joannqn Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 Here are two sentences from my son's writing. Both have the word who, but only one of them requires the clause to be offset by commas. Please help me explain why the first would not have commas but the second would. I can't come up with the explanation, I just know it is that way. The cock who won flew to the top of the farmhouse. An eagle, who circled overhead, heard the boasting rooster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleIzumi Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 I believe it only needs commas if it's an independent clause, and I don't see why the second needs commas at all. I haven't been editing for a year though so my memory might be fuzzy. ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trixie Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 Here are two sentences from my son's writing. Both have the word who, but only one of them requires the clause to be offset by commas. Please help me explain why the first would not have commas but the second would. I can't come up with the explanation, I just know it is that way. The cock who won flew to the top of the farmhouse. An eagle, who circled overhead, heard the boasting rooster. Restrictive clauses don't use commas; non-restrictive clauses do. The dependent clause "who won" in the first sentence is a restrictive clause; that is, it limits or identifies which specific cock (out of all the possible cocks) flew to the top of the farmhouse. (And I have to admit, ashamedly, that I giggled all the way through typing that sentence.) The dependent clause "who circled overhead" in the second sentence is a non-restrictive clause; that is, it simply further describes but doesn't explicity identify the eagle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
katemary63 Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 (edited) nt. Edited January 22, 2010 by katemary63 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trixie Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 nt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Georgia On My Mind Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 :iagree: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joannqn Posted January 22, 2010 Author Share Posted January 22, 2010 Restrictive clauses don't use commas; non-restrictive clauses do. The dependent clause "who won" in the first sentence is a restrictive clause; that is, it limits or identifies which specific cock (out of all the possible cocks) flew to the top of the farmhouse. (And I have to admit, ashamedly, that I giggled all the way through typing that sentence.) The dependent clause "who circled overhead" in the second sentence is a non-restrictive clause; that is, it simply further describes but doesn't explicity identify the eagle. Perfect explanation. I have to admit that our grammar has not covered restrictive and non-restrictive clauses so I don't know this yet. I honestly can't remember most of the grammar we are learning now, let alone what will be taught in later levels, being taught to me in school. BTW, I hate this source text from IEW. If I hadn't needed DS to do another paragraph for practice, I would have skipped it entirely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleIzumi Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 Ah, the amount of information I've forgotten since switching from editing to graphic design. :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.