Grammar thread?

[mikey]

That POS Microsoft Word constantly corrects my writing. Now it wants me to remove comma before "but" in:

These results suggest that deals involving bidders socially connected to their financial advisors are more likely to be completed, but are executed in a less efficient and timely manner.

a) Is that f'in software right?
b) If yes, is there a rule on when to put comma before "but" (in my old language comma goes there every time, because it is considered a natural break in the sentence).

Thanks!

I only put a comma if your conjunction ("but") is joining two independent clauses. It's not obvious to me that you're doing that here. I also initially read the sentence without a pause there naturally.

It also doesn't matter very much, as it's not impactful. But I'll go with "a", as being narrowly correct...

[meow]

Testing:

meow and mikey are pains in the ass

Yes that's the one

Your face is a pains in the asses

[willeyeam]

I don't think that checks out

[MalkinIsMyHomeboy]

more like a pleasure in the asses

[mikey]

The word you're looking for is fissure...

[Shyster]

That POS Microsoft Word constantly corrects my writing. Now it wants me to remove comma before "but" in:

These results suggest that deals involving bidders socially connected to their financial advisors are more likely to be completed, but are executed in a less efficient and timely manner.

a) Is that f'in software right?
b) If yes, is there a rule on when to put comma before "but" (in my old language comma goes there every time, because it is considered a natural break in the sentence).

Thanks!

I only put a comma if your conjunction ("but") is joining two independent clauses. It's not obvious to me that you're doing that here. I also initially read the sentence without a pause there naturally.

Concur. In that sentence, the but is not introducing something that would stand on its own as a separate sentence, so there is no need for a comma. I also agree that when I read the sentence, I do not insert a pause before the "but." Now, if the second clause were "but they are executed in a less efficient and timely manner," then there would be a comma before the "but."

[Tomas]

That POS Microsoft Word constantly corrects my writing. Now it wants me to remove comma before "but" in:

These results suggest that deals involving bidders socially connected to their financial advisors are more likely to be completed, but are executed in a less efficient and timely manner.

a) Is that f'in software right?
b) If yes, is there a rule on when to put comma before "but" (in my old language comma goes there every time, because it is considered a natural break in the sentence).

Thanks!

I only put a comma if your conjunction ("but") is joining two independent clauses. It's not obvious to me that you're doing that here. I also initially read the sentence without a pause there naturally.

Concur. In that sentence, the but is not introducing something that would stand on its own as a separate sentence, so there is no need for a comma. I also agree that when I read the sentence, I do not insert a pause before the "but." Now, if the second clause were "but they are executed in a less efficient and timely manner," then there would be a comma before the "but."

Thanks to both you and @mikey . Learning something new even after 27 years in this country. My problem is that in Czech, you always have to pause before "but" no matter what (including the sentence I originally asked about).

Just to make sure - so any time I omit the noun ("they" or "deal") - no comma. But if I put

but they are executed in a less efficient and timely manner. or
but such deals re executed in a less efficient and timely manner.

then always comma?


Either way, the study is about to be submitted to a journal without the comma.

Ultimately, the above is yet another reason why our 2 American daughters (7 and 5) have recently found a lot of pleasure in correcting pronunciation and grammar of their Czech father and Bulgarian mother...

[Shyster]

Correct. No comma when the subject is omitted from the second clause. A comma before the conjunction is used when the conjunction (words such as and, but, for, yet, so, or, although, and nevertheless) joins two clauses that each can be a stand-alone sentence because each contains both a subject and a verb. A way of checking can be to eliminate the conjunction and look at each clause by itself. If both clauses are themselves complete sentences, then use a comma. If one of them is just a fragment, however, then no comma is necessary.

A good general reference for stuff like this is The Chicago Guide to Grammar, Usage, and Punctuation by Bryan Garner. As the title suggests, it's an all-in-one book on grammar and punctuation and has a chapter on word-usage and easily-confused words. It even has a chapter on diagramming sentences. Might be something handy to have around both for you and for the kids as they go through school.

[MalkinIsMyHomeboy]

Tomas what’s the biggest grammatical difference between Czech and English you’ve found?

[Tomas]

I generally don't care if my writing has some grammar errors, but this one is an exception:

My retired colleague just died. I liked him a lot, he was a good friend, and I think I need to send an email/post about him (because he retired 10 years ago, there aren't that many who knew him as good as I did).

Anyway, I don't want to end

"He will be missed (dearly?, greatly?)" - because that's passive and not personal.

So, is

"I will miss him...a lot/dearly/greatly" reasonably standard?

If yes, is any of the "I will miss him..." version better than the others?

[meow]

I will dearly miss him

[mikey]

Of course, smooth brain meow split the infinitive there.

I will miss him dearly
I will miss him greatly

[Shyster]

In this context, I would write it as you would say it. Speak freely and from the heart. Bugger the grammar.

The no-split “rule” for infinitives is no rule at all. It began as a effort by early English grammarians to make English like Latin, in which the infinitive is a single word and is therefore unsplittable. So they declared that if you can’t split infinitives in Latin, they then you mustn’t in English. But English isn’t Latin; English is a more flexible language with more ways place adverbs to create desired tone and emphasis. Same thing with the "rules" about not ending sentences with prepositions and not starting sentences with conjunctions. None of them are real.

[mikey]

Hmph, interesting. TIL.

[meow]

who's the smooth brain now, ya mutant?

[King Colby]

I generally don't care if my writing has some grammar errors, but this one is an exception:

My retired colleague just died. I liked him a lot, he was a good friend, and I think I need to send an email/post about him (because he retired 10 years ago, there aren't that many who knew him as good as I did).

Anyway, I don't want to end

"He will be missed (dearly?, greatly?)" - because that's passive and not personal.

So, is

"I will miss him...a lot/dearly/greatly" reasonably standard?

If yes, is any of the "I will miss him..." version better than the others?

Sorry for your loss.

"I will miss him dearly"

There aren't that many who knew him as well as I did

[mikey]

who's the smooth brain now, ya mutant?

Still you, **** wit. I know Latin rules too apparently, asinus.

[Tomas]

Thank you all. Until today I had no idea that "no split rule for infinitives" existed (I followed that rule, but...)

[MalkinIsMyHomeboy]

as it comes to adjectives and adverbs, I feel like English is relatively straightforward. Not sure what Czech is like but I know in French, specifically, adjectives come after the noun except in “BANGS” cases (Beauty, Age, Number, Goodness and Size). for example you’d say “il est un grand auto” (“it is a big car”) but also “il est un auto rouge” (“it is a red car”)

edit: ok my explanation of French adjective location might be oversimplified:

thanks high school and one year of college French!

[MR25]

Spanish was easy, in that the adjective almost always followed the noun (una paloma blanca - a white dove, el tigre naranjo - the orange tiger, etc).

[MalkinIsMyHomeboy]

its “whomever I end up picking” and not “whoever I end up picking”, right?

in this I am the subject, “end up picking” is the action and whomever is the object pronoun. I think?

[MR25]

I think it's whoever, because if you rearrange the wording, you're referring to who you pick, not whom.

There is no "to whom" in the phrase.

[MalkinIsMyHomeboy]

yeah it’s tough. “I will pick whomever” makes sense but I don’t know if moving it to the front changes the subject/object nouns

[MR25]

Which is why I just say "The person/player/etc I pick" instead. No grammatical ambiguity.

[meow]

“I put this on Jason’s and Sherri’s radar”

“I put this on Jason and Sherri’s radar.”