Punctuation Marks and Etc. of the English Language

Punctuation has two separate purposes

  1. To make it easier to understand written text

  2. To create employment for language teachers.

...R

ifyoudonthavesomekindofrulesthenthingscanbeabitdifficulttofollowanditbecomeshardertocommunicate
alsoihavealwaysthoughtheenglishinenglandwasabithardtounderstand

:grin: :grin:

larryd:
ifyoudonthavesomekindofrulesthenthingscanbeabitdifficulttofollowanditbecomeshardertocommunicate
alsoihavealwaysthoughtheenglishinenglandwasabithardtounderstand

If you don't have some kind of rules, then things can be a bit difficult to follow; and, it becomes harder to communicate; also, I have always thought (that) the English in England was a bit hard to understand.

GolamMostafa:
I have always thought (that) the English in England was a bit hard to understand.

Presumably you are now referring to spoken English rather than written English.

One needs to attune one's ears to the local accent. I'm Irish and I was at a business meeting in Texas when one of the experts that we were visiting arrived late due to a delayed flight. Having got used to US accents I could not understand the newcomer for about 20 minutes until I realized he was speaking with a Scots accent. Then there was no problem understanding him.

...R

GolamMostafa:
If you don't have some kind of rules, then things can be a bit difficult to follow; and, it becomes harder to communicate; also, I have always thought (that) the English in England was a bit hard to understand.

In my opinion this is too much of punctuation. Or am I wrong and it is correct? Can somebody with native English and good knowledge of grammar, write it correctly?
P.S.: I'm native Slovak. Our language has very complicated grammar rules, much more than English. We are using comma frequently, semicolon less. The sentence above uses both in rate, which would be in Slovak language criteria simply "too much". I am suspicious that it is not correct.

Budvar10:
In my opinion this is too much of punctuation. Or am I wrong and it is correct? Can somebody with native English and good knowledge of grammar, write it correctly?

I am a native English speaker but I won't pretend to be a grammar expert. I would write that sentence like this as two separate sentences. In general shorter is better.

If you don't have some kind of rules then things can be a bit difficult to follow and it becomes harder to communicate. Also, I have always thought (that) the English in England was a bit hard to understand.

...R

Thank you Robin. I've expected 2 sentences.

Here is text from an autocue that missed some commas;
"This is BBC World News, I am Jonathan Charles kept hidden for almost two decades and forced to bear children...."

Both native and non-native speakers should have the same test for punctuation as the meaning of sentences can change completely different with different punctuation.

Having said that non-native speakers can often simplify the grammer of spoken English in non-standard ways that are are perfectly understandable and unambiguous. No doubt, over time, these simplifications will become "standard" English.

Robin2:
If you don't have some kind of rules then things can be a bit difficult to follow and it becomes harder to communicate.

As a non-native, I need to re-write the above sentence as follows just to get pass of the English as a second language.

If you don't have some kind of rules, things can be a bit difficult to follow; and, it becomes harder to communicate.

I must honor the rules of combining together the dependent clause, independent clause and transitional adverb through correct use of the punctuation marks.

GolamMostafa:
As a non-native, I need to re-write the above sentence as follows just to get pass of the English as a second language.

If you don't have some kind of rules, things can be a bit difficult to follow; and, it becomes harder to communicate.

....

I see what you mean you are actually having to be more dilligent than the native speaker.

GolamMostafa:
....
I must honor the rules of combining together the dependent clause, independent clause and transitional adverb through correct use of the punctuation marks.

I only speak one language and I don't have a formal understanding of it's grammatical rules. I am sure that is a bad thing. I suppose though as a non-native a lot depends on what level of study you are undertaking. If you are studying at University level being tested on a formal understanding of the rules probably makes sense.

GolamMostafa:
As a non-native, I need to re-write the above sentence as follows just to get pass of the English as a second language.

See the second point in Reply #4 :slight_smile:

...R

Robin2:
Presumably you are now referring to spoken English rather than written English.

One needs to attune one's ears to the local accent. I'm Irish and I was at a business meeting in Texas when one of the experts that we were visiting arrived late due to a delayed flight. Having got used to US accents I could not understand the newcomer for about 20 minutes until I realized he was speaking with a Scots accent. Then there was no problem understanding him.

...R

Years ago we hired a Scots programmer. The biggest problem was not understanding him, it was his use of the middle finger to point to things. Usually in a meeting.

Paul

Paul_KD7HB:
The biggest problem was not understanding him, it was his use of the middle finger to point to things. Usually in a meeting.

That suggests that you are a Sassanach.

...R

Robin2:
That suggests that you are a Sassanach.

...R

Probably. I had to search the word.

Paul

Paul_KD7HB:
Years ago we hired a Scots programmer. The biggest problem was not understanding him, it was his use of the middle finger to point to things. Usually in a meeting.

Paul

No, that's a thing in meetings. My corporate lawyer gf taught me the art of pushing one's glasses up, while looking straight at a rival coworker.

ardly:
I only speak one language and I don't have a formal understanding of it's grammatical rules. I am sure that is a bad thing. I suppose though as a non-native a lot depends on what level of study you are undertaking. If you are studying at University level being tested on a formal understanding of the rules probably makes sense.

It is the language that dictates the grammar and not the other way. A native is not (necessarily) required to learn the 'inherent rules' that are embedded within the language as it (the Language) is his mother tongue. On the other hand, a non-native (like me and others) acquires the 'writing style' of the Foreign Language through hard exercise of the 'syntax and semantic' rules of the language. A native can have much better control over the writing/speaking style of his mother tongue having known the mechanics of the working principles of the grammatical rules/conventions of the language.

GolamMostafa:
A native can have much better control over the writing/speaking style of his mother tongue

There is no shortage of evidence on this Forum that many don't.

...R

In a beginner/teaching environment, portability is desirable. In a production/commercial environment it is a non-sequitur as the code you work with is always going to be optimized for the destination platform. Often in the latter, portability carries overhead at too great a cost.

The above quote is a post belongs to an anonymous Forum Member in some other Section.

I am particularly impressed with the beauty of the construction style of the sentences and their coherence. However, I am at a loss to discover how the writer could miss a comma (,) after the introductory phrase of the second sentence when the required commas have been correctly placed after the introductory phrases of the first and third sentences.

GolamMostafa:
However, I am at a loss to discover how the writer could miss a comma

IMHO both commas should have been omitted - and for the same reason. Taking the first sentence as an example ...
In a beginner/teaching environment, portability is desirable.
Presented that way it implies some disconnect between the first and second parts when, in fact, the author did not intend any. Perhaps a better way of writing would have been
portability is desirable in a beginner/teaching environment
and then you can see that there is no place for a comma.

The same logic can be applied to the other sentence that has a comma.

I would not see an objection to a comma after the word sequitur although I think the meaning is perfectly clear without one.

I have a bigger problem with the middle sentence - I suspect the author did not understand the meaning and usage of "non sequitur". IMHO the last two sentences should have been written
But in a production/commercial environment the overhead associated with portability may come at a too great cost as the code is always going to be optimized for the destination platform

...R