
subject-nouns not connected by a conjunction:
80. Ease, indulgence, luxury, sloth, are the sources of misery.
With the conjunction “and” before “sloth,” the comma after “sloth”
would not be needed, as “and” and the comma before it would give notice
of the ending of the group.
The value of a comma in No. 79 is unmistakable; but is such punctuation
helpful when the subject clearly ends itself, either because of its
manifest completeness or because there is no apparent relation between
the last word of the subject and the predicate verb? Probably a
definite and satisfactory answer to this question cannot be given, for
the mental capacity and alertness of the reader are involved.
DOUBTFUL MODIFIERS
Perhaps more obscurity in language, often resulting in hurtful
misunderstandings and expensive litigation, grows out of doubtful
modifiers than out of any other source of bad construction. A knowledge
of punctuation here serves a very useful purpose, not always by putting
the proper mark in the proper place, but generally by showing the
writer the necessity of recasting his sentence, thus removing the
cause of any possible wrong interpretation. Punctuation points out the
danger; the writer removes it.
What did Smith write according to the wording and punctuation of the
following sentence?
81. Smith wrote part of the preface and Chapter I.
It says clearly that Smith wrote _part_ of the preface and _part_ of
Chapter I.
And what does the next sentence say he wrote?
81-1. Smith wrote part of the preface, and Chapter I.
It says that Smith wrote _part_ of the preface, and _all_ of Chapter I.
It is not wise to make the meaning of language, especially in important
matters, depend upon a mode of punctuation little understood. The
wise way is to recast the language. Legal phraseology grew out of the
difficulty of so writing as to make one’s meaning unmistakable; but it
went to the extreme in verbiage, and has become distasteful even to
lawyers. Such verbiage is not necessary to express one’s meaning.
Our next sentence is particularly informing to us in our efforts to
establish two or three fundamental principles governing the use of all
marks:
82. Life may be held so pure, so receptive to all high influence,
so noble in its aspirations, as to furnish the right conditions for
these finer promptings; or it may so degenerate into the material,
the selfish, the self-centered, as to become deaf and blind and
unresponsive to them.
The comma after “aspirations” is used to disconnect the two groups
of words between which it stands, thus breaking up an apparent group
(so noble in its aspirations as to furnish the right conditions for
these finer promptings), and forming out of it two groups, each of
which begins with “so,” each group having for its complement the group
beginning with “as.”
We perhaps may not say that the comma after “aspirations” at once gives
notice of the relation of each of the preceding groups to what follows;
but, when the comma cuts “as” off from the preceding “so,” it shows
that “as” introduces a group completing each of the preceding groups
introduced by “so.” This disconnection between the last two groups
compels the reader to make the new grouping.
In the second of the larger groups of this sentence occurs a somewhat
similar grouping made by “so—as.” Here the comma is used, just as
it is used in Sentence 80, to mark the end of the first part of the
group. Its use in both clauses may be said to follow the punctuation
diagrammatically exhibited in Sentence 3-2. In No. 82 the reader
suspends the thought partially expressed by “so pure” until he
reaches the complementary group of words beginning with “as.” This
process of suspending the thought occurs in this clause after each
group introduced by “so.” The process, instead of being difficult, is
well-nigh intuitive, for “so” naturally raises the expectation of
the correlative “as,” which introduces the complement of each group
introduced by “so.”
Let us also note the last grouping in this sentence, where “to them” is
tied to each of the three preceding adjectives by the grouping _ands_,
thus requiring no mark after the last adjective.
INTERMEDIATE RESTRICTIVE GROUPS
Probably at no other point in punctuation do writers obscure the
meaning of language so much as in dealing with _restrictive_ and
_explanatory_ groups of words. We dealt with the subject in Chapter
III, but passed over one feature of it,—namely, the intermediate
restrictive group, or a restrictive group coming between two other
groups closely tied together in sense, and seemingly requiring the
suspension of the intermediate group by commas.
Before dealing with these groups, let us consider an interesting
sentence, from very high authority, which tends to confirm our
statement concerning the importance of properly punctuating restrictive
and explanatory modifiers. The sentence is from a passage in Dean
Alford’s notable book, “A Plea for the Queen’s English,” in which
passage the Dean severely scolds compositors for their bad punctuation,
particularly for the insertion of commas “without the slightest
compunction.”
83. I have some satisfaction in reflecting, that, in the course
of editing the Greek text of the New Testament, I believe I have
destroyed more than a thousand commas, which prevented the text being
properly understood.
Mr. De Vinne quotes the passage in which this sentence appears; and
he does so in apparent approval of Dean Alford’s condemnation of the
misuse of commas. Mr. De Vinne makes a single comment upon the passage,
in which he says “the last comma in this extract is superfluous.” The
reference is to the comma before “which.”
The comma before “which” is not simply “superfluous”: it is wrong. It
is _wrong_ because it changes the meaning of the language by making
the writer say, apparently, that he destroyed _all_ the commas in the
text, while he, unquestionably, intended to say he destroyed more than
a thousand _offending_ commas, that is, commas _that_ (which) _obscured
the text_.
The superfluous comma in the above sentence is, in our opinion,
the one after “reflecting.” This comma is used in accordance with
the convention of Dean Alford’s day, and follows a rule of “close”
punctuation.
But the punctuation is very bad at another point; and, we venture to
say, in spite of the great distinction of its author as an English
scholar, the language at this point is not the “Queen’s English.”
Omitting the intermediate and final groups of words, and the
superfluous comma, the sentence will read as follows:
83-1. I have some satisfaction in reflecting that I believe I have
destroyed more than a thousand commas.
“Satisfaction in reflecting _that I believe_,” is, to say the least,
a curious satisfaction. This is not the meaning the writer wished to
convey.
The obvious error cannot be mended by setting “I believe” off with
commas, for this would simply throw doubt upon the statement which
follows (I have destroyed), which is a positive statement, needing no
qualification. The only doubtful assertion in the sentence is as to
the _number_ of commas destroyed. The evident meaning of the language
is, that the number of commas destroyed is _probably_ (I believe) more
than a thousand. To be sure, “probably” and “I believe” are not exactly
equivalent terms; but the word _probably_ here serves to show how “I
believe” is used. We set it off by commas because of its slightly
parenthetical character.
The entire sentence should be written thus:
83-2. I have some satisfaction in reflecting that, in the course of
editing the Greek text of the New Testament, I have destroyed, I
believe, more than a thousand commas which prevented the text being
properly understood.
The absence of a comma before the _adjective_ group of words
beginning with “which,” tells the reader that such adjective group is
_restrictive_, thus confining the destruction to _harmful_ commas.
Let us turn aside again to ask why, in the sentence above and
beginning with “The evident,” “probably” takes no commas, while a
similar expression (I believe) in No. 83-2 requires them. “Probably”
here requires no commas because it coalesces with “more”; while “I
believe” does not do so, but makes a decided break in the smoothness
of the sentence. The latter expression is like an aside, thus becoming
slightly parenthetical. The use of commas with “probably” would make
“probably” more emphatic, because the pauses thus indicated would call
special attention to it. Such use is good punctuation.
We will now turn to a restrictive group of words that comes between
two other groups closely connected in meaning.
Mr. Wilson treats this subject at length, but, we think, in an
unsatisfactory way. We find in the wording of one of his rules an
illustration of this mode of punctuation which seems more informing
than his discussion of the subject. As we do not desire to consider the
subject-matter of Mr. Wilson’s rule, we make up a sentence modeled upon
its language:
84. When books, that have been thoroughly examined and unqualifiedly
approved by a board of college professors, are recommended by a
teacher, her pupils should not refuse to read them.
The adjective group of words following “books” is restrictive. It is
perhaps made more clearly so by the use of a pronoun (that) formerly
used, in the place of _who_ or _which_, to introduce a _restrictive_
adjective in the form of a pronominal group of words.
If “which” be substituted for “that” in this sentence, the restrictive
character of the group may not be so readily apparent; but this would
not change the punctuation recommended by Mr. Wilson. Let us deal with
the sentence in this form:
84-1. When books, which have been thoroughly examined and
unqualifiedly approved by a board of college professors, are
recommended by a teacher, her pupils should not refuse to read them.
If it is deemed helpful punctuation to set off by commas the group
of words between “books” and “are,” in order to show clearly the
dependence of “books” upon “are recommended,” then commas are
required. If, on the other hand, we wish to show by the punctuation
that the group of words following “books” is restrictive, we must
omit the comma after “books.” Thus, apparently, we must here make a
choice between two modes of punctuation. As failure to distinguish by
punctuation the character of a qualifier,—that is, whether restrictive
or explanatory,—not infrequently totally obscures the sense, we do not
quite like a rule that calls for a comma before a restrictive group of
words.
The sentence may be written without a comma after “books,” but with one
after “professors.” The use of the latter would follow the punctuation
of No. 79. This mode of punctuation is, after all, only a choice
between two modes of punctuation. The better way is to recast all such
sentences. No. 84 may be recast in several ways; but it is difficult,
without introducing a new word, clearly to express the fact that _one
kind_ of books is meant, as shown in the restrictive adjective in both
Nos. 84 and 84-1.
We suggest the following form for the recast sentence:
84-2. When _certain_ books have been thoroughly examined and
unqualifiedly approved by a board of college professors, and have
been recommended by a teacher, her pupils should not refuse to read
them.
Every restrictive word or group of words confines the meaning of the
word or words so modified to a _certain_ thing or _certain_ things.
The man _who was here yesterday_ means a _certain_ man, and means so
because of the restrictive group of words following “man”; but “the
man, _who was here yesterday_,” is not so designated by the same group
of words set off by commas. These points were considered in another
place in this book.
NOT—BUT
The punctuation of intermediate groups of words gives rise to a
peculiar phraseology, which needs explanation. We have seen that the
intermediate group is set off by commas to show that the sense is
suspended at the point where the first comma is placed, to be continued
by connection with what follows the complementary comma. We illustrated
this process diagrammatically in Sentence 4-3 by actually suspending on
the printed page the intermediate group.
We do not hesitate to use commas in the following sentence:
85. His success was attained, not by ability and enterprise, but by
friendly assistance.
If we suspend or omit the intermediate group in the above we obtain a
result which is not a good sentence:
85-1. His success was attained but by friendly assistance.
We can say of such language as that of No. 85 only that it is
_idiomatic_, thus justifying it as we justify the grammatical solecism
“_than whom_.”
Mr. Wilson makes an exception to this mode of punctuation that is very
perplexing; and it is probably because of this that few, if any, other
writers refer to or deal with it.
We shall not attempt to discuss Mr. Wilson’s rule, but let us consider
one of his examples:
86. It _is not_ from wild beasts, but from untamed passions, that the
greatest evils arise to human society.
We think the omission of a comma after “is,” thus suspending the
negative group beginning with “not,” is justified, if at all, by the
fact that such a sentence is usually read without a pause after the
verb; in other words, the language thus readily groups itself, and
shows the meaning and the force of the negative intermediate group.
Not a few good writers use a comma before “not” in sentences like No.
86.
If one or more words intervene between the verb and the negative
particle, the parts of the sentence do not coalesce, and the comma is
required.
87. He came not to teach, but to be taught.
87-1. He came here, not to teach, but to be taught.
If we change the form of No. 87, we may perhaps see somewhat more
clearly why this grouping is more natural than would be a grouping made
by a comma after the verb (came):
87-2. He did not come to teach, but to be taught.
No. 87-2 seems to show that the grouping made by the comma in No. 87 is
a natural grouping.
In spite of Mr. Wilson’s rule, and of our reasoning to explain it,
we believe that each mode of punctuating the following sentence is
correct, each depending upon where the emphasis is to be laid:
88. The book’s primary aim is, not to convince the skeptic, but to
solve the difficulties of the best-thinking men.
88-1. The book’s primary aim is not to convince the skeptic, but to
solve the difficulties of the best-thinking men.
