Defining relative clause followed by comma when clause ends with negation & is followed by verb?
Whilst writing my dissertation I wrote the following line: 'Many of the features which Kotlin has that Java does not come at the cost of strange, seemingly erroneous drawbacks to, in particular, understanding the program.'
I'm tempted to insert a comma after 'does not' because a part of me is tempted to read that part of the sentence as 'does not come'; and had I not read that sentence several times already and been aware of its true meaning perhaps I would read it as such. How did you read it the first time round?
In essence: for the sake of readability can a comma be inserted after a defining relative clause when that clause ends in negation and is immediately followed by a verb? Yes this separates the subject from the verb: however the alternative is a sentence that on first reading might be misread.
verbs commas negation relative-clauses subjects
asked yesterday
MarcMarc
1
New contributor
Marc 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 |
Whilst writing my dissertation I wrote the following line: 'Many of the features which Kotlin has that Java does not come at the cost of strange, seemingly erroneous drawbacks to, in particular, understanding the program.'
I'm tempted to insert a comma after 'does not' because a part of me is tempted to read that part of the sentence as 'does not come'; and had I not read that sentence several times already and been aware of its true meaning perhaps I would read it as such. How did you read it the first time round?
In essence: for the sake of readability can a comma be inserted after a defining relative clause when that clause ends in negation and is immediately followed by a verb? Yes this separates the subject from the verb: however the alternative is a sentence that on first reading might be misread.
verbs commas negation relative-clauses subjects
asked yesterday
MarcMarc
1
New contributor
Marc is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
I don’t think you can have a comma. The convention to have no commas for defining relatives is stronger than avoiding potential garden paths. But when I read the sentence I was indeed confused at first. It’s not very elegant. Rewrite? E.g. “features which are possessed by Kotlin but not by Java come” or something like that?
– Richard Z
yesterday
Thank you @RichardZ for your suggestion. Even when just saying it aloud my initial wording seems a bit awkward; though using the passive voice in the clause makes the sentence too much of a mouthful. Perhaps the sentence as a whole is just too wordy. As it happens I'm just going to exclude the sentence altogether.
– Marc
yesterday
1
@RichardZ and Marc- I think you are confused about where the defining relative really is. Try this: Many of the features that Kotlin has, which Java does not, come ... (you could also omit the pronoun before Java and replace it with 'but')
– AmI
yesterday
@Aml BOTH the “that” and the “which” relative clauses are restrictive. You cannot paraphrase this as “the features that Kotlin has, which - by the way - Java does not...” At least that’s not the most natural meaning. So, no commas!
– Richard Z
yesterday
add a comment |
Whilst writing my dissertation I wrote the following line: 'Many of the features which Kotlin has that Java does not come at the cost of strange, seemingly erroneous drawbacks to, in particular, understanding the program.'
I'm tempted to insert a comma after 'does not' because a part of me is tempted to read that part of the sentence as 'does not come'; and had I not read that sentence several times already and been aware of its true meaning perhaps I would read it as such. How did you read it the first time round?
In essence: for the sake of readability can a comma be inserted after a defining relative clause when that clause ends in negation and is immediately followed by a verb? Yes this separates the subject from the verb: however the alternative is a sentence that on first reading might be misread.
verbs commas negation relative-clauses subjects
asked yesterday
MarcMarc
1
New contributor
Marc is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Whilst writing my dissertation I wrote the following line: 'Many of the features which Kotlin has that Java does not come at the cost of strange, seemingly erroneous drawbacks to, in particular, understanding the program.'
I'm tempted to insert a comma after 'does not' because a part of me is tempted to read that part of the sentence as 'does not come'; and had I not read that sentence several times already and been aware of its true meaning perhaps I would read it as such. How did you read it the first time round?
In essence: for the sake of readability can a comma be inserted after a defining relative clause when that clause ends in negation and is immediately followed by a verb? Yes this separates the subject from the verb: however the alternative is a sentence that on first reading might be misread.
verbs commas negation relative-clauses subjects
verbs commas negation relative-clauses subjects
asked yesterday
MarcMarc
1
New contributor
Marc is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked yesterday
MarcMarc
1
New contributor
Marc is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked yesterday
MarcMarc
1
New contributor
Marc is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked yesterday
MarcMarc
1
asked yesterday
MarcMarc
1
1
New contributor
Marc is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Marc is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Marc is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
I don’t think you can have a comma. The convention to have no commas for defining relatives is stronger than avoiding potential garden paths. But when I read the sentence I was indeed confused at first. It’s not very elegant. Rewrite? E.g. “features which are possessed by Kotlin but not by Java come” or something like that?
– Richard Z
yesterday
Thank you @RichardZ for your suggestion. Even when just saying it aloud my initial wording seems a bit awkward; though using the passive voice in the clause makes the sentence too much of a mouthful. Perhaps the sentence as a whole is just too wordy. As it happens I'm just going to exclude the sentence altogether.
