0
  1. Understanding what feeds procastination is only step one. The next step, stopping it, is a bit bigger.
  2. Understanding what feeds procastination is only step one, the next step, stopping it, is a bit bigger.

Which would be correct? Is the part after "step one" is an independet clause? I've been searching online with no answer.

Harout
  • 1
  • 1
    Version (1) is reasonably obviously (but definitely) two complete sentences: two independent clauses. Version (2) has a comma splice, and a good example of an unacceptable one: a semicolon (at least) is required. – Edwin Ashworth Sep 27 '17 at 20:21

2 Answers2

1

The first example is correct. Whenever you have two complete sentences with a subject and a verb in each one, connecting them with a comma is considered a comma-splice.

Susan P
  • 49
1

The clauses on either side of the period or comma are independent. Independent clauses generally (in formal written English at least) cannot be joined by a comma without some kind of conjunction.

Your choices are a period (as in the first example), a semicolon, a dash, or a conjunction like "and" or "but" preceded by a comma.

  1. "Understanding what feeds procastination is only step one. The next step, stopping it, is a bit bigger."
  2. "Understanding what feeds procastination is only step one; the next step, stopping it, is a bit bigger."
  3. "Understanding what feeds procastination is only step one — the next step, stopping it, is a bit bigger."
  4. "Understanding what feeds procastination is only step one, and the next step, stopping it, is a bit bigger."

The differences here are minor changes in tone, although the last one sounds awkward to my ear. To return to the original question, a period would be correct while a comma by itself would not.

Miles Grover
  • 175