Quick question about a comma

Stphen Bradley

unread,

Mar 17, 2014, 7:25:33 AM3/17/14

to

Quick question for punctuationists: is it necessary to have a comma
before "based on . . . ." in the following sentence?

"The peasants put garlic around the grave, based on their beleif that
it would ward off evil spirits."

Thanks very much for the help.

CDB

unread,

Mar 17, 2014, 7:49:19 AM3/17/14

to

On 17/03/2014 7:25 AM, Stphen Bradley wrote:

> Quick question for punctuationists: is it necessary to have a comma
> before "based on . . . ." in the following sentence?

> "The peasants put garlic around the grave, based on their belief

> that it would ward off evil spirits."

The sentence is better with the comma than without it. It would also be
better, IMO, with "on the basis of" or (even better) "because of" in
place of "based on". The participle "based" really needs a noun to
modify ("this practice, based on the belief that garlic would ..., is
wodespread" for example), and there isn't one there.

GG

unread,

Mar 17, 2014, 9:08:58 AM3/17/14

to

Stphen Bradley wrote:

> Quick question for punctuationists: is it necessary to have a comma
> before "based on . . . ." in the following sentence?
>

> "The peasants put garlic around the grave, based on their belief that

> it would ward off evil spirits."

I think you need one, or the clause
"based on their belief that it would ward off evil spirits,"
which can be thought of as an adverbial of reason,
becomes restrictive and seems to qualify (first, by proximity) the
adjacent noun "grave," instead of qualifying the whole main clause
"The peasants put garlic around the grave."

Now, "the grave [is] based on" doesn't quite rhyme:-)

Cheers.

Message has been deleted

Guy Barry

unread,

Mar 17, 2014, 10:28:45 AM3/17/14

to

"Stphen Bradley" wrote in message
news:egmdi9h45morl1d52...@4ax.com...

>
>Quick question for punctuationists: is it necessary to have a comma
>before "based on . . . ." in the following sentence?
>

>"The peasants put garlic around the grave, based on their belief that
>it would ward off evil spirits." [spelling error corrected]

Well first of all I think it's a badly constructed sentence, since "based
on" doesn't modify a noun. It wasn't the peasants or the garlic or the
grave that was based on their belief that it would ward off evil spirits; it
was the placing of the garlic around the grave. But if you insist on using
that construction, I'd say that a comma is mandatory, otherwise it looks as
though "based on" modifies "grave".

I'd probably rewrite as "The peasants put garlic around the grave, believing

that it would ward off evil spirits".

--
Guy Barry

Christian Weisgerber

unread,

Mar 17, 2014, 11:31:36 AM3/17/14

to

On 2014-03-17, Stefan Ram <r...@zedat.fu-berlin.de> wrote:

>>"The peasants put garlic around the grave, based on their beleif that
>>it would ward off evil spirits."
>

> A clause is set off by a comma if it can easily be removed
> from the sentence (without changing the sense of the
> sentence)

Oh God, that's another one of those stupid things taught in EFL
class that never made sense to me.

> or can easily be moved within the sentence. Both
> seems to be true here.

You cannot remove "based on their belief that it would ward off
evil spirits" without removing the notion that the action was "based
on their belief that it would ward off evil spirits". I don't see
how this doesn't change the meaning of the sentence.

> »[B]ased on their beleif[sic!] ...« is a participle phrase.
> When a participle phrase introduces a main clause, the
> participle phrase is set off by a comma. When a participle
> phrase concludes a main clause and is describing the word
> directly in front of it, no comma is used. In the case
> above, however, »based« refers to »peasants«,

Does it? I think it refers to the whole clause.

--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de

Stan Brown

unread,

Mar 17, 2014, 6:39:45 PM3/17/14

to

On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 07:25:33 -0400, Stphen Bradley wrote:
>
> Quick question for punctuationists: is it necessary to have a comma
> before "based on . . . ." in the following sentence?
>
> "The peasants put garlic around the grave, based on their beleif that
> it would ward off evil spirits."

The sentence is clumsy with the comma. Without the comma, the
sentence suggests very strongly that the grave is based on their
belief, or that of the many possible graves to which one might refer,
this thought relates to the one grave that is based in their belief.

Suggestion: "The peasants put garlic around the grave because they
thought it would ward off evil spirits."

Suggestion the second "... grave, to ward off ..."

--
"The difference between the /almost right/ word and the /right/ word
is ... the difference between the lightning-bug and the lightning."
--Mark Twain
Stan Brown, Tompkins County, NY, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com

Peter Moylan

unread,

Mar 18, 2014, 7:37:29 AM3/18/14

to

Don't you mean woadspread?

--
Peter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org
For an e-mail address, see my web page.

Stphen Bradley

unread,

Mar 18, 2014, 7:50:02 AM3/18/14

to

Thanks very much for the very informative discussion. If I decide to
use "based on," I will definitely place a comma after "grave."

CDB

unread,

Mar 18, 2014, 8:21:57 AM3/18/14

to

On 18/03/2014 7:37 AM, Peter Moylan wrote:

> CDB wrote:
>> Stphen Bradley wrote:

>>> Quick question for punctuationists: is it necessary to have a
>>> comma before "based on . . . ." in the following sentence?

>>> "The peasants put garlic around the grave, based on their belief
>>> that it would ward off evil spirits."

>> The sentence is better with the comma than without it. It would
>> also be better, IMO, with "on the basis of" or (even better)
>> "because of" in place of "based on". The participle "based" really
>> needs a noun to modify ("this practice, based on the belief that
>> garlic would ..., is wodespread" for example), and there isn't one
>> there.

> Don't you mean woadspread?

Wouild that I dood.