Quick comma question

Cubsfan23 · November 30, 2006, 7:42pm

Here’s just a made up sentence. Can you tell me if the commas are in the right spot…

Jerry decides to hug Tom, because his conscience views Tom as a friend, rather than an enemy.

Does a comma belong before “because” or “rather” ?

corranged · November 30, 2006, 7:47pm

You can take out all the commas, and the sentence will be fine.

groovinhard · November 30, 2006, 7:52pm

I’m 100% sure you don’t need one before because (because the subject before and after “because” is the same), but as far as the “rather” is concerned, it’s more of a gut feeling that you don’t need it.

13351 · November 30, 2006, 7:59pm

Jerry decides to hug Tom because his conscience views Tom as a friend rather than as an enemy.

I,think,that’s,the,correct,sentence.

Cubsfan23 · November 30, 2006, 8:02pm

Is there ever a time when you put a comma before “because” ?

corranged · November 30, 2006, 9:23pm

Ever? Yeah, you could come up with a time when it’s OK.

In normal use? Nope.

groovinhard · November 30, 2006, 11:01pm

I thought that if the subject of the clause after because was different than the subject of the clause before and is a full sentence, then you needed a comma.

ex.

John went to the store, because Martha wanted him to buy eggs.

I don’t know, I never use “because” in formal stuff so I never think about it…haha.

corranged · November 30, 2006, 11:34pm

Oooh, yeah, Groovin. That seems familiar. Forgot about that.

To the OP: Look it up. Wikipedia is awesome, as is Google.

equine99 · November 30, 2006, 11:37pm

nope, still not necessary.

Cards4Life · November 30, 2006, 11:51pm

This reminds me of D.O.L. back in middle school ::shudders::

Of course, the thread was started by a Cubs fan, and they always make me wonder ;)

groovinhard · December 1, 2006, 1:17am

Must be a new rule then, because I remember it being drilled into my head SO many times…(^look, I did it up there). Maybe it depends on the conjunction.

Edit: This is totally driving me insane now, lol. Most reputable sources online seem to say you never need a coma before “because”, because (OMG, I can’t stop!) by definition it introduces a subordinate phrase, and you only need commas to separate two…I guess…nonsubordinate phrases. Or something. Like when using “and”.

OK, I’m so going to ask my English teacher.

equine99 · December 1, 2006, 1:57am

yup, that’s exactly it. if the two parts can be completely seperate and still make the same sense then it’s the “, and” thing, but you never need a comma with “because” because the two have a relationship that is necessary for it to have the same meaning. That didn’t make a whole lot of sense, so here’s an example:

Mary went to the park, and John went skiing.
has the exact same meaning as:
Mary went to the park. John went skiing.

whereas

Mary went to the park because John went skiing.
has a different meaning than
Mary went to the park. John went skiing.

does that make any sense or help at all?

Gleech · December 1, 2006, 2:53pm

but you usually wouldn’t use a comma in the first sentance either.
Mary went to the park and John went skiing.
Is better than if there were a comma before and.
The difference between cooridnating and subordinating conjunctions doesn’t have to do with commas in that way.

equine99 · December 1, 2006, 6:56pm

having a comma before and and but is more traditional, but ultimately it is not a necessity.

BP-TheGuy88 · December 1, 2006, 7:12pm

A friend of mine (a teacher as well) tells me that in England a comma is used before the word ‘and’ and the word ‘or.’ That’s not the case in American English (you can do with or without it in some cases).

As for commas before the word ‘because’ here is an example of where the comma changes the meaning of the word and where it would be necessary.

No comma needed: John bought Chelsea new sunglasses because he wanted to get her a present for her birthday.

Comma needed: I knew John would buy Chelsea new sunglasses, because he left me a message on my cell phone asking which brand to get.

Without the comma in that last sentence, the sentence would sound like the message that John left me caused him to buy Chelsea new sunglasses.

BP-TheGuy88 · December 1, 2006, 7:13pm

And here is what I learned a long time ago which adds to what I was trying to say in my previous post in regards to commas before ‘because’:

<a href=“http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/commas.htm[/url]”>http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/commas.htm</a>

As pointed out above (Rule #3), an adverbial clause that begins a sentence is set off with a comma:

<pre><code>* Although Queasybreath had spent several years in Antarctica, he still bundled up warmly in the brisk autumns of Ohio.

Because Tashonda had learned to study by herself, she was able to pass the entrance exam.
</code></pre>

When an adverbial clause comes later on in the sentence, however, the writer must determine if the clause is essential to the meaning of the sentence or not. A “because clause” can be particularly troublesome in this regard. In most sentences, a “because clause” is essential to the meaning of the sentence, and it will not be set off with a comma:

<pre><code>* The Okies had to leave their farms in the midwest because the drought conditions had ruined their farms.
</code></pre>

Sometimes, though, the “because clause” must be set off with a comma to avoid misreading:

<pre><code>* I knew that President Nixon would resign that morning, because my sister-in-law worked in the White House and she called me with the news.
</code></pre>

Without that comma, the sentence says that Nixon’s resignation was the fault of my sister-in-law. Nixon did not resign because my sister-in-law worked in the White House, so we set off that clause to make the meaning clearly parenthetical.

To the OP: Your original sentence does not need commas. 13351 was right. Your sentence should look like this: “Jerry decides to hug Tom because his conscience views Tom as a friend rather than as an enemy.”

Quick comma question

CONNECT WITH US