[grammar] OWL Commas after Introductions Exercise 1, part B

[Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum]

Here are my answers to OWL's *Commas after Introductions Exercise 1*, part B.

According to my understanding of the answer key [1], I got the last sentence wrong. Either I don't understand the answer key or I disagree with it. For details, see the very last sentence below and my comment on it.

https://owl.purdue.edu/owl_exercises/punctuation_exercises/commas/after_introductions_exercise_1.html :

> B. Add introductory commas where they are needed in the following sentences. [...]
>
> 1. To give Jane a good look at the university Mr. Benson drove up for the Day on Campus.

Add comma: To give Jane a good look at the university, Mr. Benson drove up for the Day on Campus.

> 2. Since the dog had started to run a way we had to scramble to catch him.

Add comma: Since the dog had started to run a way, we had to scramble to catch him.

> 3. Of course the movie that I had rushed to see didn't start on time.

Add comma: Of course, the movie that I had rushed to see didn't start on time.

> 4. Her secondhand car was in excellent condition when she bought it.

OK as-is.

> 5. As I mentioned the rules can be broken occasionally.

Add comma: As I mentioned, the rules can be broken occasionally.

> 6. Having decided to eat only natural foods he had to give up all of his favorite junk food snacks.

Add comma: Having decided to eat only natural foods, he had to give up all of his favorite junk food snacks.

> 7. To estimate the costs he consulted a repairman by phone.

Add comma: To estimate the costs, he consulted a repairman by phone.

> 8. To succeed in politics is not necessarily desirable.

OK as-is.

> 9. Making up his mind quickly Jared ordered lasagna while we were still reading the menu.

Add comma: Making up his mind quickly, Jared ordered lasagna while we were still reading the menu.

> 10. However he tried to use the bottle opener it wouldn't work.

If I understand the answer key for part B correctly, I got this one wrong. Supposedly, it's OK as-is.

I think "However he tried to use the bottle opener" is an introductory phrase that should have a comma after it: However he tried to use the bottle opener, it wouldn't work.

The introduction to part A says:

> If there is an error, put an X on the line and circle the error.

The introduction to part B doesn't mention Xs, but the answer key for part B [1] has three sentences labeled with an X: B.4, B.8, and B.10. It seems to me that these Xs indicate something other than an error, because no error is pointed out for those sentences.

I didn't add commas to B.4 and B.8, but I did add a comma to B.10.

[1] https://owl.purdue.edu/owl_exercises/punctuation_exercises/commas/after_introductions_exercise_1_answers.html

[Elliot Temple]

On Jul 31, 2020, at 7:14 PM, Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum <petrogradp...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Here are my answers to OWL's *Commas after Introductions Exercise 1*, part B.
>
> According to my understanding of the answer key [1], I got the last sentence wrong. Either I don't understand the answer key or I disagree with it. For details, see the very last sentence below and my comment on it.
>
> https://owl.purdue.edu/owl_exercises/punctuation_exercises/commas/after_introductions_exercise_1.html :

>> 10. However he tried to use the bottle opener it wouldn't work.
>
> If I understand the answer key for part B correctly, I got this one wrong. Supposedly, it's OK as-is.
>
> I think "However he tried to use the bottle opener" is an introductory phrase that should have a comma after it: However he tried to use the bottle opener, it wouldn't work.

I think that comma is required.

But you’re incorrect that:

> "However he tried to use the bottle opener" is an introductory phrase

That’s a clause, not a phrase. It has a subject and a verb.

Elliot Temple
www.elliottemple.com

[Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum]

On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 10:33 PM Elliot Temple <cu...@curi.us> wrote:

> On Jul 31, 2020, at 7:14 PM, Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum <petrogradp...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> I think "However he tried to use the bottle opener" is an introductory phrase...

>
> That’s a clause, not a phrase. It has a subject and a verb.

