Writing/Punctuation Question

[Alice]

My 10 year old is taking an IEW class this year. This is partly so he can have the experience of being in a class setting with kids his age (something he wanted) and partly to outsource a bit of my workload. I admit to being not the best at punctuation rules but his teacher sent back his latest paragraph with corrections that seemed odd/awkward to me. I'm not sure if they are truly wrong, or just an IEW awkward thing or if I'm wrong. 

 

Can you look and advise? She wants them to put a comma after every "sentence opener". I understand this for words like "first" or "later" or for introductory phrases and clauses. I've always believed that you don't put a comma if it's a short introductory prepositional phrase and some of the other places she suggests a comma seem odd to me.

 

Here are a few examples: 

 

In 100 BC, Caesar was born. (comma or not?)

 

Soon, after he gave up a huge parade for the position of consul and even more power. (I would put the comma between after and he instead of between soon and after...this way it seem to make "after he gave up a huge parade...." into a dependent clause)

 

After, he was ransomed he became the Pontifex Maximus which granted him an enormous amount of power. (same idea...shouldn't the comma be after ransomed ?) 

 

In Gaul, he attacked and successively defeated the dreaded Helvetii. (Comma or not?) 

 

 

 

 

[8filltheheart]

My 10 year old is taking an IEW class this year. This is partly so he can have the experience of being in a class setting with kids his age (something he wanted) and partly to outsource a bit of my workload. I admit to being not the best at punctuation rules but his teacher sent back his latest paragraph with corrections that seemed odd/awkward to me. I'm not sure if they are truly wrong, or just an IEW awkward thing or if I'm wrong.

 

Can you look and advise? She wants them to put a comma after every "sentence opener". I understand this for words like "first" or "later" or for introductory phrases and clauses. I've always believed that you don't put a comma if it's a short introductory prepositional phrase and some of the other places she suggests a comma seem odd to me.

 

Here are a few examples:

 

In 100 BC, Caesar was born. (comma or not?)

 

Soon, after he gave up a huge parade for the position of consul and even more power. (I would put the comma between after and he instead of between soon and after...this way it seem to make "after he gave up a huge parade...." into a dependent clause)

 

After, he was ransomed he became the Pontifex Maximus which granted him an enormous amount of power. (same idea...shouldn't the comma be after ransomed ?)

 

In Gaul, he attacked and successively defeated the dreaded Helvetii. (Comma or not?)

You are correct. With introductory prep phrases no comma unless 5 or more words unless necessary for clarity. (Though I often catch myself using one after 4 words.)

 

The other commas destroy the meaning of the sentences and do make some dependent clauses or run-ons.

 

I like this link. https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/607/03/

[Ellie]

My 10 year old is taking an IEW class this year. This is partly so he can have the experience of being in a class setting with kids his age (something he wanted) and partly to outsource a bit of my workload. I admit to being not the best at punctuation rules but his teacher sent back his latest paragraph with corrections that seemed odd/awkward to me. I'm not sure if they are truly wrong, or just an IEW awkward thing or if I'm wrong. 

 

Can you look and advise? She wants them to put a comma after every "sentence opener". I understand this for words like "first" or "later" or for introductory phrases and clauses. I've always believed that you don't put a comma if it's a short introductory prepositional phrase and some of the other places she suggests a comma seem odd to me.

 

Here are a few examples: 

 

In 100 BC, Caesar was born. (comma or not?) Yes, although I might or might not have written the sentence this way to begin with.

 

Soon, after he gave up a huge parade for the position of consul and even more power. (I would put the comma between after and he instead of between soon and after...this way it seem to make "after he gave up a huge parade...." into a dependent clause) ITA with you.

 

After, he was ransomed he became the Pontifex Maximus which granted him an enormous amount of power. (same idea...shouldn't the comma be after ransomed ?) ITA with you.

 

In Gaul, he attacked and successively defeated the dreaded Helvetii. (Comma or not?) I might or might not use a comma; it would depend on the context.

[FloridaLisa]

My 10 year old is taking an IEW class this year. This is partly so he can have the experience of being in a class setting with kids his age (something he wanted) and partly to outsource a bit of my workload. I admit to being not the best at punctuation rules but his teacher sent back his latest paragraph with corrections that seemed odd/awkward to me. I'm not sure if they are truly wrong, or just an IEW awkward thing or if I'm wrong. 

 

Can you look and advise? She wants them to put a comma after every "sentence opener". I understand this for words like "first" or "later" or for introductory phrases and clauses. I've always believed that you don't put a comma if it's a short introductory prepositional phrase and some of the other places she suggests a comma seem odd to me.

 

Here are a few examples: 

 

In 100 BC, Caesar was born. (comma or not?)

 

Yes, comma. 

 

Soon, after he gave up a huge parade for the position of consul and even more power. (I would put the comma between after and he instead of between soon and after...this way it seem to make "after he gave up a huge parade...." into a dependent clause)

 

Hopefully she was reading quickly because she just made what was a sentence into a fragment. The comma, if used at all, should follow the after. 

 

After, he was ransomed he became the Pontifex Maximus which granted him an enormous amount of power. (same idea...shouldn't the comma be after ransomed ?) 

 

Yes, you're right again! It's a prepositional phrase not a lone preposition that's introducing the sentence. 

 

 

In Gaul, he attacked and successively defeated the dreaded Helvetii. (Comma or not?) 

 

Probably yes, but I wouldn't have been overly picky. 

 

Keep in mind that often the use of commas is a style issue and not a requirement. I usually don't correct comma usage unless it's clearly incorrect. 

 

Lisa

[Alice]

Thanks 8, Ellie and Lisa. 

 

Thanks for the link 8, I found the same one when I was trying to confirm what seemed right to me. 

 

The problem I have with grammar and punctuation is that I was never taught it in any kind of formal way. Everything I learned was from my very picky father editing my papers when I was in school. He didn't really go over the rules. Gradually though I think I kind of absorbed an idea of what looks right or wrong. But I'm not as confident at saying it's clearly wrong vs. a style issue as I am confident in the laws of Chemistry. 

 

Hopefully, the teacher was just reading quickly. Either way, it's a bit disappointing. She comes highly recommended so I'll give her the benefit of the doubt.