3 ms·
BTW, I had never heard of the "comma splice" rule before (but I'm not a native English speaker). It looks more like a stylistic rule than a grammar rule, and I
by Udik 11y ago
BTW, I had never heard of the "comma splice" rule before (but I'm not a native English speaker). It looks more like a stylistic rule than a grammar rule, and I can see nothing inherently wrong in using the form - the Wikipedia entry says it's considered acceptable or even compulsory in other languages. As a stylistic rule, it sounds like a particularly silly one, given that there are numerous examples of authors using comma splices in literature.
The Wikipedia entry mentions "The Elements of Style" by White and Strunk as one of the sources of the rule. The manual has been criticised by professional linguists, who noted that White and Strunk didn't even seem to understand what constitutes a passive voice (while discouraging their use). The manual also contains other silly prescriptions, like avoiding split infinitives.
- jeremysmyth 11y agoWhile these criticisms are valid, you shouldn't use them to dismiss S&W entirely. It contains many good observations[1] about the English language. [1] Sadly, many are voiced prescriptively despite the fact that neither S&W nor any other manual of style can claim to be the final arbiter of our ever-evolving language.