0

The sentence is intended to convey that it is easy to fall into a pattern, and the pattern might be one of two types: consecutive sentences or repeatedly introducing paragraphs in the same way.

It’s easy to fall into a pattern of using introductory phrases while writing either in consecutive sentences or at the start of multiple paragraphs.

It’s easy to fall into a pattern of using introductory phrases while writing, either in consecutive sentences or at the start of multiple paragraphs.

It’s easy to fall into a pattern of using introductory phrases, while writing, either in consecutive sentences or at the start of multiple paragraphs.

The first obeys the rules as I understand them, but I think it creates a trip hazard because the 'either' could plausibly be constraining 'while writing', and only the 'or' clarifies that it's talking about the pattern.

The third also obeys the rules as I understand them (setting-off a nonrestrictive clause with a pair of commas), but it does not match the original thought or spoken tempo.

The second matches the thought and tempo, but I cannot identify a grammatical rule that would justify the inclusion of the comma.

I have studied a number of comma guides before asking this question, including: https://www.iue.edu/student-success/coursework/commas.html https://www.grammarly.com/blog/comma/

EDIT: But I had not seen this one, which may contain the answer I was looking for: https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/punctuation/commas/extended_rules_for_commas.html

Peeling
  • 123
  • 4

3 Answers3

4

Comma placement comes under the rules of punctuation (which are quite flexible) rather than the rules of grammar.

Here, having two metaphorical-location identifiers next to each other is at best clumsy, so I'd separate them. I'd also use 'when' to show that the writing is the focus rather than 'while', which backgrounds the writing.

I'd write:

  • When writing, it’s easy to fall into a pattern of using introductory phrases (either in consecutive sentences or at the start of multiple paragraphs).

Note that the parenthetical is of the 'development of the idea of the statement in / adding details to the main clause' type. It is a parenthetical because it can be omitted without leaving the matrix sentence grammatically compromised (though of course information will be lost).

While the various options available for offsetting parentheticals include zero punctuation, I wouldn't advise that here. I prefer the brackets here, but the single offsetting comma is certainly not wrong, and a dash might be chosen by some.

  • "Clumsy but okay; better like this" is as clear an answer as I could have hoped for. Thank you very much. – Peeling Jan 18 '22 at 16:38
0

I would like to point out that if one looks hard enough, one may find differences in meaning between the sentences. The first one might be taken to mean "it's easy to fall into a pattern of using introductory phrases; this occurs while [writing either in consecutive sentences or at the start of multiple paragraphs]".

The second one might be "it's easy to fall into a pattern of using introductory phrases; this occurs while [writing], and it may occur either in consecutive sentences or at the start of multiple paragraphs".

The third one might be "it's easy to fall into a pattern of using introductory phrases; this may occur either in consecutive sentences or at the start of multiple paragraphs, and as a sidenote, this occurs while writing".

Admittedly, it's rather hard to distinguish sentences 2 and 3, but the 3rd one implies that the fact that the pattern occurs within writing is parenthesized and thus has less importance.

I might be wrong, however.

ophact
  • 139
  • 6
  • Thanks :) I realise, with hindsight, that I have not made clear the intended meaning. I shall fix that now. – Peeling Jan 18 '22 at 16:33
0

Your second example simply shows a nonrestrictive clause, which, when appearing at the end of the sentence, requires only one comma — not a pair. Read it like this:

It’s easy to fall into a pattern of using introductory phrases while writing (either in consecutive sentences or at the start of multiple paragraphs).

That one is your intention, probably.

The first one means:

It’s easy to fall into a pattern of using introductory phrases while writing in consecutive sentences or at the start of multiple paragraphs.

The last one means:

It’s easy to fall into a pattern of using introductory phrases in consecutive sentences or at the start of multiple paragraphs.

Tinfoil Hat
  • 17,008
  • It was my understanding that a nonrestrictive clause at the end of a sentence requires NO comma. EG: "Harry thought, just before he closed his eyes, that he saw a flash" --> "Harry thought that he saw a flash just before he closed his eyes." – Peeling Jan 18 '22 at 16:46
  • No. Restrictive: Harry thought that he saw a flash just before he closed his eyes. Nonrestrictive: Harry thought that he saw a flash, just before he closed his eyes. Do you see the difference in sense? – Tinfoil Hat Jan 18 '22 at 16:51
  • I think so. First example binds 'just before...' with seeing the flash, but the thought could (does?) come later. Second binds it to 'thought', earlier in the sentence, implying that the thought also occurred before he closed his eyes. Correct? – Peeling Jan 18 '22 at 16:56
  • Perhaps using the terms essential and nonessential will help. If it is important when Harry thought he saw the flash (just before he closed his eyes), omit the comma. If he saw the flash and just before he closed his eyes is extra information, use the comma. Test by using parentheses: Harry thought that he saw a flash (just before he closed his eyes). – Tinfoil Hat Jan 18 '22 at 17:08
  • Clearer example: "Dave stood in the queue of people, texting his girlfriend." "Dave stood in the queue of people texting his girlfriend." – Peeling Jan 18 '22 at 17:31
  • Well, no, that's sort of a different case; you have a relative clause separated from its noun, so you need a comma (assuming Dave was doing the texting). – Tinfoil Hat Jan 18 '22 at 17:55