CHAPTER IX
MISCELLANEOUS USES OF MARKS
ADJECTIVES BEFORE A NOUN
When two or more adjectives come before a noun, and are not connected by a conjunction, the meaning to be conveyed determines the punctuation:
75. This is a large wild grape.
75-1. This is a large, wild grape.
The punctuation is correct in each of the above sentences; but the two sentences do not mean the same.
Sentence No. 75 says that the grape is a large one in the class of wild grapes, confining the comparison to wild grapes.
Sentence No. 75-1 says that the grape is large and is wild. It is large in comparison with all kinds of grapes.
In No. 75 we give the language its natural meaning. In No. 75-1 we use a comma to show that the natural meaning is not the meaning we wish to convey; we disconnect “large” from “wild grape,” as, in Sentence 1-1, we disconnected words standing in an apparent relation which was not the real relation.
Other examples at the end of this chapter will further illustrate the punctuation.
DOUBLE OBJECT
We have already seen that nouns standing together require some mark between them if their apparent relation is not their real relation. This principle was illustrated especially in Sentence 8-1.
The so-called double object furnishes an apparent exception to the principle. The relation, however, between such words is as regular as the relation between an adjective and a noun when the former precedes the latter. Thus the following sentence requires no mark between the nouns constituting a so-called double object:
76. They elected John Smith president.
A similar relation is seen when the first noun in a sentence like the above is followed by an adjective. The relation is regular, and calls for no mark:
76-1. They called John Smith wise.
In some cases the relation may be more idiomatic than regular, the mark being omitted because there is no real need for its use. The next sentence exhibits such relationship:
77. I myself will undertake the work.
A “LONG” SUBJECT
When a subject is composed of two or more words, and these words do not readily group themselves, a comma may be helpful to group them as a subject. This failure of words to fall readily into a group is generally due to one of three causes: the subject may be somewhat long and contain marks of punctuation, or it may end with a word that seems itself to sustain grammatical and sense relation with the word or words following it, or it may end with a verb. In either of such cases the comma serves to show the end of the subject; and its use is therefore helpful punctuation:
78. Whatever is, is right.
79. He that sees a building as a common spectator, contents himself with speaking of it in the most general terms.
The use of the comma after “spectator” simply warns the reader that “the spectator contents himself” is not the meaning of the language at this point. The comma disconnects “spectator” and “contents,” just as the comma disconnects certain words in Sentence 1-1. Thus the punctuation of this sentence depends upon the fundamental principle of grouping and disjunction.
This principle also explains the value of a comma at the end of several subject-nouns not connected by a conjunction:
80. Ease, indulgence, luxury, sloth, are the sources of misery.
With the conjunction “and” before “sloth,” the comma after “sloth” would not be needed, as “and” and the comma before it would give notice of the ending of the group.
The value of a comma in No. 79 is unmistakable; but is such punctuation helpful when the subject clearly ends itself, either because of its manifest completeness or because there is no apparent relation between the last word of the subject and the predicate verb? Probably a definite and satisfactory answer to this question cannot be given, for the mental capacity and alertness of the reader are involved.
DOUBTFUL MODIFIERS
Perhaps more obscurity in language, often resulting in hurtful misunderstandings and expensive litigation, grows out of doubtful modifiers than out of any other source of bad construction. A knowledge of punctuation here serves a very useful purpose, not always by putting the proper mark in the proper place, but generally by showing the writer the necessity of recasting his sentence, thus removing the cause of any possible wrong interpretation. Punctuation points out the danger; the writer removes it.
What did Smith write according to the wording and punctuation of the following sentence?
81. Smith wrote part of the preface and Chapter I.
It says clearly that Smith wrote part of the preface and part of Chapter I.
And what does the next sentence say he wrote?
81-1. Smith wrote part of the preface, and Chapter I.
It says that Smith wrote part of the preface, and all of Chapter I.
It is not wise to make the meaning of language, especially in important matters, depend upon a mode of punctuation little understood. The wise way is to recast the language. Legal phraseology grew out of the difficulty of so writing as to make one’s meaning unmistakable; but it went to the extreme in verbiage, and has become distasteful even to lawyers. Such verbiage is not necessary to express one’s meaning.
Our next sentence is particularly informing to us in our efforts to establish two or three fundamental principles governing the use of all marks:
82. Life may be held so pure, so receptive to all high influence, so noble in its aspirations, as to furnish the right conditions for these finer promptings; or it may so degenerate into the material, the selfish, the self-centered, as to become deaf and blind and unresponsive to them.
The comma after “aspirations” is used to disconnect the two groups of words between which it stands, thus breaking up an apparent group (so noble in its aspirations as to furnish the right conditions for these finer promptings), and forming out of it two groups, each of which begins with “so,” each group having for its complement the group beginning with “as.”
We perhaps may not say that the comma after “aspirations” at once gives notice of the relation of each of the preceding groups to what follows; but, when the comma cuts “as” off from the preceding “so,” it shows that “as” introduces a group completing each of the preceding groups introduced by “so.” This disconnection between the last two groups compels the reader to make the new grouping.
In the second of the larger groups of this sentence occurs a somewhat similar grouping made by “so—as.” Here the comma is used, just as it is used in Sentence 80, to mark the end of the first part of the group. Its use in both clauses may be said to follow the punctuation diagrammatically exhibited in Sentence 3-2. In No. 82 the reader suspends the thought partially expressed by “so pure” until he reaches the complementary group of words beginning with “as.” This process of suspending the thought occurs in this clause after each group introduced by “so.” The process, instead of being difficult, is well-nigh intuitive, for “so” naturally raises the expectation of the correlative “as,” which introduces the complement of each group introduced by “so.”