In No. 88 the emphasis is placed upon “to solve the difficulties,”
the preceding group being thrown in for contrast, thus heightening the
effect of the statement made in the next group of words.
In No. 88-1 the emphasis falls upon “not to convince the skeptic,”
just as it would if written, “It is not the book’s aim to convince the
skeptic.”
Let us note carefully that the mode of punctuation in each of the two
preceding sentences would grow out of the context, which would clearly
tell where the emphasis was to be laid.
We have dwelt upon this punctuation in order to emphasize a purpose of
punctuation too often overlooked.
O and OH
The Century Dictionary says there is no difference between _O_ and _oh_
except that of their present spelling. The New Standard and Webster’s
New International do not go so far, but they point out the difference
observed by most good writers.
_O_ is generally used only in direct address; and, as the name of the
person or thing addressed immediately follows it, it takes no mark of
punctuation after it. An exclamation-point may follow the group of
words introduced by _O_. Its vocative character is not lost when the
person or thing addressed is not named, for it may be understood.
_O_ is used more in poetry than in prose.
_O_ is used in an ejaculatory expression when followed by _for_ or
_that_. It does not here seem to lose its vocative character, although
the name of the thing or person addressed may not readily be supplied.
_O_ is sometimes used colloquially in expressions like “O my!” “O
dear!” etc.
_Oh_ is purely ejaculatory, and takes a comma or an exclamation-point
immediately after it; but the latter mark may follow the group of words
beginning with _oh_, with a comma before _oh_.
_O_ is always written with a capital, but _oh_ takes a capital only
when beginning a sentence. Some writers prefer always to write _oh_
with a capital.
EXAMPLES
1. Yesterday was my last bad day, but I remember the preceding bad days.
2. He played a prominent part in Congress during the last, bad days of
the period of Reconstruction.
3. Cultivation is a fitting object to be attained by education,
particularly in a country, like ours, of busy, practical people.
4. For this stream of apt illustrations Macaulay was indebted to his
extraordinary memory, and his rapid eye for contrasts and analogies.
5. The so-called revolutions of Holland, England, and America, are all
links of one chain.
6. A man who is sensitive, quick in his responses, loyal to his
convictions, and strong in his feelings, is capable of a kind of public
service that the phlegmatic, unresponsive, insensitive sort of man
cannot render.
7. Much of this work was written, and some of it was printed, years ago.
8. We call a thing a blessing because it happens to fit our desires,
or, at least, our ideas of what a blessing ought to be.
9. Many suns may set, and many dark nights may cover the earth with
clouds, before the truth is ripened into fruitage.
10. These, and a hundred others which will occur to everyone, are
marked instances of adaptation to environment.
11. His first problem is the growth of great fortunes, and the
collocation of wealth and poverty in large cities.
12. They laud the commission’s report, and exult in its conclusions as
the final vindication of their own motives and methods.
13. We have learned, or ought to have learned by this time, that the
use of a mark of punctuation often depends wholly upon the sense of the
language, and not upon grammatical construction.
14. Untrammeled physical motions may here perfectly express the
feelings that elsewhere have to stay unexpressed, or be, at best,
imperfectly expressed by a trammeled tongue.
15. A tiny owl with a queer little voice called continually, not only
after nightfall, but in the bright afternoon.
16. His speech was noteworthy, not for its eloquence, but because of
the effect it produced upon the public.
17. The secret of life is, not to do what one likes, but to try to like
that which one has to do; and one does come to like it in time.
18. Mortality; the insane, feeble-minded, deaf and dumb, and blind;
crime, pauperism, and benevolence; education; churches; foreign-born
population; and manufacturers, are the subjects of his report.
19. Elijah is not the only one who has heard in the wilderness a still,
small voice.
20. A holy war—oh, the irony of the appellation!—means the
legitimatizing of slaughter, rapine, and plunder.
CHAPTER X
CONVENTIONAL USES OF MARKS
Many uses of marks seem to be based solely upon convention, or
arbitrary custom. Back of this convention there may be, in many cases,
reason for the punctuation; but, more frequently, there seems to be no
reason.
It is not always worth while carefully to attempt to distinguish
between reason and convention; but it is quite important to know what
is the best, or, at least, what is good, conventional usage, and to
follow it in one’s writing. We think it reasonable to call _good_ only
such conventional punctuation as is found in the work of writers,
and of expert editors of copy, who use marks with a fair degree of
consistency, and do not often violate the fundamental principles of
punctuation already discussed herein. The punctuation found in most
weekly and monthly periodicals is very poor, and is often inferior
to that of daily newspapers. In a very few magazines (it would be
difficult to name a half dozen, either American or European), and
in a considerable number of daily newspapers, the use of marks is
discriminating and helpful; in most of our periodical literature the
use of marks is so distractive as to make the presence of any mark
other than the end-marks of doubtful value, at least to readers not
familiar with the meanings of most of the marks of punctuation.
THE PERIOD
1. A period or any other mark, except an interrogation-point, is not
often used after a display line in the title-page of a book. This
practice is well-nigh universal in book-work, and almost equally so in
magazines.
2. A period is generally placed after the letter or the number
indicating a division in enumerations. Periods are so used after the
figures 1 and 2 numbering this and the preceding paragraph.
If the divisions have subdivisions, and the subdivisions are further
subdivided, it is helpful to the reader if a good conventional style
is followed. In case of four divisions and subdivisions, a good
conventional style is as follows:
The capital letters (A, B, C, etc.) mark the main divisions of the
subject.
The Roman capital numerals (I, II, III, IV, etc.) mark the subdivision
of A, B, C, etc.
The Arabic figures (1, 2, 3, 4, etc.) mark the subdivision of I, II,
III, etc.
The small or lower-case letters (a, b, c, etc.) mark the subdivision of
1, 2, 3, etc. The italic letters are generally used.
If there is only a single enumeration, the Arabic figures (1, 2, 3,
etc.) are used.
If there are one enumeration and one subdivision, the Arabic figures
and the lower-case letters are used.
If one or more of the first divisions are subdivided, and one or more
of such subdivisions are subdivided, the Roman numerals, the Arabic
figures, and the lower-case letters are used.
The enumerating letters (A, B, etc.) of the first, or main, divisions
are indented the space of the usual paragraph; the subdivisions of the
first divisions are so far indented that their enumerating letters or
figures are in alignment with the first letter of the first word under
the division above. This mode of indention is continued with the next
subdivisions, thus putting the enumerating letters or figures of the
respective divisions or subdivisions in perpendicular alignment. This
mode of enumeration and indention can be illustrated diagrammatically:
89.
A. The capital letters (A, B, C, etc.) will mark the main divisions
of the subject.
I. The Roman numerals (I, II, III, etc.) will mark the subdivisions
of A, B, C, etc.
1. The Arabic figures (1, 2, 3, etc.) will mark the subdivisions of
I, II, III, etc.
_a._ The italic lower-case letters (_a_, _b_, _c_, etc.) will mark
the subdivisions of 1, 2, 3, etc.
B. Here follows the second main division, its enumerating letter (B)
being in perpendicular alignment with “A,” above.
This mode of indention and alignment is not observed unless the
divisions and subdivisions are somewhat close together; for, otherwise,
the alignment of the enumerating letters or figures would not be
apparent to the eye. It is particularly useful in the preparation of a
syllabus.
An extra indention of the second and following lines of each
subdivision helps to make clear the alignment of the enumerating
letters and figures. This is particularly desirable in type-written
manuscript. In book-work the lines are often too short to permit so
great indention, and therefore the letters and figures are indented the
usual paragraph space.
A half-parenthesis is sometimes used with _a_, _b_, _c_, etc., as
the half-bracket is used in dramatic composition. This is the German
style. We do not know what is gained by it, unless it is used for an
additional subdivision.
Some punctuators enclose in parentheses figures and lower-case letters
when used before paragraph-enumerations. Generally, such usage is
condemned by the meanings of the marks, and serves no useful purpose.
Marks of parenthesis are properly used to enclose figures and letters
enumerating particulars within the limits of a sentence or a paragraph.
If one or more of the particulars are composed of two or more
sentences, each of the particulars should be put in paragraph form, in
order clearly to group the parts of each particular.
NOTE.—It is hardly proper to designate as a paragraph
that which is a part of a sentence; and we therefore use the term
“paragraph form” to designate a group of words that is a part of a
sentence, and is yet put in the form of a paragraph, and is numbered
as a particular.
As a rule, each enumerating group in paragraph form is composed of one
or more sentences; and thus each enumerating figure or letter becomes
a part of a paragraph group, and therefore loses its parenthetical
nature. If each paragraph group is composed of a single group of
words constituting only a phrase or a sentence, it may be followed
conventionally by a semicolon, and thus give apparent justification for
the use of parentheses enclosing the enumerating figures or letters.
The following example will illustrate the point:
90. There are three objections to buying very cheap editions of
standard uncopyrighted books:
(1) The text is almost always inaccurate;
(2) The punctuation is so poor that, often, the meaning of the
language is entirely changed;
(3) The printing is generally so poor as to injure the eyes of the
reader.
To divide paragraph groups by semicolons is so obviously inconsistent
that little justification can be found for this form of writing. If it
is desirable, for the sake of the ease of reading thereby gained, to
paragraph the particulars, as in the above sentence, the parentheses
and semicolons should not be used:
90-1. There are three objections to buying very cheap editions of
standard uncopyrighted books:
1. The text is almost always inaccurate.
2. The punctuation is so poor that, often, the meaning of the
language is entirely changed.
3. The printing is generally so poor as to injure the eyes of the
reader.
The De Vinne Press does not use a period after the letters and figures
noting paragraph enumerations. This is not very common usage; but it
is followed in the Bible and in practically all hymn-books, no period
following the verse-numbers. As it makes a better-looking page, the
style should be adopted. It is not adopted herein, except on pages xi
and xii, for we prefer not to follow a limited conventional usage.
3. A period and a dash are generally used after a side-head. The dash
sets the group of words off from what follows, and thus shows at a
glance that the words are a heading, and not a part of the sentence
following. This style is very common, and is helpful to the reader.
Side-heads are generally put in italics, but often in small capitals or
bold-face type.
The same marks are put after the word “Note” (the word is generally
printed with a capital and small capitals) when used to introduce
remarks (a note) in the text.
4. The period and dash are used before the name of the author or the
title of the work following a quotation when the name of the author or
the work begins on the last line. If such name is dropped below the
last line of type, the dash alone is used before the name.
5. The period is used to indicate abbreviations. (See Chapter XIII.)
6. The period is used by some printing-offices, notably The Riverside
Press, between the figures expressing the time of day:
91. The train arrives at 6.20 P. M.
As this makes the “20” look like a decimal, the style is not to be
commended.
7. The period is used to indicate decimals.
NOTE.—Quite contrary to the statement made in not a few
school text-books, a cipher standing alone frequently precedes the
decimal point, and is useful when it will prevent an error that is
especially to be guarded against,—for example, in a physician’s
prescription. It is easy to read “.1 gm.” as _one_ gram; but “0.1
gm.” is quite unmistakable, even with a faint mark for the decimal
sign (period), because the spacing between the figures serves to show
that a period belongs there.
THE COLON
The conventional uses of the colon are not numerous. The following are
the principal ones:
1. Between figures expressing the time of day in hours and minutes;
but, as stated above, the period is used by some good printing-houses:
92. The train arrives at 6:20 P. M.
2. Between the name of a publisher and the place of publication,
especially in title-pages and in book titles:
93. New York: The Macmillan Company.
3. After the salutatory phrase at the beginning of a letter, if not on
the first line of the letter:
94. Dear Sir:
Your letter of the 21st ultimo is at hand.
When the salutatory phrase is put on the first line of the text of the
letter, a comma and a dash is the usual punctuation:
94-1. Dear Mr. Smith,—Your letter of the 25th ultimo is at hand.
4. After the salutatory phrase used by a speaker in addressing the
chairman or the audience.
