Convention or grammatical reason for commas around non-identifying relative clausesRelative clauses: integrated, restrictive, non-restrictive, supplementaryWord order in defining and non-defining relative clausesAnds and CommasDifference between 'which' and 'that' in restrictive (defining) relative clausesIs Word always correct in suggesting either a comma before 'which' or else using 'that'?Non-defining relative clausesRelative Clause?Where to draw the line separating non-essential and essential relative clausesRelative Clauses- To use or not to use ThatLooking for a breakdown of this sentence relating to (I think) relative/essential/non-essential clauses
What do the Banks children have against barley water?
Are white and non-white police officers equally likely to kill black suspects?
Deciding between multiple birth names and dates?
Why was the "bread communication" in the arena of Catching Fire left out in the movie?
Is it legal to have the "// (c) 2019 John Smith" header in all files when there are hundreds of contributors?
OA final episode explanation
How to manage monthly salary
How is it possible for user's password to be changed after storage was encrypted? (on OS X, Android)
Why does this relative pronoun not take the case of the noun it is referring to?
Is a car considered movable or immovable property?
aging parents with no investments
Could Giant Ground Sloths have been a Good Pack Animal for the Ancient Mayans
What does "enim et" mean?
Why doesn't a const reference extend the life of a temporary object passed via a function?
Email Account under attack (really) - anything I can do?
If a centaur druid Wild Shapes into a Giant Elk, do their Charge features stack?
I’m planning on buying a laser printer but concerned about the life cycle of toner in the machine
Is there a way to make member function NOT callable from constructor?
Some basic questions on halt and move in Turing machines
What do you call something that goes against the spirit of the law, but is legal when interpreting the law to the letter?
Manga about a female worker who got dragged into another world together with this high school girl and she was just told she's not needed anymore
Why do UK politicians seemingly ignore opinion polls on Brexit?
What does 'script /dev/null' do?
Does a dangling wire really electrocute me if I'm standing in water?
Convention or grammatical reason for commas around non-identifying relative clauses
Relative clauses: integrated, restrictive, non-restrictive, supplementaryWord order in defining and non-defining relative clausesAnds and CommasDifference between 'which' and 'that' in restrictive (defining) relative clausesIs Word always correct in suggesting either a comma before 'which' or else using 'that'?Non-defining relative clausesRelative Clause?Where to draw the line separating non-essential and essential relative clausesRelative Clauses- To use or not to use ThatLooking for a breakdown of this sentence relating to (I think) relative/essential/non-essential clauses
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
Is there any grammatical reason why non-identifying relative clauses are separated by commas or is it simply a convention?
punctuation relative-clauses
asked 5 hours ago
Roman JasmannRoman Jasmann
1
New contributor
Roman Jasmann is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
Is there any grammatical reason why non-identifying relative clauses are separated by commas or is it simply a convention?
punctuation relative-clauses
asked 5 hours ago
Roman JasmannRoman Jasmann
1
New contributor
Roman Jasmann is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
1
Something has to mark them as being supplemental (non-defining). Dashes and parentheses are also found.
– BillJ
5 hours ago
add a comment |
Is there any grammatical reason why non-identifying relative clauses are separated by commas or is it simply a convention?
punctuation relative-clauses
asked 5 hours ago
Roman JasmannRoman Jasmann
1
New contributor
Roman Jasmann is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Is there any grammatical reason why non-identifying relative clauses are separated by commas or is it simply a convention?
punctuation relative-clauses
punctuation relative-clauses
asked 5 hours ago
Roman JasmannRoman Jasmann
1
New contributor
Roman Jasmann is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 5 hours ago
Roman JasmannRoman Jasmann
1
New contributor
Roman Jasmann is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 5 hours ago
Roman JasmannRoman Jasmann
1
New contributor
Roman Jasmann is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 5 hours ago
Roman JasmannRoman Jasmann
1
asked 5 hours ago
Roman JasmannRoman Jasmann
1
1
New contributor
Roman Jasmann is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Roman Jasmann is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Roman Jasmann is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
1
Something has to mark them as being supplemental (non-defining). Dashes and parentheses are also found.
– BillJ
5 hours ago
add a comment |
1
Something has to mark them as being supplemental (non-defining). Dashes and parentheses are also found.
– BillJ
5 hours ago
1
1
Something has to mark them as being supplemental (non-defining). Dashes and parentheses are also found.
– BillJ
5 hours ago
Something has to mark them as being supplemental (non-defining). Dashes and parentheses are also found.
– BillJ
5 hours ago
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
No grammatical reason, no. The distinction is in the pronunciation of the two types of clause.
This difference in pronunciation (intonation curves, mostly) is often expressed by commas or dashes.
But no real English grammar rule refers to punctuation, spelling, capitalization, or spaces.
That's just orthography, which isn't language, but rather modern technology. Sort of modern, anyway.
The reason for the difference in pronunciation, though, is precisely to distinguish the types of clause.
Restrictive (integrated, identifying) relative clauses are just modifiers, and very common. They're the norm and don't need any marker.