Let us also note the last grouping in this sentence, where “to them” is tied to each of the three preceding adjectives by the grouping ands, thus requiring no mark after the last adjective.
INTERMEDIATE RESTRICTIVE GROUPS
Probably at no other point in punctuation do writers obscure the meaning of language so much as in dealing with restrictive and explanatory groups of words. We dealt with the subject in Chapter III, but passed over one feature of it,—namely, the intermediate restrictive group, or a restrictive group coming between two other groups closely tied together in sense, and seemingly requiring the suspension of the intermediate group by commas.
Before dealing with these groups, let us consider an interesting sentence, from very high authority, which tends to confirm our statement concerning the importance of properly punctuating restrictive and explanatory modifiers. The sentence is from a passage in Dean Alford’s notable book, “A Plea for the Queen’s English,” in which passage the Dean severely scolds compositors for their bad punctuation, particularly for the insertion of commas “without the slightest compunction.”
83. I have some satisfaction in reflecting, that, in the course of editing the Greek text of the New Testament, I believe I have destroyed more than a thousand commas, which prevented the text being properly understood.
Mr. De Vinne quotes the passage in which this sentence appears; and he does so in apparent approval of Dean Alford’s condemnation of the misuse of commas. Mr. De Vinne makes a single comment upon the passage, in which he says “the last comma in this extract is superfluous.” The reference is to the comma before “which.”
The comma before “which” is not simply “superfluous”: it is wrong. It is wrong because it changes the meaning of the language by making the writer say, apparently, that he destroyed all the commas in the text, while he, unquestionably, intended to say he destroyed more than a thousand offending commas, that is, commas that (which) obscured the text.
The superfluous comma in the above sentence is, in our opinion, the one after “reflecting.” This comma is used in accordance with the convention of Dean Alford’s day, and follows a rule of “close” punctuation.
But the punctuation is very bad at another point; and, we venture to say, in spite of the great distinction of its author as an English scholar, the language at this point is not the “Queen’s English.” Omitting the intermediate and final groups of words, and the superfluous comma, the sentence will read as follows:
83-1. I have some satisfaction in reflecting that I believe I have destroyed more than a thousand commas.
“Satisfaction in reflecting that I believe,” is, to say the least, a curious satisfaction. This is not the meaning the writer wished to convey.
The obvious error cannot be mended by setting “I believe” off with commas, for this would simply throw doubt upon the statement which follows (I have destroyed), which is a positive statement, needing no qualification. The only doubtful assertion in the sentence is as to the number of commas destroyed. The evident meaning of the language is, that the number of commas destroyed is probably (I believe) more than a thousand. To be sure, “probably” and “I believe” are not exactly equivalent terms; but the word probably here serves to show how “I believe” is used. We set it off by commas because of its slightly parenthetical character.
The entire sentence should be written thus:
83-2. I have some satisfaction in reflecting that, in the course of editing the Greek text of the New Testament, I have destroyed, I believe, more than a thousand commas which prevented the text being properly understood.
The absence of a comma before the adjective group of words beginning with “which,” tells the reader that such adjective group is restrictive, thus confining the destruction to harmful commas.
Let us turn aside again to ask why, in the sentence above and beginning with “The evident,” “probably” takes no commas, while a similar expression (I believe) in No. 83-2 requires them. “Probably” here requires no commas because it coalesces with “more”; while “I believe” does not do so, but makes a decided break in the smoothness of the sentence. The latter expression is like an aside, thus becoming slightly parenthetical. The use of commas with “probably” would make “probably” more emphatic, because the pauses thus indicated would call special attention to it. Such use is good punctuation.
We will now turn to a restrictive group of words that comes between two other groups closely connected in meaning.
Mr. Wilson treats this subject at length, but, we think, in an unsatisfactory way. We find in the wording of one of his rules an illustration of this mode of punctuation which seems more informing than his discussion of the subject. As we do not desire to consider the subject-matter of Mr. Wilson’s rule, we make up a sentence modeled upon its language:
84. When books, that have been thoroughly examined and unqualifiedly approved by a board of college professors, are recommended by a teacher, her pupils should not refuse to read them.
The adjective group of words following “books” is restrictive. It is perhaps made more clearly so by the use of a pronoun (that) formerly used, in the place of who or which, to introduce a restrictive adjective in the form of a pronominal group of words.
If “which” be substituted for “that” in this sentence, the restrictive character of the group may not be so readily apparent; but this would not change the punctuation recommended by Mr. Wilson. Let us deal with the sentence in this form:
84-1. When books, which have been thoroughly examined and unqualifiedly approved by a board of college professors, are recommended by a teacher, her pupils should not refuse to read them.
If it is deemed helpful punctuation to set off by commas the group of words between “books” and “are,” in order to show clearly the dependence of “books” upon “are recommended,” then commas are required. If, on the other hand, we wish to show by the punctuation that the group of words following “books” is restrictive, we must omit the comma after “books.” Thus, apparently, we must here make a choice between two modes of punctuation. As failure to distinguish by punctuation the character of a qualifier,—that is, whether restrictive or explanatory,—not infrequently totally obscures the sense, we do not quite like a rule that calls for a comma before a restrictive group of words.