5. Many good punctuators use a dash with a colon when the colon is
at the end of a paragraph. As the salutatory phrase in No. 94 is a
paragraph, a dash would follow the colon. This is the style of The
Riverside Press. We followed it in the first edition of this work. The
combination is not pleasing to the eye, and therefore we do not now use
the two marks together.
6. It cannot be denied that the use of the colon after different forms
of the verb “to be,” and preceding details, is good _conventional_
punctuation. We think it exceedingly bad punctuation; for it separates
words (the verb and its predicate) that are in the closest grammatical
relation, and, generally, the mark is without apparent purpose.
Our illustrative sentence is from the work of Mr. Teall, who explains
that the colon is used because of the modifiers following the name of
the persons:
95. Among those present were: John Brown, who made a speech; Adam
Smith, with his wife and daughter; Charles Jones, etc.
We think no mark is needed after “were.” As indicated elsewhere, if the
particulars are put into paragraph form, thus leaving “were” at the end
of an incomplete line, a dash may be used, simply to act as a sort of
leader for the eye, or as a partial filler of the blank space in the
line:
95-1. Among those present were—John Brown, who made a speech....
Some good punctuators would use no mark after “were” in No. 95-1.
In No. 95 we give Mr. Teall’s punctuation, which shows a comma before
“etc.” This makes “etc.” stand for a modifier of “Jones”; and this,
in turn, puts three words, with their modifiers, in a series without
a conjunction before the last one. Such grouping is not in the usual
form of grouping, except in language where, as we believe, the proper
relations are overlooked, as they seem to be here.
This apparently doubtful meaning of the comma,— that is, whether it
indicates that “etc.” stands for a modifier, like the preceding ones,
or for additional persons,—may be avoided by using “and” after the
second semicolon, thus making “etc.” stand for a modifier of Jones, or
by the use of a semicolon after “Jones,” thus making “etc.” stand for
an additional group or groups.
In such sentences as No. 95, Mr. Wilson and other writers on
punctuation suggest the use of a comma before the beginning of the
semicolon-divided group. This punctuation might be based upon the use
of a comma at the end of a long subject. The use of the colon is based,
of course, on the ground that some introductory word like _namely_ is
understood.
THE SEMICOLON
We believe there are only two purely conventional uses of the semicolon:
1. As stated on a preceding page, a book title with a subtitle
introduced by “or,” takes a semicolon before “or” and a comma after it:
96. Why We Punctuate; or, Reason versus Rule in the Use of Marks.
2. Before an example or the specifications of particulars. We will
give Mr. Wilson’s rule for their use. He says:
97. A semicolon is put before _as_, _viz._, _to wit_, _namely_, _i.
e._, or _that is_, when they precede an example or a specification of
particulars....
NOTE.—The punctuation in the above sentence has a striking
peculiarity, which may readily deceive even a very careful reader.
The use of “or” apparently makes _one_ of the particulars enumerated
the antecedent of “they,” thus requiring the singular pronoun “it,”
instead of “they,” in the clause that follows. As Mr. Wilson
would neither make nor overlook such a simple error in grammatical
construction, we must look more closely for a meaning of the language
that will justify the use of “they.” Such meaning is found in the
relation between “_i. e._” and “_that is_.” As “_i. e._” (_id est_)
is the Latin abbreviation for “_that is_,” the _or_ relation exists
between only these particulars in the list. The comma before “or”
follows the punctuation exemplified in Sentence 17. This meaning of
the language ends the series with “_i. e._”; and the relation between
the items of the series is the _and_ relation, which requires the
plural pronoun “they.”
The use of the conjunction “and” after “namely” would correct
the fault; but the meaning of the sentence might not be easily
apprehended by all readers.
These relations can best be revealed by recasting the language. It
may be done thus:
97-1. A semicolon is put before _as_, _viz._, _to wit_, _namely_, and
_i. e._, or its English unabbreviated equivalent, _that is_, when
they....
If we attempt to remedy the fault by putting “_that is_” in
parentheses after “_i. e._,” we take “_that is_” out of the list of
words enumerated, making it simply an explanation of “_i. e._”
A confusion in grouping, and consequently in meaning, due to the
absence of the proper conjunction or the proper mark of punctuation
at the end of a series, is very common.
This use of the semicolon and a comma is without reason, so far as
we can determine; but it is very firmly fixed conventionally. The
objection to it is, that it makes the semicolon a mark of apposition,
along with the colon, the comma, and the comma and dash; and its use
for such purpose detracts from its more common use of grouping when
the _and_ or _or_ relation exists, whether expressed or understood, as
exemplified in Sentences 7 and 20-1.
Mr. De Vinne uses a comma before such an introductory particle, and a
colon after it; but he makes no reference to the established usage, nor
does he give any reason for such punctuation. The reason is simple:
the particle is slightly parenthetical, thus requiring to be set off
by commas; but the relation between what precedes and what follows is
clearly the _colon_ relation. When particulars are formally enumerated,
this relation requires a colon on one side of the particle; and the
colon will supersede one of the commas. On which side of the particle
does the colon belong?
Although Mr. De Vinne, in his own work, puts the colon _after_ the
particle, the Century Dictionary, which is issued from the De Vinne
Press, puts it _before_ the particle when introducing illustrative
examples. The position of the colon in either place is easily
explained: if after the particle, the particle is more closely
connected with the general term than with the particulars, which
follow the colon; if before the particle, the particle is more closely
connected with the particulars.
These relations will appear more clearly in examples:
98. The student failed in three studies, namely: spelling, grammar,
and history.
98-1. The student failed in three studies: namely, spelling, grammar,
and history.
If we substitute “by name” for “namely,” the sense relation between
“namely” and “studies,” in one sentence, and between “namely” and
the items following in the other sentence, is unmistakable. We can
therefore put any such particle where it seems best to reveal the
meaning.
We think “by name” is closely associated with “studies,” just as the
word “named” or “called” would be, if used in the place of “by name.”
This relation therefore requires the colon after the particle.
THE INTERROGATION-POINT
The mark of interrogation has three uses:
1. It is used after a word or group of words asking a question, whether
or not such word or words indicate by their form that a question is
asked. This usage has already been illustrated. (Page 2.)
2. Enclosed in the proper marks (parentheses, if in the writer’s own
language; brackets, if in quoted language), it is placed at a point in
a sentence to indicate that the writer questions the accuracy of what
immediately precedes it.
This use of the mark of interrogation is not in good taste unless it is
for a serious, and not a frivolous, purpose. A foot-note is, in most
cases, a better means of expression:
99. He said he was born in 1840(?).
100. He was asked for an exact statement of his age. He replied: “I
was born in 1840[?].”
3. It is used by an editor in the margin of a manuscript, or by a
proof-reader in the margin of a proof, to question the accuracy of
a statement or the correctness of the form of language at the point
indicated by the editor or proof-reader. When thus used it is not
necessarily enclosed in other marks.
THE EXCLAMATION-POINT
This point is used in two ways:
1. It is used after a word or group of words to express command,
surprise, or emotion.
2. Enclosed in brackets, it is used in a quotation to express surprise,
irony, or contempt.
101. Wake up! Something is going wrong!
102. Oh, how hard my lot[!]
The practice of using two or three exclamation-points together is not
now followed.
ELLIPSIS
When one, for the sake of brevity or otherwise, omits a word, a group
of words, or one or more sentences from a quotation, such omission,
or _ellipsis_, is indicated by either periods or stars. Periods are
generally preferred on the ground that they look better on the printed
page than stars. Unfortunately, the number of periods used for an
ellipsis is not definitely fixed by convention. Some writers and
printers use three, and others use four; we prefer three.
If words are omitted from the end of a sentence, the end-mark of
the sentence, if an exclamation-point or an interrogation-point,
is retained, and follows the three periods. If the end-mark of the
sentence is a period, and one or more sentences following are omitted,
there will be four periods at this point. There will be the same number
if words are omitted from the beginning of a sentence following a
sentence ending with a period.
If stars are used, the closing period is retained.
If one or more paragraphs, or if, in poetry, one or more lines, are
omitted, a full line of periods or stars is used.
A dash or stars are used in the place of letters omitted from a word,
and the dash in place of figures omitted from a number of figures.
Stars were formerly much used for omitted letters.
Examples will illustrate the punctuation under consideration. Our
first example is taken from the current issue of a well-known weekly
periodical:
103. Who commissioned them, a minority, a less than minority ...?...
Some of them are misguided, some of them are blind, most of them are
ignorant. I would rather pray for them.... They do not tell me what
they are attempting.
How shall we interpret the marks indicating the three ellipses in the
above sentence?
The first three periods stand for words omitted from the end of an
interrogative sentence, whose end-mark follows such periods.
The second group of three periods indicates an ellipsis of one or more
entire sentences. If they indicated an ellipsis of only a part of the
next sentence, “Some” would not begin with a capital.
The next group of four periods is composed of three periods for the
ellipsis and one period for the end-mark of the sentence.
It should be noted that ellipses from quotations are of only such
matter as can be omitted without affecting the sense of the language
quoted.
Marks of quotation will include the marks of ellipsis that begin or end
the quoted matter.
The use of stars in the first part of No. 103 will convey no more
definite information than the periods give the reader; but their use in
the second part of the sentence, accompanied by a period, will at once
show that they stand for the ellipsis of one or more sentences:
103-1. I would rather pray for them. * * * They do not tell me what
they are attempting.
CHAPTER XI
QUOTATION-MARKS
Quotation-marks are either single or double. The former consist of one
inverted comma and one apostrophe; the latter, of two inverted commas
and two apostrophes.
The double marks are very generally used in this country for a single
quotation; but some writers and some printing-offices follow the
English style of using the single marks.
Quotation-marks are used by a writer to identify as the exact language
of another writer a word or group of words which the first writer uses
within his own language.
They are sometimes used by a writer to enclose a quotation from his own
printed or spoken language. The fact that such quoted matter is his own
language is practically always shown by the text.
If the quoted language contains a quotation, such quotation is
identified by the quotation-marks (single or double) not used for the
main quotation.
If the subordinate quotation begins the main quotation, three marks
(one double and one single) are used at the beginning; if the
subordinate ends the main, three marks are also used at the close.
Illustrations of the three uses above defined are found in the
following examples:
104. In appreciation of Mrs. George Ripley, Mr. Frothingham says,
“Theodore Parker made the following entry in his journal: ‘Mrs.
Ripley gave me a tacit rebuke for not shrieking at wrongs, and spoke
of the danger of losing our humanity in abstractions.’”
If a quotation consists of two or more paragraphs appearing
_consecutively_ in the work quoted from, quotation-marks are used only
at the beginning of each paragraph and at the end of the last one. If
two or more paragraphs are printed consecutively in the quotation, but
do not appear consecutively in the work quoted from, each paragraph is
identified as a whole by marks at its beginning and end.
If only a part of a sentence or of a paragraph is quoted, and it is
desirable to show this fact, the omitted part or parts are indicated by
periods or stars. If such marks of omission come at the beginning or at
the end of the quoted matter, the marks of quotation are so placed as
to include them.
If the quoted matter is a letter or document with place-and date-lines
preceding it, and with a complimentary closing-line and one or more
signatures following it, each of such lines and names is treated as a
paragraph, and takes its proper marks before or after it, or both.
It is much better practice in printing to put such matter in smaller
type than the type of the main text; or, if in type-written manuscript,
to identify it by less space between its lines than is used between
the lines preceding and following it, or by indenting the lines of the
quotation more than the regular paragraph indention. Quotations thus
identified need no quotation-marks.
It was formerly the practice to put quotation marks at the beginning
of every line of a quotation however long; and occasionally this style
is now followed, especially in legal documents.
The practice in many newspaper offices furnishes, we think, a
satisfactory solution of the problem. When quoted matter is given
close grammatical relation to the text, the marks of quotation are
used before the first word of the quotation and before each line, with
the proper closing marks at the end of the quotation. Such a quotation
should not exceed ten or twelve lines in length. Larger quotations
should be put in smaller type, and without the marks. Even short ones
may be so treated.
