comma/not before 'who' [relative pronoun]: Dr. Connors who's my


Senior Member
Here's a quote from the Amazing Spider-Man:
Peter Parker: Dr. Curtis Connors, he's a biochemist...
Captain Stacy: Of OsCorp?
Peter Parker: That's right.
Captain Stacy: Okay. Dr. Curtis Connors who's also my daughters mentor. Is that who you're talking about?
Peter Parker: That's the one.
(For more context, see here.)

In line 4, there is no comma between "Dr. Curtis Connors" and the who relative clause.
And I noticed that the relative clause is actually modifies "Dr. Curtis Connors" rather than supplementing it.
So is this why the comma is not used there?
  • owlman5

    Senior Member
    Placing a comma after "Connors" would have been a good idea, JungKim. Note that you are reading a dialog. Writers are often hard-pressed to write convincing spoken language while preserving the punctuation we are accustomed to seeing in text. The missing comma may well be nothing more than a small error.


    Senior Member
    English, U.S.
    I don't regard the missing comma as necessarily an error.
    A proper noun usually is sufficient to uniquely identify a person or thing,
    so a following relative clause is normally nonrestrictive (not necessary for identifying),
    and so normally a comma is used.
    But in this dialog it seems that Captain Stacy is not satisfied with "Dr. Curtis Connors" as a unique identification,
    as if there could be more than one person with that name.
    So I see how he could be using "who's also my daughters mentor" as a restrictive relative clause (without a comma).
    He could have asked "Is it the same Dr. Curtis Connors who is my daughter's mentor?"
    < Previous | Next >