The sentence may be written without a comma after “books,” but with one after “professors.” The use of the latter would follow the punctuation of No. 79. This mode of punctuation is, after all, only a choice between two modes of punctuation. The better way is to recast all such sentences. No. 84 may be recast in several ways; but it is difficult, without introducing a new word, clearly to express the fact that one kind of books is meant, as shown in the restrictive adjective in both Nos. 84 and 84-1.
We suggest the following form for the recast sentence:
84-2. When certain books have been thoroughly examined and unqualifiedly approved by a board of college professors, and have been recommended by a teacher, her pupils should not refuse to read them.
Every restrictive word or group of words confines the meaning of the word or words so modified to a certain thing or certain things. The man who was here yesterday means a certain man, and means so because of the restrictive group of words following “man”; but “the man, who was here yesterday,” is not so designated by the same group of words set off by commas. These points were considered in another place in this book.
NOT—BUT
The punctuation of intermediate groups of words gives rise to a peculiar phraseology, which needs explanation. We have seen that the intermediate group is set off by commas to show that the sense is suspended at the point where the first comma is placed, to be continued by connection with what follows the complementary comma. We illustrated this process diagrammatically in Sentence 4-3 by actually suspending on the printed page the intermediate group.
We do not hesitate to use commas in the following sentence:
85. His success was attained, not by ability and enterprise, but by friendly assistance.
If we suspend or omit the intermediate group in the above we obtain a result which is not a good sentence:
85-1. His success was attained but by friendly assistance.
We can say of such language as that of No. 85 only that it is idiomatic, thus justifying it as we justify the grammatical solecism “than whom.”
Mr. Wilson makes an exception to this mode of punctuation that is very perplexing; and it is probably because of this that few, if any, other writers refer to or deal with it.
We shall not attempt to discuss Mr. Wilson’s rule, but let us consider one of his examples:
86. It is not from wild beasts, but from untamed passions, that the greatest evils arise to human society.
We think the omission of a comma after “is,” thus suspending the negative group beginning with “not,” is justified, if at all, by the fact that such a sentence is usually read without a pause after the verb; in other words, the language thus readily groups itself, and shows the meaning and the force of the negative intermediate group.
Not a few good writers use a comma before “not” in sentences like No. 86.
If one or more words intervene between the verb and the negative particle, the parts of the sentence do not coalesce, and the comma is required.
87. He came not to teach, but to be taught.
87-1. He came here, not to teach, but to be taught.
If we change the form of No. 87, we may perhaps see somewhat more clearly why this grouping is more natural than would be a grouping made by a comma after the verb (came):
87-2. He did not come to teach, but to be taught.
No. 87-2 seems to show that the grouping made by the comma in No. 87 is a natural grouping.
In spite of Mr. Wilson’s rule, and of our reasoning to explain it, we believe that each mode of punctuating the following sentence is correct, each depending upon where the emphasis is to be laid:
88. The book’s primary aim is, not to convince the skeptic, but to solve the difficulties of the best-thinking men.
88-1. The book’s primary aim is not to convince the skeptic, but to solve the difficulties of the best-thinking men.
In No. 88 the emphasis is placed upon “to solve the difficulties,” the preceding group being thrown in for contrast, thus heightening the effect of the statement made in the next group of words.
In No. 88-1 the emphasis falls upon “not to convince the skeptic,” just as it would if written, “It is not the book’s aim to convince the skeptic.”
Let us note carefully that the mode of punctuation in each of the two preceding sentences would grow out of the context, which would clearly tell where the emphasis was to be laid.
We have dwelt upon this punctuation in order to emphasize a purpose of punctuation too often overlooked.
O and OH
The Century Dictionary says there is no difference between O and oh except that of their present spelling. The New Standard and Webster’s New International do not go so far, but they point out the difference observed by most good writers.
O is generally used only in direct address; and, as the name of the person or thing addressed immediately follows it, it takes no mark of punctuation after it. An exclamation-point may follow the group of words introduced by O. Its vocative character is not lost when the person or thing addressed is not named, for it may be understood.
O is used more in poetry than in prose.
O is used in an ejaculatory expression when followed by for or that. It does not here seem to lose its vocative character, although the name of the thing or person addressed may not readily be supplied.
O is sometimes used colloquially in expressions like “O my!” “O dear!” etc.
Oh is purely ejaculatory, and takes a comma or an exclamation-point immediately after it; but the latter mark may follow the group of words beginning with oh, with a comma before oh.
O is always written with a capital, but oh takes a capital only when beginning a sentence. Some writers prefer always to write oh with a capital.
EXAMPLES
1. Yesterday was my last bad day, but I remember the preceding bad days.
2. He played a prominent part in Congress during the last, bad days of the period of Reconstruction.
3. Cultivation is a fitting object to be attained by education, particularly in a country, like ours, of busy, practical people.
4. For this stream of apt illustrations Macaulay was indebted to his extraordinary memory, and his rapid eye for contrasts and analogies.
5. The so-called revolutions of Holland, England, and America, are all links of one chain.
6. A man who is sensitive, quick in his responses, loyal to his convictions, and strong in his feelings, is capable of a kind of public service that the phlegmatic, unresponsive, insensitive sort of man cannot render.
7. Much of this work was written, and some of it was printed, years ago.
8. We call a thing a blessing because it happens to fit our desires, or, at least, our ideas of what a blessing ought to be.
9. Many suns may set, and many dark nights may cover the earth with clouds, before the truth is ripened into fruitage.
10. These, and a hundred others which will occur to everyone, are marked instances of adaptation to environment.
11. His first problem is the growth of great fortunes, and the collocation of wealth and poverty in large cities.
12. They laud the commission’s report, and exult in its conclusions as the final vindication of their own motives and methods.