OTHER USES OF QUOTATION-MARKS
A word or group of words is sometimes enclosed in quotation-marks to
give to such word or group of words a meaning somewhat different from
its usual meaning. This use of the marks has a very wide range; and
it is difficult to define the full scope of it. Its significance will
appear in illustrative examples:
105. A drop-folio is generally used on a page on which a chapter
begins or on a page containing an illustration extending to its top.
105-1. A “drop-folio” is a page-number that is put at the bottom of
the page.
In No. 105-1 “drop-folio” is singled out as an uncommon word, as if
quoted; and this fact is shown by the marks. In No. 105 it is used as
is any other word in the sentence.
106. He received “big wages,” $1.00 a day.
In No. 106 we put “big wages” in quotation-marks to imply that some one
has used this familiar expression in a boastful way without telling the
whole truth, which is exposed in the small sum that follows.
107. She was very fond of “five-o’clocks.”
In No. 107 the writer implies that the afternoon teas of society are
frivolous things. This is perhaps a purely conventional use of the
marks, without an underlying reason for the meaning thus given.
In the next sentence the writer groups, by means of the marks, certain
words into a title, which are identified by quotation-marks. Italics
would answer the same purpose; but the former marks are preferred:
108. This fundamental work might be called, “An Introduction to the
Study of Literature”; or, “The Elements of Literature.”
The above sentence is quoted from an educational magazine of high
standing, printed by a Press that gives much attention to style. The
use of the semicolon and comma in the sentence is the conventional
style of punctuating compound book-titles, as illustrated in Sentence
96. But the quotation-marks show that this is not a compound title, but
alternative titles. The real meaning would be more clearly expressed by
the use of “either” after “called”; and this shows that the punctuation
is wrong. Either the semicolon and the comma or the quotation-marks
must be omitted. The meaning to be conveyed will determine which marks
to omit.
If the semicolon and comma are not the proper marks here, how shall
we determine what mark, if any, should precede “or”? Simply by the
degree of liability to error in making a wrong combination of words at
this point. The quotation-marks before “or” close the first quotation,
making a complete group of words; and the quotation-marks following
“or” open a new group of words. As there is here no liability on the
part of the reader to make a wrong grouping out of some words that
precede and some that follow “or,” a mark before “or” can serve no
purpose. Each group is bound up in its own marks of quotation, and is a
name; and the two names are alternatives. With this interpretation of
the meaning of the language as determined by the quotation-marks alone,
the sentence would be punctuated as follows:
108-1. This fundamental work might be called, “An Introduction to the
Study of Literature” or “The Elements of Literature.”
The use of the comma after “called” in the above sentence is purely
conventional. It is somewhat like the use of the comma before “that”
following “is,” as treated elsewhere. Or, we may say, it is a purely
rhetorical use, as the reading of the somewhat long title seems to
require a pause after “called,” in order to identify the group to
follow. The omission of the comma could not be called poor punctuation.
Quotation-marks are used in the report of a conversation or dialogue
in which the names of the speakers are not printed at the beginning
of their respective remarks, as is done in the printing of a drama.
However, some writers do not use quotation-marks for this purpose, and
none are used in the frequent conversations in the Bible.
If the language of a quotation is broken off by a writer for the
purpose of inserting words not a part of the quotation, each of the
two parts into which the quoted matter is thus broken, is enclosed in
quotation-marks:
109. “We shall start,” he said, “at early dawn.”
Words to which special attention is called, otherwise than for
emphasis, are put in quotation-marks:
110. The words “virile,” “psychological,” “strenuous,” etc., are
useful words in their proper places, but weak words when out of place.
The titles of books, plays, songs, poems, and the like, when referred
to in one’s text, are put in quotation-marks by some writers and in
italics by others. The former seems to be the more common usage. Mr.
De Vinne says “italic is preferred by bookish men.” Most writers make
an exception to the above rule in the case of the titles of well-known
books.
The same rule applies to periodicals, including transactions and
proceedings issued, at least, quarterly. In most journal offices there
is a well-established convention: the journal puts in italics the
name of another periodical, and in caps and small caps its own name
appearing in its own text.
When the closing marks of quotation follow a word or group of words
that is also followed by another mark of punctuation, the positions
of the two marks are determined by the relation such other mark
of punctuation bears to the quoted matter. If it belongs to, and
is therefore required by, the quoted matter, it goes within the
quotation-marks. The comma and the period always precede the
final quotation-marks, and do so simply because they appear better
thus arranged on the printed page. The semicolon, the colon, the
interrogation-point, and the exclamation-point follow or precede the
closing marks of quotation according to their relation to the quoted
matter. The comma and period also precede marks of reference (superior
figures, stars, etc.) and the degree mark, while the semicolon, colon,
the interrogation-point, and the exclamation-point follow them. On page
3, above, a superior figure follows a colon. It does so because it
refers to the colon, not to what precedes the colon.
EXAMPLES
1. “Movies” showing war scenes that arouse the martial spirit are
objectionable to all pacifists.
The above sentence contains two words treated as they are found
today in practically all periodicals and books using them. The words
_movies_ and _pacifists_ (also written _pacificists_) are newcomers
in English, and are not found in any dictionary. Why is the former
put in quotation-marks and the latter not? It is probably because
all editors recognize “movies” as a word of doubtful propriety, and
therefore give it the conventional marks. On the other hand, the
word “pacifist,” whose meaning is so apparent and whose form is so
regular, has not been regarded as of doubtful propriety, generally
recognized as a stranger, and so has been accepted without the
introduction of the conventional marks of quotation.
3. Portrait of Major-General Henry Dearborn. By Gilbert Stuart.
4. “Our Boatman.” By John La Farge.
The above legends (inscriptions) appear under two pictures in a
well-edited current magazine. Why does the title in No. 4 take marks
of quotation, while that in No. 3 does not?
Two reasons may be given for the use of the marks in No. 4, while one
reason is sufficient for their absence in No. 3. “Our Boatman” is the
title of the painting, and is treated as a quotation, and therefore
requires the quotation-marks. Secondly, the words “Our Boatman” are
not used in their literal sense as descriptive of a man who acts as
our boatman,—that is, the picture is not a photograph of John Smith,
our boatman, but is an idealization of a man of his class. To give
the words other than a literal meaning, the marks are used.
In No. 3 the language is taken in its literal meaning, and even may
be that of the editor of the magazine, thus requiring no marks.
Probably no painter would put upon his canvas “A Portrait of John
Smith.”
5. “Justice,” said Webster, “is the great interest of man on earth”;
and Mr. Root laid it down as a rule, when Secretary of State, that we
should not only observe justice in our relations, but that we should be
just.
6. Professor John Finley, in “The French in the Heart of America,”
insists, with pardonable enthusiasm, that we got our finest democratic
ideals from the French settlers in the Mississippi Valley, and that
here was nourished
a national democracy founded on the equalities, the freedoms, and the
fraternities of the frontier so vital, so powerful, that it became
the dominant nationalistic force in a continent-wide republic.
CHAPTER XII
BRACKETS AND PARENTHESES
The principal use of brackets is to show that a bracketed word or group
of words in a quotation is inserted by the writer using the quoted
language, and not by the author of such language. Parentheses, on the
other hand, are used by a writer, as we have already seen, to enclose a
parenthetical word or group of words in his own language.
Some examples that furnish apparent exceptions to these general
statements considered as rules, may serve to emphasize the principle of
this punctuation.
The following examples (Nos. 112-115) are taken from the “Style Book”
of the Government Printing-Office.
NOTE.—We follow in the examples the capitalization and
punctuation of the original. For this reason we do not use a hyphen
in writing the quoted title (Style Book), above.
These examples are given in this style-book for the guidance of
type-setters in their work in the Government Printing-Office. They
appear to be extracts from the _Congressional Record_:
112. Mr. SPEAKER. Is there any objection to the consideration of this
bill at this time? [After a pause.] There is no objection.
113. Mr. SPEAKER (after a pause). If no gentleman claims the floor,
the Clerk will proceed with the reading of the bill.
114. Mr. HEALD. The gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. SHERLEY]
stated that he would support the measure.
115. Mr. HEALD. The gentleman from Kentucky, Col. SHERLEY,
stated that he would support the measure.
In these examples the names of the persons speaking are so manifestly
inserted by the reporter that they need no identification marks.
In No. 112 three words are inserted within the text by the reporter,
and take brackets for identification as matter inserted in the language
of another.
In No. 113 the same three words, manifestly inserted by the reporter,
take parentheses. They do so because they clearly belong to what
precedes, which is not a part of the text, but is the reporter’s
language. The use of brackets here would be bad punctuation.
The parentheses are used because the words enclosed are purely
_parenthetical_ in their relation to the preceding word, which is the
reporter’s language.
In No. 114 the words “Mr. SHERLEY” are inserted by the
reporter, and therefore take brackets. In No. 115 the words “Col.
SHERLEY” are the language of Mr. Heald, and therefore take the
usual punctuation (commas).
Another apparent exception to the above rule is found in the various
modes of printing stage directions in dramatic composition. As such
directions have no reference to the meaning of the language of the
text, it is desirable, in printing them, to show this fact by their
form. In the main, such directions are either centered lines shorter
than the text, or are indented more than the usual space of the
paragraph. They may be enclosed in brackets or parentheses, and be
printed in either italic or Roman type, or in italics without the
brackets or parentheses.
If a direction precedes, as it does sometimes, the speech to which it
belongs, and is in the opening line of such speech, it necessarily
is enclosed in brackets. If it follows and ends the last line of the
speech, it takes a single bracket at the beginning of the direction. If
it follows, and is put below, the last line, it takes a single bracket,
or is printed in the style of the direction preceding the speech.
Thus we see that the variety of style in printing stage directions
grows out of the fact that they are sometimes identified as stage
directions by their location and the style of type (italic),
and therefore do not necessarily require brackets for further
identification.
We shall not take space to illustrate the above varieties of
punctuation. Examples can readily be found in almost any library.
We have dwelt perhaps more at length upon this varied punctuation than
its importance may seem to justify; but, it seems to us, we may see in
it a principle underlying even conventional punctuation.
Our next sentence illustrates a very common use of brackets. In this
sentence we make the first enclosure (_sic_), the second being that of
the writer who made the quotation:
116. In one of John Smith’s quaint letters to the Royal Council of
Virginia, sitting in London, he says: “And I humbly entreat you
hereafter, [_sic_] let us know what we [are to] receive, and not
stand to the sailors’ courtesy to leave us what they please.”
When inserted in a quotation, the Latin word “_sic_,” meaning _thus_,
signifies that what immediately precedes it is found in the original.
By thus calling attention to it, the writer who makes the quotation
implies that an error exists at this point. Our own insertion of
“_sic_” is meant to say that the comma preceding it is in the original,
and to question its correctness. The position of the comma makes
“hereafter” qualify what precedes, as if it read, “I hereafter entreat
you.” The evident meaning is, “hereafter let us know.”
The words “are to,” enclosed in the next brackets, were inserted by the
writer who quoted from John Smith’s letter.
“Sic” is put in italics because this is the conventional way of
writing most words from a foreign language. The words “are to,” being
a suggested part of the text, are put in the text letter. Words thus
supplied by the translators of the Bible are put in italics, simply
to show their character, as is explained in the preface or elsewhere.
Brackets are not used in the Bible text.
Sometimes a line of poetry is too long for the type-measure in which
the poem is set. If one or more words of such line are carried forward
to make a new and very short line, the space between the full line
above and the full line below such short line may be as wide as the
space between two verses, and thus present a bad effect to the eye. To
avoid this the extra word or words may be put in the line above, if the
space permits, and at its end, with a single bracket at the left to cut
it off from the preceding words in the same line.
It is a common practice in legal and commercial work to enclose in
parentheses Arabic figures corresponding to the preceding number
expressed in words. This practice often gives rise to a mistake that,
when pointed out, is plain enough to anyone:
117. Pay to John Smith or order twenty-five ($25.00) dollars.
The matter in the parentheses should be simply “25,” to correspond with
what precedes; or the sentence should be written thus:
117-1. Pay to John Smith or order twenty-five dollars ($25.00).
