A Dash or a Semicolon

[warooa]

Thanks David. Always incisive, timely and helpful.

[Shelley Hansen]

Thank you David - that is very comprehensive, and what you've written agrees with my understanding of the use of punctuation, in particular to convey to a reader/reciter what is required at certain points.

So why is it that some judges superimpose their preferences to the point of adverse criticism when the punctuation is not wrong, but simply different from what they may have used?

Maybe I'm off the planet here, but unless the punctuation is obviously incorrect, does a judge err by accepting the poet's intentions?

I suppose that's one of THOSE questions!!

Cheers, Shelley

[warooa]

So why is it that some judges superimpose their preferences to the point of adverse criticism when the punctuation is not wrong, but simply different from what they may have used?

I suppose that's one of THOSE questions!!

Cheers, Shelley

It must be difficult being a judge. When it gets to the pointy end, and deciding a 1 2 3 out of probably dozens of worthy entries it probably does come down to a minor discrepancy like a non-preferred punctuation mark. It might not be fair or right but if it is something that that particular judge might be particularly insistent upon then so be it. At the end of the day they are doing a tough job to the best of their ability.

Marty

[Neville Briggs]

Surely clarity of expression is the main consideration. If we claim to be poets don't we know that ?

If the rules of grammar serve the purpose of clarity then they have served their purpose . Must they be imagined as commandments of some transcendent force.

[Shelley Hansen]

You are right, Marty - and certainly when it comes to splitting straws between potential winning entries, all aspects including use of punctuation must be taken into consideration.

I guess I was referring to the instance I cited earlier where a judge's feedback to a competitor specifically states that the punctuation was poor, resulting in lost marks - but then doesn't point out an example of error. So the poet is left up in the air and is led to assume that it is more to do with the judge's opinion than an actual breach of grammar rules.

I agree with you Nev - if there is clarity of expression and meaning, then the punctuation has done its job.

Cheers, Shelley

[David Campbell]

Yes, Shelley and Marty, judges will always have personal preferences and that’s not going to change, but sometimes they’re just plain wrong. I’ve had several cases of judging sheets that have come back to me with statements that are simply incorrect. One of these was also reported by Terry some time back. A judge told him that you can’t use a comma before the word “and”. That’s absolute rubbish. Of course you can if you want to indicate a pause. One of my grammar books gives the following prose example: “The man rose to his feet; his opponent rushed at him, and both fell to the ground.” (This also shows the use of a semicolon to separate two linked statements.) And the stanza I quoted above has a comma between “near” and “and” because I wanted a pause there. It also used to be the case that you couldn’t start a sentence with “And”, but that’s no longer true, as can be seen from the previous sentence!

Language is constantly evolving, and one of the problems we face is making judgements based on something learnt at school fifty or sixty years ago. I was taught never to split infinitives, but if I’d written that as “I was taught to never split infinitives” nobody would even notice these days.

One of the difficulties judges face is dealing with the “sprinkle” effect. There are poets (believe me!) who write their poems and then sprinkle punctuation (particularly commas) here and there because they know there probably should be some. For example, you’ll find poems with commas at the end of each line, whether a pause is indicated or not. That sort of thing could attract a penalty in a competition, but the judge would need to spell out the problem and not leave the poet guessing.

As Neville says, punctuation should help to clarify meaning. It’s not just there for decoration.

Cheers
David

[warooa]

Must they be imagined as commandments of some transcendent force.

Nev getting either very sci-fi or religious there

(or are they one and the same )

I think modern punctuation is an inexact science and that is something we all need to come to terms with. Should we, as David mentions, adhere to what we may have been taught decades ago? Some of us are hard-wired to do so and there is nothing wrong with that, but our language and grammar does evolve, all the more rapidly of late for better or worse. I for one, never truly grasped the concept of infinitives, split or otherwise, but try my hardest to understand grammatical rules so at least I know when I'm breaking them. Or maybe that's just some transcendental force coming over me?

Marty

[Neville Briggs]

Marty, I was simply making the point that the rules are what we determine for our usefulness. They are not laws handed down by some high and exalted language legislature. Although I think that we need to commit to some sort of agreed standard. Communication becomes confused if anything goes.


I wouldn't worry about understanding split infinitives Marty, it's a non-event. We are free to boldly go where no pedants have gone before.

[Terry]

G/day Neville

At least it's sparked a bit on interest.

Terry

[Heather]