13. We have learned, or ought to have learned by this time, that the use of a mark of punctuation often depends wholly upon the sense of the language, and not upon grammatical construction.
14. Untrammeled physical motions may here perfectly express the feelings that elsewhere have to stay unexpressed, or be, at best, imperfectly expressed by a trammeled tongue.
15. A tiny owl with a queer little voice called continually, not only after nightfall, but in the bright afternoon.
16. His speech was noteworthy, not for its eloquence, but because of the effect it produced upon the public.
17. The secret of life is, not to do what one likes, but to try to like that which one has to do; and one does come to like it in time.
18. Mortality; the insane, feeble-minded, deaf and dumb, and blind; crime, pauperism, and benevolence; education; churches; foreign-born population; and manufacturers, are the subjects of his report.
19. Elijah is not the only one who has heard in the wilderness a still, small voice.
20. A holy war—oh, the irony of the appellation!—means the legitimatizing of slaughter, rapine, and plunder.
CHAPTER X
CONVENTIONAL USES OF MARKS
Many uses of marks seem to be based solely upon convention, or arbitrary custom. Back of this convention there may be, in many cases, reason for the punctuation; but, more frequently, there seems to be no reason.
It is not always worth while carefully to attempt to distinguish between reason and convention; but it is quite important to know what is the best, or, at least, what is good, conventional usage, and to follow it in one’s writing. We think it reasonable to call good only such conventional punctuation as is found in the work of writers, and of expert editors of copy, who use marks with a fair degree of consistency, and do not often violate the fundamental principles of punctuation already discussed herein. The punctuation found in most weekly and monthly periodicals is very poor, and is often inferior to that of daily newspapers. In a very few magazines (it would be difficult to name a half dozen, either American or European), and in a considerable number of daily newspapers, the use of marks is discriminating and helpful; in most of our periodical literature the use of marks is so distractive as to make the presence of any mark other than the end-marks of doubtful value, at least to readers not familiar with the meanings of most of the marks of punctuation.
THE PERIOD
1. A period or any other mark, except an interrogation-point, is not often used after a display line in the title-page of a book. This practice is well-nigh universal in book-work, and almost equally so in magazines.
2. A period is generally placed after the letter or the number indicating a division in enumerations. Periods are so used after the figures 1 and 2 numbering this and the preceding paragraph.
If the divisions have subdivisions, and the subdivisions are further subdivided, it is helpful to the reader if a good conventional style is followed. In case of four divisions and subdivisions, a good conventional style is as follows:
The capital letters (A, B, C, etc.) mark the main divisions of the subject.
The Roman capital numerals (I, II, III, IV, etc.) mark the subdivision of A, B, C, etc.
The Arabic figures (1, 2, 3, 4, etc.) mark the subdivision of I, II, III, etc.
The small or lower-case letters (a, b, c, etc.) mark the subdivision of 1, 2, 3, etc. The italic letters are generally used.
If there is only a single enumeration, the Arabic figures (1, 2, 3, etc.) are used.
If there are one enumeration and one subdivision, the Arabic figures and the lower-case letters are used.
If one or more of the first divisions are subdivided, and one or more of such subdivisions are subdivided, the Roman numerals, the Arabic figures, and the lower-case letters are used.
The enumerating letters (A, B, etc.) of the first, or main, divisions are indented the space of the usual paragraph; the subdivisions of the first divisions are so far indented that their enumerating letters or figures are in alignment with the first letter of the first word under the division above. This mode of indention is continued with the next subdivisions, thus putting the enumerating letters or figures of the respective divisions or subdivisions in perpendicular alignment. This mode of enumeration and indention can be illustrated diagrammatically:
89.
A. The capital letters (A, B, C, etc.) will mark the main divisions of the subject.
I. The Roman numerals (I, II, III, etc.) will mark the subdivisions of A, B, C, etc.
1. The Arabic figures (1, 2, 3, etc.) will mark the subdivisions of I, II, III, etc.
a. The italic lower-case letters (a, b, c, etc.) will mark the subdivisions of 1, 2, 3, etc.
B. Here follows the second main division, its enumerating letter (B) being in perpendicular alignment with “A,” above.
This mode of indention and alignment is not observed unless the divisions and subdivisions are somewhat close together; for, otherwise, the alignment of the enumerating letters or figures would not be apparent to the eye. It is particularly useful in the preparation of a syllabus.
An extra indention of the second and following lines of each subdivision helps to make clear the alignment of the enumerating letters and figures. This is particularly desirable in type-written manuscript. In book-work the lines are often too short to permit so great indention, and therefore the letters and figures are indented the usual paragraph space.
A half-parenthesis is sometimes used with a, b, c, etc., as the half-bracket is used in dramatic composition. This is the German style. We do not know what is gained by it, unless it is used for an additional subdivision.
Some punctuators enclose in parentheses figures and lower-case letters when used before paragraph-enumerations. Generally, such usage is condemned by the meanings of the marks, and serves no useful purpose. Marks of parenthesis are properly used to enclose figures and letters enumerating particulars within the limits of a sentence or a paragraph. If one or more of the particulars are composed of two or more sentences, each of the particulars should be put in paragraph form, in order clearly to group the parts of each particular.
Note.—It is hardly proper to designate as a paragraph that which is a part of a sentence; and we therefore use the term “paragraph form” to designate a group of words that is a part of a sentence, and is yet put in the form of a paragraph, and is numbered as a particular.
