comma after introductory clause [conjunction]: When the robber..., I
- Thread starter 4max
- Start date
I've taught that when you start the sentence with "when", you always need a comma after the first phrase. That means you need a comma after "came" in this case. If you don't want to use the comma, maybe you should say "I fought one of the robbers when they came." And I agree Trisia about "fought with."
But I'm not a native English speaker, so...
But I'm not a native English speaker, so...
panjandrum
Senior Member
English-Ireland (top end)
Hello 4max, and welcome to WordReference.
I have no problem with "fought with", or indeed with the original sentence without the comma.
Did the teacher explain why she thought there should be a comma?
Did your son ask her
HERE is a useful set of guidance for using commas in BE (British English).
HERE is an AE (American English) alternative that might justify the comma (see #3).
I have no problem with "fought with", or indeed with the original sentence without the comma.
Did the teacher explain why she thought there should be a comma?
Did your son ask her
HERE is a useful set of guidance for using commas in BE (British English).
HERE is an AE (American English) alternative that might justify the comma (see #3).
Thanks for your welcome and your input, Panjandrum. He did not ask the teacher, nor did she offer any explanation. I didn't want to push him to ask about it until I was at least a little confident that the comma wasn't necessary. It was the only error on the entire paper. I felt a little like she was just looking for something to mark wrong. The scoring rubic said that he would be graded on "end punctuation". I thought this meant at the end of the sentence. Seeing how he's only 10 years old anyway, I don't think she should be worried about this missing comma. It took 4 percentage points from his total grade.
Trinibeens
Senior Member
U.S. English
I agree with Leafy Kid. "When" is an adverb. That makes "When the robbers came" an adverbial clause, which in AE requires a comma.
If the comma were truly optional, would the following make sense?
When doubtful delegate.
To me that seems like three unrelated words strung together.
I was always taught to put the comma in.
If the comma were truly optional, would the following make sense?
When doubtful delegate.
To me that seems like three unrelated words strung together.
I was always taught to put the comma in.
Matching Mole
Senior Member
England, English
Thanks for those links, Panjandrum. I see the item (3) in the US version that you refer to, and it seems quite applicable in this case.
It seems I tend towards this American style, myself.
Use a comma to set off introductory elements, as in "Running toward third base, he suddenly realized how stupid he looked."
The author goes on to say: "It is permissible to omit the comma after a brief introductory element if the omission does not result in confusion or hesitancy in reading", so it seems the topic sentence is correct.
It seems I tend towards this American style, myself.
AngelEyes
Senior Member
English - United States
I agree with this. I think the teacher was correct to mark it wrong.
That introductory clause needs to be set off by a comma.
It reads better, it's structurally correct in my opinion, and you pause there when you say it out loud.
AngelEyes
Thomas Tompion
Member Emeritus
English - England
There are several problems implicit in this, it seems to me:
1. We seem not to agree whether or not the comma is necessary.
2. What had the teacher been teaching the children recently about comma usage?
3. Obviously you need to avoid undermining the boy's confidence in the teacher. If that is his only 'mistake', both of them must be getting a lot of things right most of the time.
4. I think it's very important to make sure that the boy is self-sufficient in school - Panjandrum's question about whether he asked the teacher for an explanation is important. If either the boy, or the teacher, or both, receive the impression that a parent in on the qui vive for a mistake, their future relationship is likely to be less productive. The fact remains that if you are deeply unhappy about the teacher - you must have more important grounds than the correction of one comma for this - then you obviously need to consider taking the matter further. At that stage you risk, of course, falling on a teacher who is less good that the first one.
1. We seem not to agree whether or not the comma is necessary.
2. What had the teacher been teaching the children recently about comma usage?
3. Obviously you need to avoid undermining the boy's confidence in the teacher. If that is his only 'mistake', both of them must be getting a lot of things right most of the time.
4. I think it's very important to make sure that the boy is self-sufficient in school - Panjandrum's question about whether he asked the teacher for an explanation is important. If either the boy, or the teacher, or both, receive the impression that a parent in on the qui vive for a mistake, their future relationship is likely to be less productive. The fact remains that if you are deeply unhappy about the teacher - you must have more important grounds than the correction of one comma for this - then you obviously need to consider taking the matter further. At that stage you risk, of course, falling on a teacher who is less good that the first one.
wizard8451
Senior Member
Mexico, Spanish
I'm not going to pick every word of your sentence, as is some people's propensity to do on here. Instead, I'll tell you that the comma is NOT optional. 'When the robbers came' is a subordinate (dependent) adverbial clause, which means that it must be followed by a comma. There is no way around this.
languageGuy
Senior Member
USA and English
I would the say the comma is required here. This phrase is not introductory material; it is a dependent clause. If a sentence begins with a dependent clause, you must have a comma after it (at least that's what all my English teachers required).
Hmmm. He seems to love his teacher this year. He's had no opportunity to discuss it with her yet; she sends the tests in a folder directly to me. (He is only 10.) He's not had much work with commas yet. That's why he asked me what was wrong with it when I showed him the folder. After reading your feedback I see another problem. I (knowing more about commas) assumed that's what she thought was missing, when in fact, she may have misread it and was looking for a period. You see she only left a red circle. She did not correct it. It could be just a mistake in correction. Like I said before, he's only 10 years old and working on "end punctuation". "End punctuation", before this, has been whether he remembers to put a period, exclamation, or question mark. I was so stuck on thinking about whether a comma was necessary, that it never occurred to me that she could've mistakenly been looking for a period. It sure seemed unfair to be taking off points for a comma that may or may not have been necessary when they are just beginning to study writing. In any case, he'll be asking her for clarification tomorrow at school. Thanks again for all your help.
panjandrum
Senior Member
English-Ireland (top end)
This is one of those topics where sources are important, not simply opinion.
From my superficial digging, the guidance varies, though it is worth pointing out that it is the AE site that gives some support for the comma - supporting the teacher's view. It is perhaps also worth noting that teaching of punctuation to ten-year-olds, like anything else, is likely to promote punctuation-by-rule before introducing flexibility. We need to take care not to apply post-graduate standards to ten-year-old punctuation
In my own defence there is a world of a difference between:
When doubtful delegate.
- and -
When the robbers came I fought with one of them.
The first sentence demands a comma to be comprehensible - not least because delegate, without context, could be either a noun or a verb.
I suggest that the second reads easily and fluently without a comma.
And finally, Larry Trask states (see first link in previous post):
That does not mean that when writing I must put a comma wherever I would pause. I often pause where there is no comma in the text.
Commas are not meant to be breath-marks.
From my superficial digging, the guidance varies, though it is worth pointing out that it is the AE site that gives some support for the comma - supporting the teacher's view. It is perhaps also worth noting that teaching of punctuation to ten-year-olds, like anything else, is likely to promote punctuation-by-rule before introducing flexibility. We need to take care not to apply post-graduate standards to ten-year-old punctuation
In my own defence
there is a world of a difference between:When doubtful delegate.
- and -
When the robbers came I fought with one of them.
The first sentence demands a comma to be comprehensible - not least because delegate, without context, could be either a noun or a verb.
I suggest that the second reads easily and fluently without a comma.
And finally, Larry Trask states (see first link in previous post):
When reading aloud or singing, I always pause where a comma appears.
That does not mean that when writing I must put a comma wherever I would pause. I often pause where there is no comma in the text.
Commas are not meant to be breath-marks.
Thomas Tompion
Member Emeritus
English - England
I think the sort of point about a comma we are arguing about is far too advanced for a ten-year-old. 'End punctuation' sounds like learning when sentences end, which should be more elementary.