1

I am proofreading an article and not sure about the following sentence:

  • In doing so, Marshall departs from the standards of Western modernist painting, in which the direct application of paint to the painting ground – usually a white canvas – has long been established as the norm.

My only question is whether the comma is correct before "in which"... I read somewhere that as a rule there should not be a comma place in front of "in which". Logically, it seems to me that "in which" should be treated as "which" but I am not certain.

John Lawler
  • 107,887
Phil
  • 51
  • 1
  • 1
    The word "correct" probably doesn't make much sense in these sorts of stylistic matters of writing. – tchrist Feb 19 '23 at 21:13
  • Your phrase is nonrestrictive in nature, a parenthetical expression that comments on Western modernist painting rather than limiting it. The sentence mentions the painterly technique to remind the reader of the standard. – Yosef Baskin Feb 19 '23 at 21:32
  • 3
    Could you please explain why you think there is a problem? Punctuation has some conventions, such as that where more than two nouns/verbs or noun/verb phrases are conjoined, most people write "a, b and c", "a, b, c and d" etcetera. Many as a rule of thumb read the passage out loud and ask themselves whether they make a significant pause between (in this case) "painting" and "in which". Don't you find that the substantial length/importance of the clause that follows calls for a pause and so a comma? – Tuffy Feb 19 '23 at 21:36
  • While I may find that a comma "sounds" right here, I am double-checking to see if there may be a rule or convention that I am not aware of... along the lines of 'I know enough to know I don't know much' :) I was also hoping for someone to answer the question posed in the original post heading. – Phil Feb 19 '23 at 22:05
  • 1
    If there weren't a comma, it would mean that Marshall departs from those standards that involve the direct application of paint.... In other words, the relative clause would modify standards instead of Western modernist painting. – Tinfoil Hat Feb 19 '23 at 22:42
  • 1
    No special rule for in which. It's just a relative clause with a preposition pied-piped instead of stranded. In this case, non-restrictive, but it would work as a restrictive, too. Pied piping is ultra-formal, though, so it's probly more common in non-restrictive clauses. – John Lawler Feb 20 '23 at 01:04
  • @John Lawyer - Is there any reason why you used a bullet point instead of a blockquote there? Should blockquotes only be used for long quotations? – HippoSawrUs Feb 20 '23 at 01:09
  • 1
    Just to separate the data we're sposta concentrate on from the discussion it was set with. Visual easement, not punctuation. There ain't no "should" here. Everybody has their own habits, just like real life. – John Lawler Feb 20 '23 at 03:06

1 Answers1

1

From a comment above:

No special rule for in which. It's just a relative clause with a preposition pied-piped instead of stranded. In this case, non-restrictive, but it would work as a restrictive, too.

As for your statement:

I read somewhere that as a rule there should not be a comma place in front of "in which"

Some prescriptivists demand the relative pronoun "that" for restrictive clauses and "which" for nonrestrictive clauses.1 I suppose that the advice that you read came from such a source. However, in practice "which" is often used for both restrictive and nonrestrictive clauses, so the presence of that pronoun is not useful for determining whether a comma is needed or not (unless you subscribe to the prescriptivists' position).

1 Note that this only applies when the choice is available. Thus, it wouldn't apply when the pronoun should be "who(m)", a preposition is pied-piped (as in your example), etc.

MarcInManhattan
  • 7,930