This is my third postmortem that has to do with clauses. Here are the previous two, as listed in [my learning plan](https://hg.sr.ht/~petrogradphilosopher/fi/raw/lp.md):

> - [Postmortem: thinking I understood a term that I didn't](https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/fallible-ideas/VYpRwJLiGKY/W4NfL1pxAgAJ) (2020-06-23). Lesson: consider looking up any term that I notice I'm using for the first time.
>
> - [Postmortem: a second mistake with clauses](https://groups.google.com/d/msg/fallible-ideas/jTdIqbzgKfc/YBgcfcnfAQAJ) (2020-07-02). Lesson: There's something wrong with the way I think about postmortems or mistakes or learning.

I intend to improve my understanding of phrases and clauses until I can identify both with full confidence.

Elliot pointed out that something with a subject and a verb cannot be a phrase. After thinking it over, I think that a clause has exactly one conjugated verb + subject pair. For example, I think "I gave him the book that my brother recommended" is not a clause, because it has more than one conjugated verb + subject pair. See also my discussion of sentence 7 below.

Here are my working definitions of *phrase* and *clause*:

- *phrase*: sequence of words without a conjugated verb + subject pair

- *clause*: sequence of words with exactly one conjugated verb + subject pair

I tried a [quiz on phrases and clauses](https://www.grammarwiz.com/phrases-and-clauses-quiz.html). I got only 8 out of 10 correct. Here are the two I got wrong:

> Choose whether the [italicized] part ... is a phrase or a clause.

> 7. They were annoyed *by the baby crying so loudly*.

I thought the italicized part was a clause, but it's a phrase. My mistake was thinking that "baby crying" was a conjugated verb + subject pair -- it's not. It could be made into a conjugated verb + subject pair with additional words, e.g.: *baby was crying*, *baby is crying*, or *baby would be crying*. With the first of those options, the sentence could be rewritten like this: *They were annoyed that the baby was crying so loudly*.

> 9. I *will be running* for President.

I thought the italicized part was a clause, but it's a phrase. My mistake was being careless: I thought that the "I" was included in the italicized text, but it's not.

[Elliot Temple]

Do you know which word the object of the preposition “by” is? Could you make a tree of that sentence?


Elliot Temple
www.fallibleideas.com

[Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum]

On Sun, Aug 02, 2020 at 12:33:39PM -0700, Elliot Temple wrote:

> On Aug 1, 2020, at 9:29 PM, Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum <petrogradp...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> ... https://www.grammarwiz.com/phrases-and-clauses-quiz.html ... :

>>> Choose whether the [italicized] part ... is a phrase or a clause.
>>>
>>> 7. They were annoyed *by the baby crying so loudly*.

> Do you know which word the object of the preposition “by” is?

I believe "baby" is the object of the preposition "by".

On the other hand, suppose the sentence were this: *They were annoyed by the baby's loud crying.* I believe the object of the preposition "by" would then be "crying".

> Could you make a tree of that sentence?

No, I don't know how to make trees of sentences. I'm guessing that's covered in the "Grammar Trees" material in your "Grammar and Analyzing Text" package ( https://gumroad.com/l/dRQhn ).

[Elliot Temple]

On Aug 2, 2020, at 5:26 PM, Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum <petrogradp...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 02, 2020 at 12:33:39PM -0700, Elliot Temple wrote:
>
>> On Aug 1, 2020, at 9:29 PM, Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum <petrogradp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> ... https://www.grammarwiz.com/phrases-and-clauses-quiz.html ... :
>
>>>> Choose whether the [italicized] part ... is a phrase or a clause.
>>>>
>>>> 7. They were annoyed *by the baby crying so loudly*.
>
>> Do you know which word the object of the preposition “by” is?
>
> I believe "baby" is the object of the preposition "by".

Why don’t you think “crying” is the object? What do you think “crying” is?