When a woman signs her name to a letter, especially a letter to a
stranger, and wishes to give other information than the name conveys,
or to indicate how she should be addressed in a reply to her letter,
parentheses are used for the purpose:
118. MARY LOUISE BROWN.
(MRS. GEORGE H. BROWN.)
If she wishes simply to convey information as to whether she is a
married or an unmarried woman, she uses the proper title, enclosed in
parentheses, before her name:
119. (Miss) MARY LOUISE BROWN.
119-1. (Mrs.) MARY LOUISE BROWN.
In Sentences 99, 100, and 102 we saw a purely conventional use
of parentheses and brackets for enclosing interrogation-and
exclamation-points to express doubt and surprise, respectively.
PUNCTUATION WITHIN PARENTHESES OR BRACKETS
Matter within parentheses or brackets refers to what precedes these
marks, which may be a mark of punctuation, a single word, a group of
words forming part of a sentence, an entire sentence, or two or more
sentences.
We cannot show by the punctuation how much of the preceding matter is
referred to; but a conventional treatment of the punctuation for this
purpose is helpful, even though such treatment is not uniform.
The enclosed matter either falls between the parts of a sentence or
follows a sentence. When within a sentence the enclosed matter does
not begin with a capital letter, even though a full sentence, unless
the first word is a proper noun; nor does it take a period at its end.
If, however, the language is either interrogative or exclamatory, it
takes the proper mark to show this; and such mark is placed within the
parentheses or brackets.
When the enclosed matter follows a sentence, it may refer to a word
or to a small group of words within such sentence, to all of the
sentence, or to two or more preceding sentences. It is at this point
that a conventional treatment of the subject may be helpful, the
object of such treatment being to show, at a glance, how far the
reference extends. If the enclosed matter refers to the last word of
the sentence, or to a short group of words near the end, it receives
the same treatment given it when wholly within the sentence. If
such enclosed matter refers to a larger part of the sentence than
above described, to the entire sentence, or to two or more preceding
sentences, it is regarded as an independent sentence. As such it is
separated from the preceding sentence by the space usually put between
sentences; it begins with a capital letter; and the proper end-mark is
put within the parentheses, with no mark following outside.
We believe there is only one mark used within parentheses with
reference to a mark outside. The English practice, which is followed by
a number of high-class periodicals in this country, is as follows: if
a comma is required where a parenthesis is to be inserted, a comma is
placed before the first enclosing mark, and is repeated at the end of
the language within the parentheses.
We prefer to use only one mark when required by the text without
reference to the parenthesis, and to put it after the parentheses, thus
more clearly confining the parenthesis to what precedes.
Our illustrative examples will show these points more clearly.
EXAMPLES
1. The Senator [Davis] may strongly condemn the measure, but I shall
vote for it. [Applause.]
As the above example is quoted matter, the two interpolated words
take brackets.
2. [a-b-(c-d)].
In the above algebraic expression brackets and parentheses are used
conventionally to group the letters (algebraic symbols) which they
respectively enclose.
3. PEER
[To himself]
Indeed an exceedingly gifted man;
Almost all he says is beyond comprehension.
[Looks around.]
4. Let every one of us please _his_ neighbor for his good to
edification.—Romans xv, 2.
5. “Yours of the 14th has just arrived, and I hasten to reply to it.
“Here is a list of the six best novels in the English language:
“Tom Jones. (Fielding.)
“Tristam Shandy. (Sterne.)
“David Copperfield. (Dickens.)
“Henry Esmond. (Thackeray.)
“The Cloister and the Hearth. (Reade.)
“The Egoist. (Meredith.)
“I don’t know whether ‘Tristam Shandy’ can strictly be called a novel.
If the rules of your game cut it out, then I would replace it by
“Kenilworth, (Scott,)
to my mind the most perfect of Scott’s novels.”
While we have not used quotation-marks with our illustrative
sentences and examples, practically all of which are quoted, we do so
with the above examples, in order to exhibit their use.
The punctuation of this example illustrates the following points:
1. The use of marks of quotation at the beginning of every paragraph,
or group of words put in paragraph form, with like closing marks
after the last line, informs the reader that the paragraphs quoted
appear consecutively in the original.
2. The titles of the books named, with one exception, are not
enclosed in marks of quotation in the original. If they were so
enclosed, each title in our example would be enclosed in single marks
of quotation, in addition to the double marks at the beginning.
3. The name of each novel (Tom Jones, etc.) is treated as a complete
sentence, and so takes a period after it. The matter following each
sentence (name of a novel) refers to the entire sentence, thus
requiring a period within the marks of parenthesis enclosing the name
of the author.
4. The treatment of the last-named title (Kenilworth) is somewhat
unusual. It is put in paragraph form, probably to conform to the
paragraph form above; but it lacks the usual introduction of
particulars that calls for the paragraph form.
The commas before and within the parentheses follow the English
style. As a comma is required between “Kenilworth” and the
explanatory group of words following the parenthesis, we should use
only one, putting it after the marks of parenthesis.
Those who adopt the English style apparently always use the commas
when the matter within parentheses or brackets falls within the
sentence, even though the relation between what follows and what
precedes the parentheses or brackets does not require a comma. We
consider such punctuation bad, for it appears to treat the matter
so enclosed as both _slightly_ and _wholly_ parenthetical. Our next
example (No. 6), a quotation, illustrates this point.
5. We do not know why “Tristam Shandy” takes marks of quotation
(single marks in the example), while the names of the other books
take none.
6. I permitted myself, [he said,] the prophecy that their prejudices
were destined to vanish.
While we use a comma, as in the paragraph (No. 5) preceding Example
6, after parentheses or brackets when required by the language
outside of the parentheses or brackets, and use no comma unless
so required, we think the English practice poor punctuation. This
conventional use of two commas ignores the sense relation between the
groups of words preceding and following the parentheses or brackets,
which sense relation may be determined by the presence or the absence
of a comma.
CHAPTER XIII
ABBREVIATIONS AND MISCELLANY
We shall not attempt to treat the subject of abbreviations exhaustively
or even fully, for it goes beyond the subject of punctuation; but its
importance seems to justify its consideration at some length.
In the best printing-offices, if their expert copy-readers prepare
the manuscript, few abbreviations are permitted in book-work; and it
is well to follow their rules in all formal, if not in all business,
correspondence.
FORM OF ADDRESS
The abbreviations in forms of address accepted by the printing-offices
issuing three works on punctuation and style, especially mentioned in
our preface, are the following:
By the De Vinne Press, _Mr._, _Mrs._, _Messrs._, _Jr._, and _Sr._
By the University of Chicago Press, _Mr._, _Messrs._, _Mrs._ (French,
_M._, _MM._, _Mme_, _Mlle_), _Dr._, _Rev._, _Hon._, _St._ [Saint], and
_Esq._
By The Riverside Press, _Mr._, _Mrs._, _Messrs._, _M._, _Mme._,
_Mlle._, _Jr._, _Sr._, _Dr._, _Esq._, _Rev._, _Hon._
These lists are somewhat misleading. Although not uniform, it is
probable that the practice of the three offices from which they come,
is uniform, with one exception. In the list from the “Manual for
Writers” (University of Chicago Press), _Mme_ and _Mlle_ are not
written with periods, as, we think, they should be.
It is a matter of course that the plural form _MM._, given in only one
list, and the plural forms _Mmes._ and _Mlles._, not given at all, are
treated the same as the abbreviations of the singular forms of the same.
NOTE.—We are unable to interpret the parenthesis in
the above list from the University of Chicago Press. The terms
within the parentheses are only remotely, if at all, explanatory
of the preceding terms; and, although they belong in the list of
abbreviations, they are taken out of the list by being put in
parentheses. Moreover, “Mlle,” which is within the parentheses, has
no reference to any term outside of the marks.
While the above and other points in abbreviations discussed herein,
are closely to be observed in the text of a book and in formal
correspondence, abbreviations of technical terms, in tabulated work, in
foot-notes, indexes, etc., are used freely.
FIRM OR CORPORATION NAMES
In business correspondence courtesy requires that abbreviations adopted
in a firm or a corporation name be carefully observed by others,
regardless of the in elegance of such forms.
_Bro._, _Bros._, and _Co._ are used in firm names following _&_, but
not otherwise. They should always be spelled out when preceded by a
proper adjective.
_John Smith & Bro._; _Brown, Smith & Co._, and like forms are used.
In _Smith Brothers_, _Smith Company_, and like forms the final word is
not abbreviated.
While the “short and” (&) is commonly used in firm names, “and” is
frequently seen:
_Armour and Company_.
It is very rare that a comma is used before the final “and” or “&” in
firm names of three or more words constituting a series. If a firm
prefers so to punctuate its name, others who write the name should not
insert a comma.
FIGURES
As there are few fixed conventional uses for figures, we shall give
simply our preferences.
In ordinary reading matter, spell out all round numbers, and numbers
of one or two digits, unless of a technical character. When several
numbers occur close together, and are to be compared, they may be
expressed in figures:
120. Admission, one dollar.
120-1. Admission, fifty cents.
120-2. Admission: Men, $2; women, $1.50; children, 50 cents.
In No. 120-2 we use “50,” instead of “fifty,” because figures are used
to express other numbers in the sentence.
TIME OF DAY
The time of day is generally spelled out in ordinary reading matter:
121. We shall start at four o’clock this afternoon.
But with A. M. and P. M. (these abbreviations are
best set in small capitals) figures are always used:
121-1. We shall start at 4 P. M.
TEMPERATURE, ETC.
Figures are used to express temperature, specific gravity, and like
technical matter.
122. The specific gravity of gold is 19.27. Its melting-point is
1947° F. (1064° C.)
The letters “th,” “st,” and “d” (“d” is preferable to “nd” or “rd”)
should not be used with the number expressing the day of the month,
except when preceding the name of the month:
123. We left on July 9, 1915.
123-1. We left on July 9.
123-2. We left on the 9th of July.
Many good writers would use “th” in No. 123-1, probably because it
expresses the usual oral form of the date.
In printing consecutive numbers, like dates, numbers of pages, etc.,
certain omissions may be indicated by the dash; but the exact meaning
of this and another mode of writing these numbers should be understood.
Examples will illustrate this:
124. He was in England in 1914-15.
124-1. He spent the winter of 1914-15 in England.
125. Further information will be found on pages 25-27.
125-1. Further information will be found on pages 25, 26, 27.
125-2. Further information will be found elsewhere (pp. 25, 26) in
this work.
125-3. Further information will be found on pages 25 to 40.
No. 124, strictly interpreted, means _all_ of the two years indicated;
but it may be an indefinite portion of the last of 1914 and a like
portion of the first of 1915. In No. 124-1 the latter meaning is
specifically given by the word _winter_.
No. 125 means that the subject is treated continuously on the pages
mentioned; but it may not occupy _all_ of pages 25 and 27.
No. 125-1 means that the subject is referred to on each of the pages
numbered, but not to the exclusion of other matter.
In No. 125-2, in order to save space, the comma takes the place of
“and” between two numbers, just as the dash takes the place of “to”
between “25” and “27” in No. 125. Such omission of “and” is found in
the text only when the figures are enclosed in parentheses; but it is
common without the parentheses in foot-notes, tables, and indexes.
In No. 125-3 we use “to” instead of a dash. “To” is generally used when
a considerable number of pages is named. No definite rule can be given
for such usage.
An apparent exception to the interpretation of the numbers in No. 125
is not infrequently found in the manner of writing the street numbers
of a building, especially as found on letter-heads:
126. John Smith & Co.
25-27 Water Street
Chicago
As buildings on one side of a street take the odd numbers, and on the
other side the even numbers, we know that John Smith & Co. are located
at 25 _and_ 27 Water Street.
