Stalking and slaying the wily comma splice
(fragments and run-on sentences, too)

Run-on sentences, comma splices and fragments are tricky. They're sometimes known as "sentence boundary" errors because they occur where one sentence ends and the next sentence begins, and that makes them confusing because we don't really know what a sentence is. Rei Noguchi of California State University at Northridge, who has written a book on grammar for the National Council of Teachers of English, says they are "frequent and highly resistant syntax-based stylistic errors" (38-39). And he's right.

Part of the problem is that the rules of grammar don't follow logically from the way native speakers use English. According to linguist and composition theorist Cornelia Paraskevas of Western Oregon University, the rules for commas and other punctuation marks are "arbitary in that the punctuation symbols do not bear any natural connection to their meaning yet [are] conventional in that we agree to play the same rules." Paraskevas adds that the conventions are often ignored "in real life: in newspapers, magazines, books, and fliers" (41). That's especially true in British writing. It all spells trouble, since we're bound by rules we can't logically explain.

At the bottom of this page are several links to websites that elaborate on the rules. In the meantime, it's best to treat anything that has its own subject and verb as a complete sentence. Begin it with a capital letter, and end it with a period. Make sure it has a subject and a verb. In other words, make sure somebody does something. That way, it's a complete thought. If it doesn't have a subject and a verb, it isn't. That's rule No. 1. Here's the next rule. Be careful how you join two complete thoughts (that is, two thoughts with their own subject and a verb). If you join them with a comma, you've got a comma splice. If you do it without a comma, it's a run-on sentence. The websites linked below -- especially the OWL at Purdue -- will explain it all better than I can.

In the meantime, the crucial skill is identifying a complete sentence. It's harder than you might think. A linguist named Paul Roberts once said there are more than 200 separate definitions of what a sentence is, and many of them contradict each other. But here are three tests yoiu can use -- questions you can ask yourself to tell whether you've got a complete sentence or not.

'Tag' questions. Here's how to use the tests. When you're editing your copy, go back over what you've written and look at each clump of words. If you can turn it around into one of the tag questions I've listed below, it's a sentence. That means it needs a capital letter and a period. Here's another test: If it fits in a "frame" that calls for a complete idea, treat it like a sentence. Again, you need to begin it with a capital letter and end it with a period. If you've ended it with a comma, or linked it with a comma to another thought that also passes one of the sentence tests, you need to end it with a period and begin the next thought with a capital letter. And so on through your paper. Here are the three tests:

• Yes-No question: "Did _______________?" It's a sentence if you can turn it around into a question, and it still makes sense. Here's an example. Jack and Jill went up the hill. Turn it around, and you've got: Did Jack and Jill go up the hill? That sounds right, doesn't it? But try this: Jack and Jill going up the hill. Sometimes you hear people talk that way, and you know exactly what they mean. But it isn't considered a sentence in standard written English. Turn it around, and you'd get: Did Jack and Jill going up the hill? It doesn't make sense, does it? No. Fragment. Bad! Bad dog! Bad sentence! Other examples: Jill has a 4.0 average. Does Jill have a 4.0 average? Jack and Jill are freshmen at SCI. Are Jack and Jill freshmen at SCI? Jill having a 4.0 average. Does Jill having a 4.0 average? Huh? See? It's not a sentence.
• Tag Question. "___________, didn't it? Just add a tag like "didn't it?," "isn't it?" or "aren't we?" at the end. Again, if it sounds right when you add the tag question, you've got a sentence. If it doesn't, you don't. Examples: Jack and Jill went up the hill, didn't they? Jill has a 4.0 average, doesn't she? You don't, do you? And so on. But, how does this sound? Jack and Jill going up the hill, didn't they?Try it. Jack and Jill going up the hill, aren't they? Jill's 4.0 average, isn't it? Huh? Say what? Again, the fragments just don't sound right.
• Frame. "I know that ___________." With this test, you don't have to turn the thought around into a question. You just plug it into the frame. Example: Jill has a 4.0 average. See, it fits in the frame. Like this: I know that Jill has a 4.0 average. But try this. Jill making a 4.0 average. I know that Jill making a 4.0 average. Another frame that works the same way is: "I can't believe the idea that ___________." Its advantage is that you can use it with more complex, abstract thoughts. Examples: I can't believe the idea that postmodernist theory explains Jill's 4.0 average. I can't believe the idea that there are exceptions to postmodernist theory. And so on. Frankly, I prefer to use the tag questions above. They're more straighforward. But sometimes, especially in more intellectual contexts, the frame works too.

Links to other websites

Purdue University's OWL has nothing to do with nocturnal birds that live in barns ... it's an Online Writing Lab instead. Anyway, the OWL has a good primer on the rules on comma splices, run-ons and fragments, with fill-in-the-blanks models to follow for correct, formal end punctuation. Please forgive me for saying this, but it's a real hoot! At http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/grammar/g_sentpr.html

Cathy Witlox, "the Grammar Girl" at Harlequin's website for aspiring writers of category romances, says "The comma splice is one of those grammatical errors that even the layperson notices when reading, though she might not realize what made her stumble over the sentence." This and other comments on life and love at http://www.eharlequin.com/cms/learntowrite/ltwArticle.jhtml?pageID=030915wg01001

Jeanne Phoenix Laurel of Niagra University has a handout that "substitutes for the traditional grammar and "how-to" (rhetoric) handbook which many English instructors assign." She says, "I’ve found that most students refuse to buy such a handbook, no matter how desperately they need it and how urgently I advocate such a textbook." At http://www.niagara.edu/english/links.htm

Noguchi, Rei R. Grammar and the Teaching of Writing: Limits and Possibilities. Urbana: National Council of Teachers of English, 1991.

Paraskevas, Cornelia. "The Craft of Writing: Breaking Conventions." English Journal March 2004: 31-46.

-- Pete Ellertsen, Becker L-16, Springfield College in Illinois