Elliot Temple
www.elliottemple.com

[Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum]

On Sun, Aug 02, 2020 at 05:28:53PM -0700, Elliot Temple wrote:

> On Aug 2, 2020, at 5:26 PM, Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum <petrogradp...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> On Sun, Aug 02, 2020 at 12:33:39PM -0700, Elliot Temple wrote:

>>> On Aug 1, 2020, at 9:29 PM, Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum <petrogradp...@gmail.com> wrote:

>>>> ... https://www.grammarwiz.com/phrases-and-clauses-quiz.html ... :

>>>>> 7. They were annoyed *by the baby crying so loudly*.

>>> Do you know which word the object of the preposition “by” is?

>> I believe "baby" is the object of the preposition "by".

> Why don’t you think “crying” is the object?

Having "crying" be the object of the preposition doesn't make sense to me. If "crying" were the object, then I wouldn't know how to grammatically analyze "baby" in the prepositional phrase.

> What do you think “crying” is?

I think "crying" is an adjective that modifies "baby".

[Elliot Temple]

subject of “crying” (gerund).

>> What do you think “crying” is?
>
> I think "crying" is an adjective that modifies "baby".

i don’t know if you mean a regular adjective or a participle. either way, don’t adjectives go before the nouns they modify, not after? your explanation hasn’t accounted for that.

Elliot Temple
www.fallibleideas.com

[Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum]

On Sun, Aug 02, 2020 at 10:30:35PM -0700, Elliot Temple wrote:

> On Aug 2, 2020, at 6:22 PM, Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum <petrogradp...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> On Sun, Aug 02, 2020 at 05:28:53PM -0700, Elliot Temple wrote:

>>> On Aug 2, 2020, at 5:26 PM, Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum <petrogradp...@gmail.com> wrote:

>>>> On Sun, Aug 02, 2020 at 12:33:39PM -0700, Elliot Temple wrote:

>>>>> On Aug 1, 2020, at 9:29 PM, Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum <petrogradp...@gmail.com> wrote:

>>>>>> ... https://www.grammarwiz.com/phrases-and-clauses-quiz.html ... :
>>
>>>>>>> 7. They were annoyed *by the baby crying so loudly*.
>>
>>>>> Do you know which word the object of the preposition “by” is?
>>
>>>> I believe "baby" is the object of the preposition "by".
>>
>>> Why don’t you think “crying” is the object?
>>
>> Having "crying" be the object of the preposition doesn't make sense to me. If "crying" were the object, then I wouldn't know how to grammatically analyze "baby" in the prepositional phrase.
>
> subject of “crying” (gerund).

How would that work? According to http://fallibleideas.com/grammar , a gerund is a kind of verbal, and verbals don't have a subject:

> However, verbals don’t have a subject.
>
> There are three types of verbals:
>
> A _gerund_ is *noun* based on a verb.

I continued:

>> I think "crying" is an adjective that modifies "baby".
>
> i don’t know if you mean a regular adjective or a participle.

I think "crying" is a participle.

> either way, don’t adjectives go before the nouns they modify, not after? your explanation hasn’t accounted for that.

I found some pages that claim that participles can come after the nouns they modify. Here's one: http://www.myenglishgrammar.com/lesson-12-modifiers/5-participles-as-modifiers.html :

> If the present participle is part of a modifying phrase, it comes after the noun that it modifies.
>
> Examples:
>
> - She got a dancing doll for her birthday.
>
> (The present participle dancing modifies the noun doll.)
>
> - That was her daughter dancing in her room.
>
> (The present participle phrase dancing in her room modifies the noun daughter.)

The "baby" sentence is similar to a sentence in [a participle quiz I found](https://www.quia.com/quiz/268919.html?AP_rand=351884018):

> 5. I watched the dog charging toward me.

The reader is supposed to identify the participle in the sentence. The options are: "watched" and "charging". It can't be "watched", because "watched" has a subject ("I"), and participles don't have subjects. That leaves "charging".