An accepted form of shortening an address which contains the words
_street_ and _avenue_ is to write “avenue” first with its number
expressed in words, followed by the street with its number in figures:
127. He resides at the corner of Tenth Avenue and 52d Street.
If a house number precedes the spelled-out name of the street, the
former takes figures, in order readily to distinguish it from the name
of the street:
127-1. He resides at 34 Tenth Avenue South.
If it is desirable to begin a sentence with a number, such number
should be spelled out, and not expressed in figures:
128. Two thousand people met in the park.
BIBLE REFERENCES
As the forms of Bible references are very numerous we shall give only
two, which, we think, represent the best modern usage:
129. Matt, iv, 4; 1 Cor. i, 29.
130. Gen. 2:3-6, 9; 3:17.
As the Roman numerals were formerly, and still are to some extent,
followed by a period, this usage would give the following in the place
of No. 129:
129-1. Matt. iv. 4; 1 Cor. i. 29
We think No. 129 the better style.
FOOT-NOTES
The style in foot-notes is so varied that we shall consider only one or
two points involved.
Superior figures in the text have taken the place almost altogether
of the star, dagger, etc., both because they are less conspicuous and
because they can be extended in number.
The lower-case superior italic letters are sometimes used instead of,
or together with, superior figures, as in the Bible.
In ordinary work, the superior figures or letters follow the word or
group of words concerning which the reference is made. In the Bible the
figures and letters precede such word or words.
The figures before the notes corresponding to the figures in the text
are generally superior figures; but the ordinary figures are sometimes
used, because, as each number begins a paragraph, the superior figures
are too small to look well.
The punctuation of foot-notes, and other details of their composition,
are treated differently by different writers. A single illustration
will serve to show a well-recognized style of composing such notes:
130. 5 Morris Schaff, “The Battle of the Wilderness,” _Atlantic
Monthly_, June, 1909.
130-1. 5 Morris Schaff, The Battle of the Wilderness, Vol. ii, p. 204.
No. 130 specifies foot-note No. 5, and refers to an article in a
magazine, which is named.
No. 130-1 refers to a book, the volume and page being indicated.
These foot-notes often appear in the following form:
130-2. 5. Schaff, Morris: The Battle of the Wilderness.
Foot-notes are often extensively used in scientific periodicals and
books; and the larger establishments that print such matter usually
have their style-cards, which should be followed by authors submitting
manuscripts to such establishments.
The lower-case italic letters, “_a_,” “_b_,” and “_c_,” and sometimes
the superior letters, are used to indicate the first, second, and third
parts of a verse, paragraph, or page referred to by an accompanying
figure. For instance, Romans vi, 5a means the first part of verse 5 of
Romans vi.
STAR, DAGGER, ETC.
Because of the clumsy appearance of these marks, and because of the
inconvenience they cause in the mechanical make-up of printed matter,
they are used sparingly; but they are quite indispensable in tabulated
matter, scientific works, etc.
If several of these marks are required on a page, they follow the
following order: star, dagger, double dagger, section, parallel lines,
paragraph.
MISCELLANEOUS
The word _cent_ in _per cent_ is now generally written without a period.
_Etc._ is preferable to _&c._ when used for “and others” or “and so
on”; but not a few good writers use the latter for this purpose.
The terms _4to_, _8vo_, _12mo_, etc., used to denote the sizes of
books, are not abbreviations, and so do not take periods after them.
Each number stands for a suppressed part of the word in which it
appears.
The abbreviations _i. e._, _e. g._, _vs._, _viz._, etc., are often
printed in italics. The words for which they stand are generally
preferred to the abbreviations.
THE APOSTROPHE
There are but few uses of the apostrophe, and they are well settled, as
follows:
1. To indicate the omission of letters or figures in contractions:
_ne’er_, _don’t_, _it’s_ (it is), _’t_ will, class of _’83_, the
gold-seekers of _’49_, etc.
2. To indicate the possessive case of nouns, but not of pronouns:
_Henry’s_, _man’s_, _Jones’s_, a _boy’s_ task, the _boys’_ play-ground,
for _conscience’_ sake, etc.
3. To indicate, with _s_, the plurals of letters, figures, symbols, and
certain unusual or peculiar names: _i’s_ and _t’s_, _6’s_ and _7’s_,
four _t’s_, several _D.D’s_, the _stay-at-home’s_, etc.
WHEREAS—RESOLVED
In the absence of a better place to note the conventional form of
printing and punctuating the above words and what follows them, we
consider the subject here. Two illustrations are sufficient to show
the best usage. We prefer the first style. The second is that of the
Century Dictionary, and is good style:
130A. WHEREAS, Our neighbors have suffered great loss ...
_Resolved_, That we give them immediate financial assistance ...
130B. _Whereas_, Our neighbors have suffered great loss ...
Resolved, that we give them immediate financial assistance ...
If the words “therefore be it” are used, they are put at the end of the
line preceding “Resolved,” and set in Roman, with or without a dash
following:
130C. WHEREAS, Our neighbors have suffered great loss;
therefore be it
_Resolved_, That ...
CHAPTER XIV
COMPOUND WORDS
We add this chapter on compound words to a work on punctuation simply
to record our high estimate of the value of the subject, and our
protest against its complete neglect by high schools and colleges, as
well as by very many good writers.
As in spelling, a few rules may be helpful; but, also as in spelling,
only continuous reference to a dictionary or to a good list of compound
words, will enable a writer to attain any degree of perfection in their
use.
We believe there is only one fairly complete work on the subject, and
that is by Mr. F. Horace Teall, who was a department editor of the
Standard Dictionary, having in charge especially the matter of compound
words. His work is entitled “English Compound Words and Phrases.”
We shall discuss only two illustrative examples; and they are selected
for the purpose of emphasizing the importance of the subject, and the
value of common sense in the application of principles governing the
determination of the form words take to express different meanings.
Our first example may seem to be a somewhat commonplace one, but it
may be a helpful illustration. It has been submitted to a large number
of suitable persons as a test of the general knowledge extant on the
subject among printers, proof-readers, teachers, and writers. The
result revealed almost complete ignorance of the subject.
Which of the following forms is correct, and why?
131. (1) back bone, (2) back-bone, (3) backbone.
The three forms are correct, but each has a special meaning:
1. In the form “back bone,” the word “back” stands in the position of
an adjective, and is to be interpreted as we interpret any adjective
standing before a noun. If we know the meaning of a word thus used, and
the meaning of the word it precedes, we know the meaning of the two
words. “Back” here designates one of two or more bones in a row, say,
lying on a table.
2. In “back-bone” we have an illustration of a process of the growth
of language. Professor W. D. Whitney, the distinguished philologist,
says that the composition of words out of independent elements, is more
important than any other process in the development of language. The
stage of development may determine the word’s form.
“Back-bone” means the bone of the back, or the spinal column. It is
a type of a large class of hyphenated compounds which are merely
elliptical inversions; in this case, the word is such an inversion of
_bone of the back_.
3. “Backbone” is an example of words whose meanings are traceable,
sometimes readily and sometimes with difficulty, to their parts. It is
easy to understand that a man with a real “back-bone” has _grit_, which
is one meaning of “backbone” written as a solid word.
NOTE.—Webster’s New International Dictionary does not give
the hyphenated form of these two words; notwithstanding this, we
believe this form has the sanction of reason and of convention.
The principles involved in determining the above forms are very simple,
and seem self-evident.
The process of language-development is rapidly going on; and, as every
corrector of manuscript knows, incorrect forms of words are exceedingly
numerous. Often they are made in attempts at short cuts in language.
When they may not be changed by the corrector, the hyphen is often
useful in revealing their meaning. The use of the hyphen must be based
upon reason. Usually, the purpose is to tie together two words to form
one adjective or one noun.
The words in our next two illustrative sentences were frequently
seen some time ago when almost the entire press of the country was
discussing a subject calling for the use of these words. The words
were invariably printed improperly; and we shall print them so in the
illustrative sentences:
132. Dr. Keene is the medical school inspector of Minneapolis.
133. Mr. Flexner is the medical school inspector of the Carnegie
Foundation.
What is the meaning of the language of these sentences? To the careful
reader “Dr.” and “Mr.” connote quite different things, and thus suggest
different relations between the words “medical school inspector.”
Let the hyphen answer the question:
132-1. Dr. Keene is the medical school-inspector of Minneapolis.
133-1. Mr. Flexner is the medical-school inspector of the Carnegie
Foundation.
In other words, the sentences say that Dr. Keene does _medical_
inspection of schools, and that Mr. Flexner simply inspects medical
schools. As a matter of fact, Mr. Flexner investigated the adequacy of
their methods and means of teaching.
Whether one uses a hyphen in “to-day” or “to-morrow,” or writes
“cannot” as one word or as two words (can not), is a matter of little
importance; but no educated person should be ignorant of the meanings
of words conveyed by the forms in which they are written.
The fundamental principles of compounding words, especially when the
meaning of such words is involved, should be understood by pupils
in our grade schools. This knowledge is easily acquired; and, once
acquired, the pupil will soon form the habit of consulting the
dictionary or a list of words to ascertain the present-day usage in
compounding. The fundamental principles will tell him that all such
combinations as “present-day” when used as adjectives take the hyphen.
A few examples will serve to show the beauty and value of compounding
words upon the principles illustrated above.
EXAMPLES
1. More than once he was on the verge of breaking down; but he held,
duty-true, to his task until he had spent his last ounce of strength in
the service.
2. . . . Some take from the shelves
Of the volumes a-row
Those legends of goblins and elves
That we loved long ago.
3. Between flood-and ebb-tide there is a period of rest called
slack-water.
4. The speeches were generally reported in _Handels- und Machtpolitick_
(politics of trade and power).
In No. 3 “tide” is omitted from the first of two compound hyphenated
words connected by a conjunction. In No. 4 the common ending
(_politick_) is omitted from the first of two compound solid words, a
hyphen taking its place.
We know of no author who deals with the somewhat inconsistent use of
the hyphen in No. 4; but we believe such usage is to be recommended.
5. Truffles grow in calcareous soils, usually under birch-or oak-trees.
6. Mr. So-and-so asserted that the present-day practices are wrong.
7. The president of the society is a member of several committees ex
officio; but the secretary is not an ex-officio member of any committee.
In No. 7 the first “ex officio” is formed of a preposition and a
noun, and means _by virtue of office_. The second “ex-officio” is a
compound adjective, as is “present-day” in No. 6.
Many writers prefer to put in italics all foreign expressions, such
as “ex-officio.”
CHAPTER XV
CLOSE AND OPEN PUNCTUATION
We shall deal with this subject somewhat as we dealt with compound
words, endeavoring simply to point out the relative values of the
“open” and “close” styles of punctuation.
Almost all writers on punctuation refer to a close open styles
of punctuation, but they make no attempt clearly to define or to
differentiate these terms. In general, the _close_ style of today is
characterized by a free use of marks where they determine the meaning
of the language, or assist the reader in determining it easily and
quickly; the _open_ style omits most marks not actually needed to
determine the meaning of the language. The close style may call for too
many marks, and the open style for too few, each causing confusion to
the reader.
It is mainly the comma whose use or omission determines the style of
punctuation; but the use of a semicolon instead of a comma, may also
differentiate the open from the close style. For instance, the need
of a mark before “and” in Sentence 1 is so unmistakable that the use
of a comma in such sentence cannot be called close punctuation; but
the use of a semicolon in that sentence, as suggested in Chapter 7,
may properly be called close punctuation. The use of a comma in the
sentence (see Sentence 1-1) may be considered open punctuation; its
omission would be poor punctuation, but many open punctuators would
omit it.
While we must recognize the fact that for some years there has been a
tendency among good writers to use fewer marks, we should disregard any
such tendency based upon a lack of appreciation of the value of marks
or, more specifically, upon ignorance of the fine sense relations of
language so easily overlooked when not indicated by marks with meanings.