As a rule, each enumerating group in paragraph form is composed of one or more sentences; and thus each enumerating figure or letter becomes a part of a paragraph group, and therefore loses its parenthetical nature. If each paragraph group is composed of a single group of words constituting only a phrase or a sentence, it may be followed conventionally by a semicolon, and thus give apparent justification for the use of parentheses enclosing the enumerating figures or letters. The following example will illustrate the point:
90. There are three objections to buying very cheap editions of standard uncopyrighted books:
(1) The text is almost always inaccurate;
(2) The punctuation is so poor that, often, the meaning of the language is entirely changed;
(3) The printing is generally so poor as to injure the eyes of the reader.
To divide paragraph groups by semicolons is so obviously inconsistent that little justification can be found for this form of writing. If it is desirable, for the sake of the ease of reading thereby gained, to paragraph the particulars, as in the above sentence, the parentheses and semicolons should not be used:
90-1. There are three objections to buying very cheap editions of standard uncopyrighted books:
1. The text is almost always inaccurate.
2. The punctuation is so poor that, often, the meaning of the language is entirely changed.
3. The printing is generally so poor as to injure the eyes of the reader.
The De Vinne Press does not use a period after the letters and figures noting paragraph enumerations. This is not very common usage; but it is followed in the Bible and in practically all hymn-books, no period following the verse-numbers. As it makes a better-looking page, the style should be adopted. It is not adopted herein, except on pages xi and xii, for we prefer not to follow a limited conventional usage.
3. A period and a dash are generally used after a side-head. The dash sets the group of words off from what follows, and thus shows at a glance that the words are a heading, and not a part of the sentence following. This style is very common, and is helpful to the reader. Side-heads are generally put in italics, but often in small capitals or bold-face type.
The same marks are put after the word “Note” (the word is generally printed with a capital and small capitals) when used to introduce remarks (a note) in the text.
4. The period and dash are used before the name of the author or the title of the work following a quotation when the name of the author or the work begins on the last line. If such name is dropped below the last line of type, the dash alone is used before the name.
5. The period is used to indicate abbreviations. (See Chapter XIII.)
6. The period is used by some printing-offices, notably The Riverside Press, between the figures expressing the time of day:
91. The train arrives at 6.20 P. M.
As this makes the “20” look like a decimal, the style is not to be commended.
7. The period is used to indicate decimals.
Note.—Quite contrary to the statement made in not a few school text-books, a cipher standing alone frequently precedes the decimal point, and is useful when it will prevent an error that is especially to be guarded against,—for example, in a physician’s prescription. It is easy to read “.1 gm.” as one gram; but “0.1 gm.” is quite unmistakable, even with a faint mark for the decimal sign (period), because the spacing between the figures serves to show that a period belongs there.
THE COLON
The conventional uses of the colon are not numerous. The following are the principal ones:
1. Between figures expressing the time of day in hours and minutes; but, as stated above, the period is used by some good printing-houses:
92. The train arrives at 6:20 P. M.
2. Between the name of a publisher and the place of publication, especially in title-pages and in book titles:
93. New York: The Macmillan Company.
3. After the salutatory phrase at the beginning of a letter, if not on the first line of the letter:
94. Dear Sir:
Your letter of the 21st ultimo is at hand.
When the salutatory phrase is put on the first line of the text of the letter, a comma and a dash is the usual punctuation:
94-1. Dear Mr. Smith,—Your letter of the 25th ultimo is at hand.
4. After the salutatory phrase used by a speaker in addressing the chairman or the audience.
5. Many good punctuators use a dash with a colon when the colon is at the end of a paragraph. As the salutatory phrase in No. 94 is a paragraph, a dash would follow the colon. This is the style of The Riverside Press. We followed it in the first edition of this work. The combination is not pleasing to the eye, and therefore we do not now use the two marks together.
6. It cannot be denied that the use of the colon after different forms of the verb “to be,” and preceding details, is good conventional punctuation. We think it exceedingly bad punctuation; for it separates words (the verb and its predicate) that are in the closest grammatical relation, and, generally, the mark is without apparent purpose.
Our illustrative sentence is from the work of Mr. Teall, who explains that the colon is used because of the modifiers following the name of the persons:
95. Among those present were: John Brown, who made a speech; Adam Smith, with his wife and daughter; Charles Jones, etc.
We think no mark is needed after “were.” As indicated elsewhere, if the particulars are put into paragraph form, thus leaving “were” at the end of an incomplete line, a dash may be used, simply to act as a sort of leader for the eye, or as a partial filler of the blank space in the line:
95-1. Among those present were—John Brown, who made a speech....
Some good punctuators would use no mark after “were” in No. 95-1.
In No. 95 we give Mr. Teall’s punctuation, which shows a comma before “etc.” This makes “etc.” stand for a modifier of “Jones”; and this, in turn, puts three words, with their modifiers, in a series without a conjunction before the last one. Such grouping is not in the usual form of grouping, except in language where, as we believe, the proper relations are overlooked, as they seem to be here.
This apparently doubtful meaning of the comma,— that is, whether it indicates that “etc.” stands for a modifier, like the preceding ones, or for additional persons,—may be avoided by using “and” after the second semicolon, thus making “etc.” stand for a modifier of Jones, or by the use of a semicolon after “Jones,” thus making “etc.” stand for an additional group or groups.
