Question regarding commas..

[phoenixblessed]

The sun had barely risen, and already, the two were bickering.
Isn't that technically correct?

This is essentially two small sentences joined with a comma and a conjunction. Or, is there some rule that I’ve forgotten about?

[Sq]

I don't see anything wrong about that sentence..it looks/sounds perfectly fine to me. ^_^

[phoenixblessed]

I know. That's why I'm confused to as why someone would cross out the first comma. It's mind-boggling.

[Dan]

I think both ways work, maybe that person crossed it out because it sounds better in his/her mind. ^_^

[Rikku]

If I did anything, I'd cross out the second comma, but it seems fine to me. I'd say Dan's got it.

[Tam]

rikku said:

If I did anything, I'd cross out the second comma, but it seems fine to me. I'd say Dan's got it.

That's what I initially thought too. xD But the purpose of a comma is to create a momentary pause, and I think that a pause will sound better in different places to different people. Personally, I think the sentence looks fine the way it is too.

[Serene]

tamiasilverwing said:

rikku said:

If I did anything, I'd cross out the second comma, but it seems fine to me. I'd say Dan's got it.

That's what I initially thought too. xD But the purpose of a comma is to create a momentary pause, and I think that a pause will sound better in different places to different people. Personally, I think the sentence looks fine the way it is too.

I was thinking the same thing, about the second comma. (Oh, comma work there.) I do think that the comma can sometimes be somewhat a matter of opinion. Though the only person who it matters to, should be the writer. (Unless it is grammatically incorrect)

[phoenixblessed]

So my APEng teacher explained it, but said that she-- my creative writing teacher-- should have crossed out the second comma as well... but of course, I kinda got lost in his explanation. >>

[emmhwal]

*grabs her grammar book*

I looked it up, and my handy-dandy Merriam-Webster Concise Handbook for Writers, but it really doesn't talk about it. I assume, in which case, the second comma is really unneccessary. It doesn't separate a clause, series, fall in a quotation, name or title, or address, and is not used with another form of punctuation, so I doubt that it should actually be there.

On the other hand, the book was talking about how many authors and editors will use commas, even when unnecessary:

NOTE: Despite the fact that most style manuals and composition handbooks warn against separating the parts of compound predicates with commas, many authors and editors use commas in just this way. They are particularly likely to do so... if the abscence of a comma would cause even a momentary misreading of the sentence.

Even so, I doubt that the removal of that comma would affect the interpretation of the sentence. So, to answer your initial question: Technically, no, although it really is just a matter of personal opinion and one's own writing style.

[Deleted]

The sun had barely risen, and already, the two were bickering.
The sun had barely risen and already, the two were bickering.
The sun had barely risen and already the two were bickering.

All are correct. In newspaper, we'd do the last one. Just a preference thing.

(When I personally write, though, I'd do one of the first two. I really like using commas.)

[Deleted]

^ I was going to say the same thing. Except that I wouldn't know the last one would be used in a newspaper. ^^

It's up to you. If you're a comma person, use the first one (in twocent's post). I'd probably use the last unless I felt that a comma would help emphasize the narrator's frustration with the two Neopians.