I believe the participle portion of the analysis would be the same if we replaced "watched" with "was annoyed by", as in the "baby" sentence: *I was annoyed by the dog charging toward me.*

[Elliot Temple]

On Aug 3, 2020, at 1:12 PM, Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum <petrogradp...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 02, 2020 at 10:30:35PM -0700, Elliot Temple wrote:
>
>> On Aug 2, 2020, at 6:22 PM, Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum <petrogradp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> On Sun, Aug 02, 2020 at 05:28:53PM -0700, Elliot Temple wrote:
>
>>>> On Aug 2, 2020, at 5:26 PM, Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum <petrogradp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>> On Sun, Aug 02, 2020 at 12:33:39PM -0700, Elliot Temple wrote:
>
>>>>>> On Aug 1, 2020, at 9:29 PM, Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum <petrogradp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>>> ... https://www.grammarwiz.com/phrases-and-clauses-quiz.html ... :
>>>
>>>>>>>> 7. They were annoyed *by the baby crying so loudly*.
>>>
>>>>>> Do you know which word the object of the preposition “by” is?
>>>
>>>>> I believe "baby" is the object of the preposition "by".
>>>
>>>> Why don’t you think “crying” is the object?
>>>
>>> Having "crying" be the object of the preposition doesn't make sense to me. If "crying" were the object, then I wouldn't know how to grammatically analyze "baby" in the prepositional phrase.
>>
>> subject of “crying” (gerund).
>
> How would that work? According to http://fallibleideas.com/grammar , a gerund is a kind of verbal, and verbals don't have a subject:
>
>> However, verbals don’t have a subject.
>>
>> There are three types of verbals:
>>
>> A _gerund_ is *noun* based on a verb.

That article says:

> So grammar has many exceptions. English has a bunch of special cases that don’t fit the rules nicely. So remember that there are exceptions to most of what I say about grammar.

The concept of verbals is that they retain some of the properties of verbs. The act partially like a verb and partially like something else.

They do have subjects sometimes. (More often than I was aware of when writing the article.)

See:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerund#"Gerund”_clauses_with_a_specified_subject

which includes discussion of the specific issue in question.

> I continued:
>
>>> I think "crying" is an adjective that modifies "baby".
>>
>> i don’t know if you mean a regular adjective or a participle.
>
> I think "crying" is a participle.
>
>> either way, don’t adjectives go before the nouns they modify, not after? your explanation hasn’t accounted for that.
>
> I found some pages that claim that participles can come after the nouns they modify. Here's one: http://www.myenglishgrammar.com/lesson-12-modifiers/5-participles-as-modifiers.html :
>
>> If the present participle is part of a modifying phrase, it comes after the noun that it modifies.
>>
>> Examples:
>>
>> - She got a dancing doll for her birthday.
>>
>> (The present participle dancing modifies the noun doll.)
>>
>> - That was her daughter dancing in her room.
>>
>> (The present participle phrase dancing in her room modifies the noun daughter.)
>
> The "baby" sentence is similar to a sentence in [a participle quiz I found](https://www.quia.com/quiz/268919.html?AP_rand=351884018):
>
>> 5. I watched the dog charging toward me.
>
> The reader is supposed to identify the participle in the sentence. The options are: "watched" and "charging". It can't be "watched", because "watched" has a subject ("I"), and participles don't have subjects. That leaves "charging".
>
> I believe the participle portion of the analysis would be the same if we replaced "watched" with "was annoyed by", as in the "baby" sentence: *I was annoyed by the dog charging toward me.*

This material is treating it like a special case (in X scenario, you can do Y, b/c [no reason given – basically b/c ppl apparently do it]). I doubt the authors even considered another interpretation. The authors are not grammar experts. If you want to find evidence about what grammar experts think, the best thing to find would be a dependency grammar paper that covers a case of this type. Example from treebanks could also help https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treebank Wikipedia also has some grammar material written by experts.

Elliot Temple
www.curi.us