When two groups of words which, standing alone, take, at least
conventionally, a comma, or even a semicolon, stand together in some
relation to another group or to a single word, this relation may
appear more readily if no mark is used between the two groups. We have
already discussed such omission between intermediate groups, which are
very numerous in both complex and simple language. The principle is
illustrated in our next sentence:
133. The Lord my Shepard is;
I shall be well supplied:
Since He is mine and I am His
What can I want beside?
In the third line of the stanza “and” so manifestly groups the two
clauses between which it stands that a comma is not needed to avoid a
wrong grouping by the reader; and, as each clause is connected in sense
with “since,” the omission of a comma between the clauses more readily
ties them as a single group to “since.” Of course, the use of a comma
before “and,” which would be good punctuation, would require one at the
end of the line.
A good close punctuator omits commas from all such groups of words;
and a poor open punctuator does the same, but also improperly omits
commas and semicolons in many other places.
One doing serious composition, or studying punctuation, may well
punctuate closely as he writes, and afterwards remove all marks whose
omission will improve the grouping and not violate good convention. The
close punctuator who studiously omits a mark only when he has a reason
to do so will rarely fail to use marks helpfully; the open punctuator
who omits marks too freely will write much obscure language and much
more whose meaning is not readily obtainable by the reader.
With this general principle established, the punctuator can readily
determine what marks may be omitted; and, far more important, he can
adapt to his own language the style of punctuation he prefers to follow.
The punctuation of our next sentence, taken from an editorial in a
recent issue of the _New York Times_, has interest for both the close
and the open punctuator. It contains _seven_ commas, only one of which
can safely be omitted, while two more are needed. The comma after
“divisions” may be omitted, but its use is good punctuation. One is
needed after “music,” in order to show that “and” is followed by the
closing word of a series; and one is imperative after “exhibition,” to
show that what follows is an _explanatory_, and not a _restrictive_,
adjective modifier:
134. There are in this issue eight separate sections, including,
besides the twelve pages of timely pictures, beautifully executed
in roto-gravure and half-tone, and the ample news and editorial
divisions, and those devoted to sports, social affairs, music and
the stage, a twenty-page section given up entirely to the development
of the motor car in view of the yearly automobile exhibition which
receives so large a share of public attention.
The punctuator who follows the fundamental principles we have
endeavored to set forth, will be neither a _close_ nor an _open_
punctuator: he will be a judicious punctuator.
EXAMPLES
The following selections, copied from the first edition of this book,
show the value of good punctuation, which, in this instance, is
fairly close punctuation.
The first selection is an extract from Macaulay, picturing Burke’s
knowledge of India; the second is from an article by Mr. Rowland
E. Robinson, in the _Atlantic Monthly_ for December, 1895. The
punctuation of the first is our own; the punctuation of the second is
either the author’s or the editor’s.
A careful study of these selections, with a view to comparing at what
points the punctuation is open and at what points close, cannot fail
to be of interest. For instance, what is the meaning of the language
in the first paragraph of the second extract (A New England Woodpile)
with a comma after “certainty,” and what would be the meaning without
the comma? Wherein does the punctuation of this extract depart from
the principles we have been discussing?
BURKE’S INDIA
India and its inhabitants were not to him, as to most Englishmen, mere
names and abstractions, but a real country and a real people. The
burning sun; the strange vegetation of the palm and the cocoa-tree;
the rice-field and the tank; the huge trees, older than the Mogul
Empire, under which the village crowds assemble; the thatched roof
of the peasant’s hut, and the rich tracery of the mosque, where the
imaum prayed with his face to Mecca; the drums, and banners, and gaudy
idols; the devotee swinging in the air; the graceful maiden, with the
pitcher on her head, descending the steps to the river-side; the black
faces, the long beards, the yellow streaks of sect; the turbans and
the flowing robes; the spears and the silver maces; the elephants with
their canopies of state; the gorgeous palanquin of the prince, and the
close litter of the noble lady—all those things were to him as the
objects amidst which his own life had been passed—as the objects which
lay on the road between Beaconsfield and St. James’s Street.
The value of punctuation will appear in comparing this passage, as
above printed, with the same passage as it appears in a work on
composition edited by a university professor:
... the rice-field; the tank; ... the thatched roof of the peasant’s
hut; the rich tracery of the mosque where the imaum prays with his
face to Mecca; ... the graceful maiden, with the pitcher on her head
descending the steps to the riverside; the black faces; the long
beards; the yellow streaks of sect; the turbans and the flowing robes,
the spears and the silver maces; ...
By such punctuation the _tank_ is taken out of the _rice-field_; the
contrast between _hut_ and _mosque_ is lost; the absence of the comma
before “where” makes the imaum pray at a particular mosque; not the
maiden, but her head, is descending the steps; beards are separated
from faces, and yellow streaks of sect may be on fence posts for
aught the reader knows; and turbans and flowing robes, emblems of
rank, are put on spear-and mace-bearers.
And by such punctuation the beauty of the picture is entirely lost in
a mere catalogue of things seen in India—and this is not literature.
A NEW ENGLAND WOODPILE
When the charitable mantle of the snow has covered the ugliness of
the earth, as one looks towards the woodlands he may see a distant
dark speck emerge from the blue shadow of the woods and crawl slowly
houseward. If born to the customs of this wintry land, he may guess
at once what it is; if not, speculation, after a little, gives way to
certainty, when the indistinct atom grows into a team of quick-stepping
horses or deliberate oxen hauling a sled-load of wood to the farm-house.
It is more than that. It is a part of the woods themselves, with
much of their wildness clinging to it, and with records, slight and
fragmentary, yet legible, of the lives of trees and birds and beasts
and men, coming to our door.
Before the sounds of the creaking sled and the answering creak of the
snow are heard, one sees the regular puffs of the team’s breath jetting
out and climbing the cold air. The head and shoulders of the muffled
driver then appear, as he sticks by narrow foothold to the hinder part
of his sled, or trots behind it beating his breast with his numb hands.
Prone like a crawling band of scouts, endwise like battering-rams, not
upright, with green banners waving, Birnam wood comes to Dunsinane to
fight King Frost.
As the woodpile grows at the farm-house door in a huge windrow of
sled-length wood or an even wall of cord wood, so in the woods there
widens a patch of uninterrupted daylight. Deep shade and barred and
netted shadow turn to almost even whiteness, as the axe saps the
foundation of summer homes of birds and the winter fastnesses of the
squirrels and raccoons. Here are the tracks of sled and team, where
they wound among rocks and stumps and over cradle knolls to make up a
load; and there are those of the chopper by the stump where he stood
to fell the tree, and along the great trough made by its fall. The snow
is flecked with chips, dark or pale according to their kind, just as
they alighted from their short flight, bark up or down or barkless or
edgewise, and with dry twigs and torn scraps of scattered moss.
When the chopper comes to his work in the morning, he finds traces
of nightly visitors to his white island that have drifted to its
shores out of the gray sea of woods. Here is the print of the hare’s
furry foot where he came to nibble the twigs of poplar and birch that
yesterday were switching the clouds, but have fallen, manna-like,
from skyward to feed him. A fox has skirted its shadowy margin, then
ventured to explore it, and in a thawy night a raccoon has waddled
across it.
The woodman is apt to kindle a fire more for company than warmth,
though he sits by it to eat his cold dinner, casting the crumbs to the
chickadees, that come fearlessly about him at all times. Blazing or
smouldering by turns, as it is fed or starved, the fire humanizes the
woods more than the man does. Now and then it draws to it a visitor,
oftenest a fox-hunter who has lost his hound, and stops for a moment
to light his pipe at the embers and to ask if his dog has been seen or
heard. Then he wades off through the snow, and is presently swallowed
out of sight by gray trees and blue shadows. Or the hound comes in
search of his master or a lost trail. He halts for an instant, with a
wistful look on his sorrowful face, then disappears, nosing his way
into the maw of the woods.
If the wood is cut “sled length,” which is a saving of time and also
of chips, that will now be made at the door and will serve to boil the
tea-kettle in summer, instead of rotting to slow fertilization of the
woodlot, the chopper is one of the regular farm hands or a “day man,”
and helps load the sled when it comes. If the wood is four foot, he is
a professional, chopping by the cord, and not likely to pile his cords
too high or long, nor so closely that the squirrels have much more
trouble in making their way through them than over them; and the man
comes and goes according to his ambition to earn money.
In whichever capacity the chopper plies his axe, he is pretty sure to
bring no sentimentalism to his task. He inherits the feeling that was
held by the old pioneers toward trees, who looked upon the noblest of
them as only giant weeds, encumbering the ground, and best got rid of
by the shortest means. To him the tree is a foe worthy of no respect
or mercy, and he feels the triumph of a savage conqueror when it comes
crashing down and he mounts the prostrate trunk to dismember it; the
more year-marks encircling its heart, the greater his victory. To his
ears, its many tongues tell nothing, or preach only heresy. Away with
the old tree to the flames! To give him his due, he is a skillful
executioner, and will compel a tree to fall across any selected stump
within its length. If one could forget the tree, it is a pretty sight
to watch the easy swing of the axe, and see how unerringly every blow
goes to its mark, knocking out chips of a span’s breadth. It does not
look difficult nor like work; but could you strike “twice in a place,”
or in half a day bring down a tree twice as thick as your body? The
wise farmer cuts, for fuel, only the dead and decaying trees in his
woodlot, leaving saplings and thrifty old trees to “stand up and grow
better,” as the Yankee saying is.
There is a prosperous and hospitable look in a great woodpile at
a farmhouse door. Logs with the moss of a hundred years on them,
breathing the odors of the woods, have come to warm the inmates and all
in-comers. The white smoke of these chimneys is spicy with the smell of
seasoned hard wood, and has a savor of roasts and stews that makes one
hungry. If you take the back track on a trail of pitchy smoke, it is
sure to lead you to a squalid threshold with its starved heap of pine
roots and half-decayed wood. Thrown down carelessly beside it is a dull
axe, wielded as need requires with spiteful awkwardness by a slatternly
woman, or laboriously upheaved and let fall with uncertain stroke by a
small boy.
INDEX
No effort is made in this index to refer to the complete details of
treatment of the principal marks, for the treatment of such marks is
almost continuous throughout the book. The table of contents will
make up, in some measure, for this deficiency.
References are to pages.
Abbreviations and miscellany, 194.
Accordingly, 96.
Address, abbreviations in forms of, 169;
forms of, in a letter, 194.
Adjective in natural position, 10;
two or more before a noun, 147.
Adverb out of natural position takes a comma or commas, 10.
Afterthought, 42.
Again, 102.
Alford, Dean, 152.
Although, 96.
A. M., P. M., how written, 196.
And, in a series, 21;
between two quoted groups of words, 62;
between like-formed coördinate groups, 103;
preceded by a comma, a semicolon, a colon, or a period, 107.
Apparent and real relations, 10.
Appositives, 44.
Apostrophe, the, 201.
As, 171, 172.
Atlantic Monthly, vi.
Avenue, street and, how written in an address, 198.
Because, 94, 96, 97.
Bible, examples of punctuation in the Common and Revised Versions,
59, 70;
punctuation of Bible references, 199.
Bigelow, Marshall T., vii, 75.
Brackets and parentheses, 185.
Bro., Bros., and Co., 195.
But, a colon before; the extent of the _but_ relation, 18, 60.
Capital letters mark main divisions, 164.
Century Dictionary, its use of a colon, 173.
Co., Company, 195.
Colon, meaning of word, 16;
follows formal introduction of matter, 63;
indicates an amplification, expansion, or contrast, 67;
its differentiation from other marks, 107;
follows closing marks of quotation, 183;
conventional uses of, 169;
improperly used after a verb, 170;
in Bible references, 199.
Comma, meaning of word, 16;
a _disjunctive_, 7;
after adverb out of natural position, 10;
before “and” in a series, 21;
differentiation from other marks shown diagrammatically, 107;
differentiation from semicolon, 121;
differentiation of commas from dashes and parentheses, 131;
differentiation from parentheses, 136;
precedes closing marks of quotation, 183.