In such sentences as No. 95, Mr. Wilson and other writers on punctuation suggest the use of a comma before the beginning of the semicolon-divided group. This punctuation might be based upon the use of a comma at the end of a long subject. The use of the colon is based, of course, on the ground that some introductory word like namely is understood.
THE SEMICOLON
We believe there are only two purely conventional uses of the semicolon:
1. As stated on a preceding page, a book title with a subtitle introduced by “or,” takes a semicolon before “or” and a comma after it:
96. Why We Punctuate; or, Reason versus Rule in the Use of Marks.
2. Before an example or the specifications of particulars. We will give Mr. Wilson’s rule for their use. He says:
97. A semicolon is put before as, viz., to wit, namely, i. e., or that is, when they precede an example or a specification of particulars....
Note.—The punctuation in the above sentence has a striking peculiarity, which may readily deceive even a very careful reader. The use of “or” apparently makes one of the particulars enumerated the antecedent of “they,” thus requiring the singular pronoun “it,” instead of “they,” in the clause that follows. 172 As Mr. Wilson would neither make nor overlook such a simple error in grammatical construction, we must look more closely for a meaning of the language that will justify the use of “they.” Such meaning is found in the relation between “i. e.” and “that is.” As “i. e.” (id est) is the Latin abbreviation for “that is,” the or relation exists between only these particulars in the list. The comma before “or” follows the punctuation exemplified in Sentence 17. This meaning of the language ends the series with “i. e.”; and the relation between the items of the series is the and relation, which requires the plural pronoun “they.”
The use of the conjunction “and” after “namely” would correct the fault; but the meaning of the sentence might not be easily apprehended by all readers.
These relations can best be revealed by recasting the language. It may be done thus:
97-1. A semicolon is put before as, viz., to wit, namely, and i. e., or its English unabbreviated equivalent, that is, when they....
If we attempt to remedy the fault by putting “that is” in parentheses after “i. e.,” we take “that is” out of the list of words enumerated, making it simply an explanation of “i. e.”
A confusion in grouping, and consequently in meaning, due to the absence of the proper conjunction or the proper mark of punctuation at the end of a series, is very common.
This use of the semicolon and a comma is without reason, so far as we can determine; but it is very firmly fixed conventionally. The objection to it is, that it makes the semicolon a mark of apposition, along with the colon, the comma, and the comma and dash; and its use for such purpose detracts from its more common use of grouping when the and or or relation exists, whether expressed or understood, as exemplified in Sentences 7 and 20-1.
Mr. De Vinne uses a comma before such an introductory particle, and a colon after it; but he makes no reference to the established usage, nor does he give any reason for such punctuation. The reason is simple: the particle is slightly parenthetical, thus requiring to be set off by commas; but the relation between what precedes and what follows is clearly the colon relation. When particulars are formally enumerated, this relation requires a colon on one side of the particle; and the colon will supersede one of the commas. On which side of the particle does the colon belong?
Although Mr. De Vinne, in his own work, puts the colon after the particle, the Century Dictionary, which is issued from the De Vinne Press, puts it before the particle when introducing illustrative examples. The position of the colon in either place is easily explained: if after the particle, the particle is more closely connected with the general term than with the particulars, which follow the colon; if before the particle, the particle is more closely connected with the particulars.
These relations will appear more clearly in examples:
98. The student failed in three studies, namely: spelling, grammar, and history.
98-1. The student failed in three studies: namely, spelling, grammar, and history.
If we substitute “by name” for “namely,” the sense relation between “namely” and “studies,” in one sentence, and between “namely” and the items following in the other sentence, is unmistakable. We can therefore put any such particle where it seems best to reveal the meaning.
We think “by name” is closely associated with “studies,” just as the word “named” or “called” would be, if used in the place of “by name.” This relation therefore requires the colon after the particle.
THE INTERROGATION-POINT
The mark of interrogation has three uses:
1. It is used after a word or group of words asking a question, whether or not such word or words indicate by their form that a question is asked. This usage has already been illustrated. (Page 2.)
2. Enclosed in the proper marks (parentheses, if in the writer’s own language; brackets, if in quoted language), it is placed at a point in a sentence to indicate that the writer questions the accuracy of what immediately precedes it.
This use of the mark of interrogation is not in good taste unless it is for a serious, and not a frivolous, purpose. A foot-note is, in most cases, a better means of expression:
99. He said he was born in 1840(?).
100. He was asked for an exact statement of his age. He replied: “I was born in 1840[?].”
3. It is used by an editor in the margin of a manuscript, or by a proof-reader in the margin of a proof, to question the accuracy of a statement or the correctness of the form of language at the point indicated by the editor or proof-reader. When thus used it is not necessarily enclosed in other marks.
THE EXCLAMATION-POINT
This point is used in two ways:
1. It is used after a word or group of words to express command, surprise, or emotion.
2. Enclosed in brackets, it is used in a quotation to express surprise, irony, or contempt.
101. Wake up! Something is going wrong!
102. Oh, how hard my lot[!]
The practice of using two or three exclamation-points together is not now followed.
ELLIPSIS
When one, for the sake of brevity or otherwise, omits a word, a group of words, or one or more sentences from a quotation, such omission, or ellipsis, is indicated by either periods or stars. Periods are generally preferred on the ground that they look better on the printed page than stars. Unfortunately, the number of periods used for an ellipsis is not definitely fixed by convention. Some writers and printers use three, and others use four; we prefer three.