Non-restrictive (supplemental, non-identifying) relative clauses, however, are essentially separate utterances on a related topic, rather than being part of the main sentence itself.
As such, ,on-restrictive clauses are normally delivered in a lower tone of voice (flatted intonation) than their antecedent noun phrase, suitable for obiter dicta like these. The transition to this flatted intonation stretch is the first comma intonation, and its end is the second.
answered 2 hours ago
John LawlerJohn Lawler
85.1k6118335
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Roman Jasmann is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f493103%2fconvention-or-grammatical-reason-for-commas-around-non-identifying-relative-clau%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
No grammatical reason, no. The distinction is in the pronunciation of the two types of clause.
This difference in pronunciation (intonation curves, mostly) is often expressed by commas or dashes.
But no real English grammar rule refers to punctuation, spelling, capitalization, or spaces.
That's just orthography, which isn't language, but rather modern technology. Sort of modern, anyway.
The reason for the difference in pronunciation, though, is precisely to distinguish the types of clause.
Restrictive (integrated, identifying) relative clauses are just modifiers, and very common. They're the norm and don't need any marker.
Non-restrictive (supplemental, non-identifying) relative clauses, however, are essentially separate utterances on a related topic, rather than being part of the main sentence itself.
As such, ,on-restrictive clauses are normally delivered in a lower tone of voice (flatted intonation) than their antecedent noun phrase, suitable for obiter dicta like these. The transition to this flatted intonation stretch is the first comma intonation, and its end is the second.
answered 2 hours ago
John LawlerJohn Lawler
85.1k6118335
add a comment |
No grammatical reason, no. The distinction is in the pronunciation of the two types of clause.
This difference in pronunciation (intonation curves, mostly) is often expressed by commas or dashes.
But no real English grammar rule refers to punctuation, spelling, capitalization, or spaces.
That's just orthography, which isn't language, but rather modern technology. Sort of modern, anyway.
The reason for the difference in pronunciation, though, is precisely to distinguish the types of clause.
Restrictive (integrated, identifying) relative clauses are just modifiers, and very common. They're the norm and don't need any marker.
Non-restrictive (supplemental, non-identifying) relative clauses, however, are essentially separate utterances on a related topic, rather than being part of the main sentence itself.
As such, ,on-restrictive clauses are normally delivered in a lower tone of voice (flatted intonation) than their antecedent noun phrase, suitable for obiter dicta like these. The transition to this flatted intonation stretch is the first comma intonation, and its end is the second.
answered 2 hours ago
John LawlerJohn Lawler
85.1k6118335
add a comment |
No grammatical reason, no. The distinction is in the pronunciation of the two types of clause.
This difference in pronunciation (intonation curves, mostly) is often expressed by commas or dashes.
But no real English grammar rule refers to punctuation, spelling, capitalization, or spaces.
That's just orthography, which isn't language, but rather modern technology. Sort of modern, anyway.
The reason for the difference in pronunciation, though, is precisely to distinguish the types of clause.
Restrictive (integrated, identifying) relative clauses are just modifiers, and very common. They're the norm and don't need any marker.
Non-restrictive (supplemental, non-identifying) relative clauses, however, are essentially separate utterances on a related topic, rather than being part of the main sentence itself.
As such, ,on-restrictive clauses are normally delivered in a lower tone of voice (flatted intonation) than their antecedent noun phrase, suitable for obiter dicta like these. The transition to this flatted intonation stretch is the first comma intonation, and its end is the second.
answered 2 hours ago
John LawlerJohn Lawler
85.1k6118335
No grammatical reason, no. The distinction is in the pronunciation of the two types of clause.
This difference in pronunciation (intonation curves, mostly) is often expressed by commas or dashes.
But no real English grammar rule refers to punctuation, spelling, capitalization, or spaces.
That's just orthography, which isn't language, but rather modern technology. Sort of modern, anyway.
The reason for the difference in pronunciation, though, is precisely to distinguish the types of clause.
Restrictive (integrated, identifying) relative clauses are just modifiers, and very common. They're the norm and don't need any marker.
Non-restrictive (supplemental, non-identifying) relative clauses, however, are essentially separate utterances on a related topic, rather than being part of the main sentence itself.
As such, ,on-restrictive clauses are normally delivered in a lower tone of voice (flatted intonation) than their antecedent noun phrase, suitable for obiter dicta like these. The transition to this flatted intonation stretch is the first comma intonation, and its end is the second.
answered 2 hours ago
John LawlerJohn Lawler
85.1k6118335
answered 2 hours ago
John LawlerJohn Lawler
85.1k6118335
answered 2 hours ago
John LawlerJohn Lawler
85.1k6118335
answered 2 hours ago
John LawlerJohn Lawler
85.1k6118335
85.1k6118335
add a comment |
add a comment |
Roman Jasmann is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Roman Jasmann is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Roman Jasmann is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Roman Jasmann is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f493103%2fconvention-or-grammatical-reason-for-commas-around-non-identifying-relative-clau%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
Something has to mark them as being supplemental (non-defining). Dashes and parentheses are also found.
– BillJ
5 hours ago