Compound words, 203.
Conventional uses of marks, 163.
D, preferable to “nd” or “rd” with the day of the month, 197.
Dash, meaning of, 74;
some uses of, 74;
with comma, 80;
a rule for its use, 85;
a paragraph-mark, 87;
differentiation of dashes from commas and parentheses, 131;
differentiation from parentheses, 137;
indicates an ellipsis, 175.
De Vinne, Theodore L., vii, 74, 75, 153, 167, 172, 194.
Double object takes no mark, 147.
Doubtful modifiers, 150.
Dr., 194.
E. g., 201.
Either—or, 104.
Ellipsis, 175.
End-marks characterize sentences, 2.
Esq., 194.
Etc., proper mark before, 20;
preferable to &c., 201.
Exclamation-point, 174.
Explanatory and restrictive terms, 30.
Ex-officio, 207.
Figures, how punctuated, 14;
use of Arabic in enumerations, 164;
conventional uses of, 196;
not to begin a sentence, 199.
Firm or corporation names, 195.
First, second, when, now, because, etc., 94.
Foot-notes, 199.
For and _but_ relations, 57.
Format of books, 201.
For relation, the, 56.
Fortunately, 100.
Garrison, Phillips, vi, 131.
Gray’s Elegy, a sentence from, 83.
Grouping by commas, semicolons, and colons, 17.
Grouping the fundamental purpose of punctuation, 14.
Held, followed by a comma or a dash, 93.
Hence, 96.
Hon., 194.
However, 96.
I.e., punctuation of, 171;
sometimes in italics, 201;
generally written out, 201.
In conclusion, 101, 102.
Intermediate restrictive groups, 152.
Interrogation-point, 174.
Italics, a conventional use of, 141.
Jr. and Sr., 194.
Legal phraseology, 150.
Letters, capital, place in enumerations of, 164.
Letter, the salutatory phrase of, 169.
Like, 10.
“Manual for Writers,” a, 145.
Marks, conventional uses of, 163.
Mark of punctuation, a disjunctive, a sign-brand, 4.
Marks, the function of, and how performed, 1;
the names of the principal, 15;
the relative values of, 16;
miscellaneous uses of, 147.
M., Mme., Mlle., 194.
Mr., Mrs., Messrs., 194.
Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen, 24.
Myself, I myself, 148.
Namely, 171, 172, 173.
Neither—nor, 104.
No, 102, 106.
Not—but, 157.
Now, an adverb or an expletive, 12, 13, 94, 100.
Number, a, beginning a sentence, should be expressed in words, 199.
Numbers, how punctuated, 14.
O and oh, 159.
Only, improperly used, 98.
Open and close punctuation, 208.
Or, and, their relations, 44.
Or, comma before, 41; between groups not coördinate, 110.
Parentheses, meaning of, 30, 132;
a modified parenthesis, 30;
how used by some writers, 41;
differentiated from commas and dashes, 131;
how differentiated from commas, 136;
when used to enclose enumerating letters and figures, 166;
brackets and parentheses, 185;
punctuation within, 183.
Per cent, how written, 201.
Period, meaning and relative value of, 16;
differentiation from other marks, 107;
conventional uses of, 164;
precedes the closing marks of quotation, 183.
Perhaps, 95.
Punctuation, grouping the fundamental purpose of, 14;
by reason and convention, 15, 91.
Quotation-marks, 177.
Resolved, how printed and punctuated, 202.
Restrictive and non-restrictive groups, 38.
Restrictive groups, intermediate, 152.
Restrictive terms, explanatory and, 30.
Rev., 194.
Riverside Press, The, viii, 168, 194.
Roman capital numerals, use of in enumerations, 164.
Salutatory phrase, the, 169.
Semicolon, meaning of the word, 16;
grouping by, 19;
grouping by semicolon and colon, 50;
differentiation from other marks, 107;
three conventional uses of, 171;
follows the closing marks of quotation, 183.
Sentences, declarative, interrogative, and exclamatory,
how punctuated, 2.
Series, comma before the final “and” in a, 21.
Sic, in brackets, its meaning, 187.
Sr., 194.
St., 194.
Stage directions, 187.
Stars, 175, 176, 201.
St., its position when used with the day of the month, 197.
Street and avenue, how written in an address, 198.
Street numbers, how punctuated, 14.
Subject, a “long,” followed by a comma, 148;
ending in verb, 149.
Syllabus, a, treatment of headings in, 165.
Teall, F. Horace, vii, 40, 98, 135, 136, 148, 170.
Temperature, 196.
That is, 171, 172.
That, preceded by a comma, 93.
Thence, 96.
Therefore, 96.
Th, its position when used with the day of the month, 197.
Th, st, and d, position when used with the day of the month, 197.
Time of day, how expressed, 168, 169, 196.
Title-page, how punctuated. 164, 169.
Tomorrow, 100.
To wit, 171, 172.
University of Chicago Press, Manuals of, viii, 25, 145, 194.
Viz., 171, 172, 201.
Vocatives, 45.
Vs., often in italics; generally printed in full, 201.
Wendell, Professor, 82.
When, 94, 99, 100.
Where, 99.
Whereas—resolved, 202.
Wherefore, 96.
Wilson, John, vii, 40, 56, 75, 94, 98, 135, 145, 155, 157, 171.
Yes, 102, 106.
Yet, 96.
&, “short and,” 195.
&c., sometimes used for etc.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] For the sake of brevity, we shall frequently use herein the term
_printed_ language to include _written_ language.
[2] In order to avoid the too frequent use of a formal word (thus, as
follows, etc.), to introduce our illustrative examples, we use the
colon, thus indicating that the _colon_ relation exists between what
precedes and what follows the mark. This somewhat uncommon use of the
colon is explained on another page.
[3] Sentences herein numbered by hyphenated figures are modifications,
with some exceptions, of preceding sentences designated by the first
figures of the hyphenated numbers,—for example, Sentence 1-1 is a
modification of Sentence 1 in its punctuation.
[4] A comma at this point does not appear in the original. We insert it
because what follows is clearly explanatory.
[5] As Sentence 22 is a quotation, we retain its two-word form of
“for-ever,” which is the English style; but in No 22-2. which is our
own language, we use the one-word form, which is the American style.
[6] No mark is used here before “and” because it connects two groups of
words, each used as a whole, as indicated by marks of quotation.
[7] See page vi.
[8] The use of this comma is wrong, for what follows “sentence” is
clearly restrictive.
The following pages contain extracts from a few press notices of the
first edition of this book.
WHY WE PUNCTUATE
OR
REASON VS. RULE IN THE USE OF MARKS
(Published anonymously in 1896)
EXTRACTS FROM PRESS NOTICES OF THE FIRST EDITION
The well considered contents of “Why We Punctuate” should work a
reform in the manner of using points. The author proposes no startling
innovations, but approaches his subject from the plane of pure reason,
substituting carefully-thought-out principles for the empirical rules,
which have too long governed American printing offices, and giving us
for the first time a rationale as foundation for the entire system.
The work itself shows that practically nothing has been done to advance
the science of punctuation for many years, the entire subject having
apparently crystallized after the publication of Wilson’s book and
the compendium of it prepared by Bigelow. How much these last lacked
has not been apparent until this author took up the cudgels for less
arbitrary rule and more distinctions based on good judgment. He throws
light into dark places and makes it possible at last for a student to
acquire a number of broad principles in place of the interminable rules
and exceptions of the earlier writers.
The book is to be welcomed as a much needed contribution to a much
neglected topic of universal interest.—_Chicago Tribune._
No student of English should be without this book.—_The Globe_ (Boston).
The work is valuable, not only to the learner, but also to the
scholar.—_Baltimore American._
The author has undoubtedly gone to the root of the matter in his
fundamental theory.—_The Beacon_ (Boston).
Though I have read proof twenty-five years or more, I find I can learn
some valuable things from this book.—_Henry R. Boss_, _Editor of the
Proofsheet_ (Chicago).
With journalistic instinct the author has sought the reasons for the
use of all marks; and instead of copying what previous authors have
said, he has simply told _why_ marks are used.—_Philadelphia Press._
This book unquestionably has a mission, and it seems to us that the
author has performed his task with exceptional intelligence. The book
may be said to represent the best American usage of our day.—_Review of
Reviews._
The author is a painstaking and intelligent writer, and the line
of reasoning followed by him is original and convincing, while his
explanations and illustrations make the subject of punctuation both
interesting and easy to learn.—_Philadelphia Telegraph._
It is philosophical, clear, simple, and teaches the intimate relation
between punctuation and the meaning of language. It shows plainly that
we must punctuate to suit our meaning. An excellent text-book for the
schools and for practical reference.—_The Union-Signal_ (Chicago).
The subject of punctuation seldom receives sufficient attention in
our schools and colleges, and its importance is so great that such an
intelligent discussion of it as that contained in these pages deserves
commendation. It is surprising how much even educated persons, and even
those accustomed to composition, may gain from such a treatise.—_The
Congregationalist_ (Boston).
The whole problem is reduced to the fundamental principles which
control it. They are easily grasped, and the numerous examples and
illustrations collected and arranged by the author, instead of
scattering the impression of the book, only concentrate the reader’s
attention on the few principles which control the subject. The book is
one to be commended.—_The Independent_ (New York).
The author takes the ground that the use of a mark of punctuation is
determined by its meaning, and the meaning of the language it governs.
He elucidates these meanings clearly, concisely, and logically. The
book may be said to be the only one available which gives an exhaustive
treatment of the reasons and rules of proper punctuation, plainly and
intelligently set forth.—_The Free Press_ (Detroit).
It is one of the most rational works ever issued on the subject, and
will be of incalculable value as a guide to proper punctuation. The
author departs from the usual set rules commonly taught in text-books,
and simplifies the process by classifying the marks according to the
necessity, or relative length of pause, required to give our language
its proper meaning, not only as appears to the writer, but also as will
appear to the reader.—_The Bee_ (Omaha).
The author knows how to punctuate himself, and he knows how to make the
principles that guide him clear to others.
“Why We Punctuate” is a valuable addition to the literature of
punctuation. Its examples are, as a rule, particularly happy. Some
of them make plain at a glance the reasons for rules which have
been disputed by many authorities, but which are based on common
sense.... It is a practical guide to punctuation, and any one who
masters it thoroughly ought to be able afterward always to punctuate
correctly.—_The Writer_ (Boston).
The distinctive feature of the book is that it is not a mere collection
of cut-and-dried rules. It goes into the reasons for the use of the
several marks, and deals with the logical relations of language. It
is a book that helps to clear thinking on the part of the writer who
employs it.—_The Buffalo Express._
Punctuation is treated as based upon the science of language and not
altogether upon grammatical construction. The author’s examples are
all good and new and his ideas original. Some latitude is allowed,
according to construction of sentences, and common sense is permitted
to depart, if clearness of meaning is desired, from arbitrary
rules.—_Baltimore Sun._
The author of this work has not copied from previous authors, but
has drawn largely upon current literature for illustrative examples,
and has brought together several hundred short quotations of great
interest, beyond the use of examples of correct punctuation. His
reasoning is original. His theories, as explained and illustrated, make
the subject both interesting and easy to understand.
The book is valuable to the learner, and the scholar, as well,
and it cannot fail to attract the attention of students of the
English language, and it merits the commendation of all competent
judges.—_Journal of Education_ (Boston).
If the author’s name were on the title-page of his book we would know
whom to thank for the best and most sensible work on this subject that
has yet been published.
The student of this book, if he masters its teachings, will not fall
into the absurdities and obscurities of mechanical punctuation on the
one hand, or of slovenly punctuation on the other, but will punctuate
in such a way as to make his meaning clear—which is one essential art
in good writing.
“Why We Punctuate” should be in the hands of every newspaper
man and author, and it ought to become a text-book in advanced
schools.—_Democrat and Chronicle_ (Rochester, N. Y.).
End of Project Gutenberg's Why We Punctuate, by William Livingston Klein