If words are omitted from the end of a sentence, the end-mark of the sentence, if an exclamation-point or an interrogation-point, is retained, and follows the three periods. If the end-mark of the sentence is a period, and one or more sentences following are omitted, there will be four periods at this point. There will be the same number if words are omitted from the beginning of a sentence following a sentence ending with a period.
If stars are used, the closing period is retained.
If one or more paragraphs, or if, in poetry, one or more lines, are omitted, a full line of periods or stars is used.
A dash or stars are used in the place of letters omitted from a word, and the dash in place of figures omitted from a number of figures. Stars were formerly much used for omitted letters.
Examples will illustrate the punctuation under consideration. Our first example is taken from the current issue of a well-known weekly periodical:
103. Who commissioned them, a minority, a less than minority ...?... Some of them are misguided, some of them are blind, most of them are ignorant. I would rather pray for them.... They do not tell me what they are attempting.
How shall we interpret the marks indicating the three ellipses in the above sentence?
The first three periods stand for words omitted from the end of an interrogative sentence, whose end-mark follows such periods.
The second group of three periods indicates an ellipsis of one or more entire sentences. If they indicated an ellipsis of only a part of the next sentence, “Some” would not begin with a capital.
The next group of four periods is composed of three periods for the ellipsis and one period for the end-mark of the sentence.
It should be noted that ellipses from quotations are of only such matter as can be omitted without affecting the sense of the language quoted.
Marks of quotation will include the marks of ellipsis that begin or end the quoted matter.
The use of stars in the first part of No. 103 will convey no more definite information than the periods give the reader; but their use in the second part of the sentence, accompanied by a period, will at once show that they stand for the ellipsis of one or more sentences:
103-1. I would rather pray for them. * * * They do not tell me what they are attempting.
CHAPTER XI
QUOTATION-MARKS
Quotation-marks are either single or double. The former consist of one inverted comma and one apostrophe; the latter, of two inverted commas and two apostrophes.
The double marks are very generally used in this country for a single quotation; but some writers and some printing-offices follow the English style of using the single marks.
Quotation-marks are used by a writer to identify as the exact language of another writer a word or group of words which the first writer uses within his own language.
They are sometimes used by a writer to enclose a quotation from his own printed or spoken language. The fact that such quoted matter is his own language is practically always shown by the text.
If the quoted language contains a quotation, such quotation is identified by the quotation-marks (single or double) not used for the main quotation.
If the subordinate quotation begins the main quotation, three marks (one double and one single) are used at the beginning; if the subordinate ends the main, three marks are also used at the close.
Illustrations of the three uses above defined are found in the following examples:
104. In appreciation of Mrs. George Ripley, Mr. Frothingham says, “Theodore Parker made the following entry in his journal: ‘Mrs. Ripley gave me a tacit rebuke for not shrieking at wrongs, and spoke of the danger of losing our humanity in abstractions.’”
If a quotation consists of two or more paragraphs appearing consecutively in the work quoted from, quotation-marks are used only at the beginning of each paragraph and at the end of the last one. If two or more paragraphs are printed consecutively in the quotation, but do not appear consecutively in the work quoted from, each paragraph is identified as a whole by marks at its beginning and end.
If only a part of a sentence or of a paragraph is quoted, and it is desirable to show this fact, the omitted part or parts are indicated by periods or stars. If such marks of omission come at the beginning or at the end of the quoted matter, the marks of quotation are so placed as to include them.
If the quoted matter is a letter or document with place-and date-lines preceding it, and with a complimentary closing-line and one or more signatures following it, each of such lines and names is treated as a paragraph, and takes its proper marks before or after it, or both.
It is much better practice in printing to put such matter in smaller type than the type of the main text; or, if in type-written manuscript, to identify it by less space between its lines than is used between the lines preceding and following it, or by indenting the lines of the quotation more than the regular paragraph indention. Quotations thus identified need no quotation-marks.
It was formerly the practice to put quotation marks at the beginning of every line of a quotation however long; and occasionally this style is now followed, especially in legal documents.
The practice in many newspaper offices furnishes, we think, a satisfactory solution of the problem. When quoted matter is given close grammatical relation to the text, the marks of quotation are used before the first word of the quotation and before each line, with the proper closing marks at the end of the quotation. Such a quotation should not exceed ten or twelve lines in length. Larger quotations should be put in smaller type, and without the marks. Even short ones may be so treated.
OTHER USES OF QUOTATION-MARKS
A word or group of words is sometimes enclosed in quotation-marks to give to such word or group of words a meaning somewhat different from its usual meaning. This use of the marks has a very wide range; and it is difficult to define the full scope of it. Its significance will appear in illustrative examples:
105. A drop-folio is generally used on a page on which a chapter begins or on a page containing an illustration extending to its top.
105-1. A “drop-folio” is a page-number that is put at the bottom of the page.
In No. 105-1 “drop-folio” is singled out as an uncommon word, as if quoted; and this fact is shown by the marks. In No. 105 it is used as is any other word in the sentence.
106. He received “big wages,” $1.00 a day.
In No. 106 we put “big wages” in quotation-marks to imply that some one has used this familiar expression in a boastful way without telling the whole truth, which is exposed in the small sum that follows.
107. She was very fond of “five-o’clocks.”
In No. 107 the writer implies that the afternoon teas of society are frivolous things. This is perhaps a purely conventional use of the marks, without an underlying reason for the meaning thus given.
In the next sentence the writer groups, by means of the marks, certain words into a title, which are identified by quotation-marks. Italics would answer the same purpose; but the former marks are preferred:
108. This fundamental work might be called, “An Introduction to the Study of Literature”; or, “The Elements of Literature.”