– Marc
yesterday
1
@RichardZ and Marc- I think you are confused about where the defining relative really is. Try this: Many of the features that Kotlin has, which Java does not, come ... (you could also omit the pronoun before Java and replace it with 'but')
– AmI
yesterday
@Aml BOTH the “that” and the “which” relative clauses are restrictive. You cannot paraphrase this as “the features that Kotlin has, which - by the way - Java does not...” At least that’s not the most natural meaning. So, no commas!
– Richard Z
yesterday
add a comment |
I don’t think you can have a comma. The convention to have no commas for defining relatives is stronger than avoiding potential garden paths. But when I read the sentence I was indeed confused at first. It’s not very elegant. Rewrite? E.g. “features which are possessed by Kotlin but not by Java come” or something like that?
– Richard Z
yesterday
Thank you @RichardZ for your suggestion. Even when just saying it aloud my initial wording seems a bit awkward; though using the passive voice in the clause makes the sentence too much of a mouthful. Perhaps the sentence as a whole is just too wordy. As it happens I'm just going to exclude the sentence altogether.
– Marc
yesterday
1
@RichardZ and Marc- I think you are confused about where the defining relative really is. Try this: Many of the features that Kotlin has, which Java does not, come ... (you could also omit the pronoun before Java and replace it with 'but')
– AmI
yesterday
@Aml BOTH the “that” and the “which” relative clauses are restrictive. You cannot paraphrase this as “the features that Kotlin has, which - by the way - Java does not...” At least that’s not the most natural meaning. So, no commas!
– Richard Z
yesterday
I don’t think you can have a comma. The convention to have no commas for defining relatives is stronger than avoiding potential garden paths. But when I read the sentence I was indeed confused at first. It’s not very elegant. Rewrite? E.g. “features which are possessed by Kotlin but not by Java come” or something like that?
– Richard Z
yesterday
I don’t think you can have a comma. The convention to have no commas for defining relatives is stronger than avoiding potential garden paths. But when I read the sentence I was indeed confused at first. It’s not very elegant. Rewrite? E.g. “features which are possessed by Kotlin but not by Java come” or something like that?
– Richard Z
yesterday
Thank you @RichardZ for your suggestion. Even when just saying it aloud my initial wording seems a bit awkward; though using the passive voice in the clause makes the sentence too much of a mouthful. Perhaps the sentence as a whole is just too wordy. As it happens I'm just going to exclude the sentence altogether.
– Marc
yesterday
Thank you @RichardZ for your suggestion. Even when just saying it aloud my initial wording seems a bit awkward; though using the passive voice in the clause makes the sentence too much of a mouthful. Perhaps the sentence as a whole is just too wordy. As it happens I'm just going to exclude the sentence altogether.
– Marc
yesterday
1
1
@RichardZ and Marc- I think you are confused about where the defining relative really is. Try this: Many of the features that Kotlin has, which Java does not, come ... (you could also omit the pronoun before Java and replace it with 'but')
– AmI
yesterday
@RichardZ and Marc- I think you are confused about where the defining relative really is. Try this: Many of the features that Kotlin has, which Java does not, come ... (you could also omit the pronoun before Java and replace it with 'but')
– AmI
yesterday
@Aml BOTH the “that” and the “which” relative clauses are restrictive. You cannot paraphrase this as “the features that Kotlin has, which - by the way - Java does not...” At least that’s not the most natural meaning. So, no commas!
– Richard Z
yesterday
@Aml BOTH the “that” and the “which” relative clauses are restrictive. You cannot paraphrase this as “the features that Kotlin has, which - by the way - Java does not...” At least that’s not the most natural meaning. So, no commas!
– Richard Z
yesterday
add a comment |
0
active
oldest
votes
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
});
}
});
Marc 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%2f490813%2fdefining-relative-clause-followed-by-comma-when-clause-ends-with-negation-is-f%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
0
active
oldest
votes
0
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Marc is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Marc is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Marc is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Marc 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%2f490813%2fdefining-relative-clause-followed-by-comma-when-clause-ends-with-negation-is-f%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
I don’t think you can have a comma. The convention to have no commas for defining relatives is stronger than avoiding potential garden paths. But when I read the sentence I was indeed confused at first. It’s not very elegant. Rewrite? E.g. “features which are possessed by Kotlin but not by Java come” or something like that?
– Richard Z
yesterday
Thank you @RichardZ for your suggestion. Even when just saying it aloud my initial wording seems a bit awkward; though using the passive voice in the clause makes the sentence too much of a mouthful. Perhaps the sentence as a whole is just too wordy. As it happens I'm just going to exclude the sentence altogether.
– Marc
yesterday
1
@RichardZ and Marc- I think you are confused about where the defining relative really is. Try this: Many of the features that Kotlin has, which Java does not, come ... (you could also omit the pronoun before Java and replace it with 'but')
– AmI
yesterday
@Aml BOTH the “that” and the “which” relative clauses are restrictive. You cannot paraphrase this as “the features that Kotlin has, which - by the way - Java does not...” At least that’s not the most natural meaning. So, no commas!
– Richard Z
yesterday