The above sentence is quoted from an educational magazine of high standing, printed by a Press that gives much attention to style. The use of the semicolon and comma in the sentence is the conventional style of punctuating compound book-titles, as illustrated in Sentence 96. But the quotation-marks show that this is not a compound title, but alternative titles. The real meaning would be more clearly expressed by the use of “either” after “called”; and this shows that the punctuation is wrong. Either the semicolon and the comma or the quotation-marks must be omitted. The meaning to be conveyed will determine which marks to omit.
If the semicolon and comma are not the proper marks here, how shall we determine what mark, if any, should precede “or”? Simply by the degree of liability to error in making a wrong combination of words at this point. The quotation-marks before “or” close the first quotation, making a complete group of words; and the quotation-marks following “or” open a new group of words. As there is here no liability on the part of the reader to make a wrong grouping out of some words that precede and some that follow “or,” a mark before “or” can serve no purpose. Each group is bound up in its own marks of quotation, and is a name; and the two names are alternatives. With this interpretation of the meaning of the language as determined by the quotation-marks alone, the sentence would be punctuated as follows:
108-1. This fundamental work might be called, “An Introduction to the Study of Literature” or “The Elements of Literature.”
The use of the comma after “called” in the above sentence is purely conventional. It is somewhat like the use of the comma before “that” following “is,” as treated elsewhere. Or, we may say, it is a purely rhetorical use, as the reading of the somewhat long title seems to require a pause after “called,” in order to identify the group to follow. The omission of the comma could not be called poor punctuation.
Quotation-marks are used in the report of a conversation or dialogue in which the names of the speakers are not printed at the beginning of their respective remarks, as is done in the printing of a drama. However, some writers do not use quotation-marks for this purpose, and none are used in the frequent conversations in the Bible.
If the language of a quotation is broken off by a writer for the purpose of inserting words not a part of the quotation, each of the two parts into which the quoted matter is thus broken, is enclosed in quotation-marks:
109. “We shall start,” he said, “at early dawn.”
Words to which special attention is called, otherwise than for emphasis, are put in quotation-marks:
110. The words “virile,” “psychological,” “strenuous,” etc., are useful words in their proper places, but weak words when out of place.
The titles of books, plays, songs, poems, and the like, when referred to in one’s text, are put in quotation-marks by some writers and in italics by others. The former seems to be the more common usage. Mr. De Vinne says “italic is preferred by bookish men.” Most writers make an exception to the above rule in the case of the titles of well-known books.
The same rule applies to periodicals, including transactions and proceedings issued, at least, quarterly. In most journal offices there is a well-established convention: the journal puts in italics the name of another periodical, and in caps and small caps its own name appearing in its own text.
When the closing marks of quotation follow a word or group of words that is also followed by another mark of punctuation, the positions of the two marks are determined by the relation such other mark of punctuation bears to the quoted matter. If it belongs to, and is therefore required by, the quoted matter, it goes within the quotation-marks. The comma and the period always precede the final quotation-marks, and do so simply because they appear better thus arranged on the printed page. The semicolon, the colon, the interrogation-point, and the exclamation-point follow or precede the closing marks of quotation according to their relation to the quoted matter. The comma and period also precede marks of reference (superior figures, stars, etc.) and the degree mark, while the semicolon, colon, the interrogation-point, and the exclamation-point follow them. On page 3, above, a superior figure follows a colon. It does so because it refers to the colon, not to what precedes the colon.
EXAMPLES
1. “Movies” showing war scenes that arouse the martial spirit are objectionable to all pacifists.
The above sentence contains two words treated as they are found today in practically all periodicals and books using them. The words movies and pacifists (also written pacificists) are newcomers in English, and are not found in any dictionary. Why is the former put in quotation-marks and the latter not? It is probably because all editors recognize “movies” as a word of doubtful propriety, and therefore give it the conventional marks. On the other hand, the word “pacifist,” whose meaning is so apparent and whose form is so regular, has not been regarded as of doubtful propriety, generally recognized as a stranger, and so has been accepted without the introduction of the conventional marks of quotation.
3. Portrait of Major-General Henry Dearborn. By Gilbert Stuart.
4. “Our Boatman.” By John La Farge.
The above legends (inscriptions) appear under two pictures in a well-edited current magazine. Why does the title in No. 4 take marks of quotation, while that in No. 3 does not?
Two reasons may be given for the use of the marks in No. 4, while one reason is sufficient for their absence in No. 3. “Our Boatman” is the title of the painting, and is treated as a quotation, and therefore requires the quotation-marks. Secondly, the words “Our Boatman” are not used in their literal sense as descriptive of a man who acts as our boatman,—that is, the picture is not a photograph of John Smith, our boatman, but is an idealization of a man of his class. To give the words other than a literal meaning, the marks are used.
In No. 3 the language is taken in its literal meaning, and even may be that of the editor of the magazine, thus requiring no marks. Probably no painter would put upon his canvas “A Portrait of John Smith.”
5. “Justice,” said Webster, “is the great interest of man on earth”; and Mr. Root laid it down as a rule, when Secretary of State, that we should not only observe justice in our relations, but that we should be just.
6. Professor John Finley, in “The French in the Heart of America,” insists, with pardonable enthusiasm, that we got our finest democratic ideals from the French settlers in the Mississippi Valley, and that here was nourished
a national democracy founded on the equalities, the freedoms, and the fraternities of the frontier so vital, so powerful, that it became the dominant nationalistic force in a continent-wide republic.