Grammar Wall of Shame #7: How to punctuate "however"

However you slice it, a punctuation pie is sure to have its share of "however" goofs; however, there are simple rules for getting it right. Pay attention, however, or you will find yourself taking a punctuation pratfall.

Take a look:

Warning! Comma missing!

So, what are the rules for punctuating "however"?

Rule 1:

When it's a conjunctive adverb joining two sentences, it needs a semi-colon before and a comma after:

The food was terrible; however, we at it anyway. 

Rule 2:

When it's an aside or interruption in the middle of a sentence it needs a comma before and another comma after:

The food was terrible, however, but we ate it anyway.

Addendum to Rule 2:

If however is used as an aside at the end of a sentence (see the closing sentence of this post, for example), then it should be introduced - set apart - by a comma.

Rule 3:

When it's an adverb meaning "no matter how" it doesn't require any punctuation.

However you look at it, the food was terrible.

Clear?

Writers and editors need to learn just three simple rules. I'm sorry to say, these rules are frequently broken, however. 

(Sorry! Couldn't help myself...!)

Grammar Wall of Shame #6: Punctuation gone wild

When teaching grammar to college students, I always enjoyed - in a subversive sort of way - hearing their stories about grammar lessons learned in school.

"My teacher said never to start a sentence with because."

"A sentence is a complete thought." (Define complete, I would tell them, which they couldn't.)

My favourites always had to do with punctuation, such as:

"Use a comma whenever you take a breath in reading a sentence." (To which I would ask: "What if you had just run up stairs? What if you had a cold?")

"Always introduce a list with a colon."

"Use semi-colons to separate items in a list after a colon."

Punctuation is a minefield. That is something we can all agree on as the rules continue to confound the unwary writer. Take a look:

Commas and hyphens gone wild!

Matthew Bell married Isabella Humble in 1840 and just over a decade later in 1851, they moved...

Okay, this is nitpicking perhaps, since the meaning is very clear, but without a comma after later (blue circle), this sentence suggests that a decade took place in the latter part of 1851. Without a time dilation device, this would be impossible. Add a comma and the reader no longer needs a working knowledge of the space-time continuum:

Matthew Bell married Isabella Humble in 1840 and just over a decade later, in 1851, they moved...

But there's another comma problem in this paragraph as well (second blue circle). The writer wants to add information about the city of Guelph: at the time of the Bells' settlement, the city was 24 years old. The modifying clause beginning with which needs to be enclosed by commas to set it apart. But the writer added an unnecessary and confusing comma smack in the middle of the clause:

...Guelph, which was at the time, only a 24 year-old settlement. (I'll deal with that hyphen in a moment.)

Remove that comma after time! It's not required - in fact, it complicates the meaning by suggesting Guelph simply "was at the time" - or, in other words, Guelph was, as opposed to not being in existence. That comma removes the connection of Guelph to its 24 years and leaves it simply as "Guelph was." Complicated, subtle - wrong! Here is the correction:

...Guelph, which was at the time only a 24-year-old settlement.

There were not 24 Guelphs, each one a year old (yellow circle). There was one Guelph, and it was 24 years old. If you turn that age description into an adjective preceding the noun settlement, you need to add hyphens. Not just one hyphen, but two - enough to turn the age description into a single adjective: ...24-year-old...

Punctuation has the power to obscure - or facilitate - meaning. But you have to put it in the right place.

Give me back my apostrophes, please!

A recent episode of The Current on CBC Radio One explored the controversy surrounding a British city council which had decided to get ride of apostrophes on signs.

The interviews featured grammarians, editors and language experts from Canada, the UK, the United States and Australia, and the conversations were lively and entertaining.

But I confess, the whole idea of messing with punctuation fills me with (gulp!) horror.

The power of punctuation!

Teaching punctuation to college students – most of them in business programs – remains one of the highlights of my college teaching career. Students tend to approach the topic of punctuation with misconceptions and a fair amount of resistance.

To give them credit, however, my students – most of them under the age of 25, members of the text-speak generation – always indicated that they could see the difference between “real” written communication for the workplace, and the informal grammar-challenged shorthand used on their mobile devices. They understood that formal and informal workplace communication necessarily has certain conventions and expectations, punctuation among them. But the nit-pickiness of it disturbed them.

“Who cares if a comma is missing?” “What’s the point of using a semi-colon? What IS a semi-colon, anyway?” And my favourite: “Everybody knows what I mean, so what’s the big deal?”

This is the argument put forward by Ted Gibson, a professor of cognitive science at MIT, one of the CBC interviewees: that the context of any written passage will make it clear whether you’re talking about an item commonly found on a beach, or a female who will be doing something: shell, she’ll.

His point was that in spoken English, we understand each other, so it’s not a huge leap to expect people to clue into the meaning behind written English, apostrophes present or not. “His brother’s keeper” or “his brothers keeper” – the reader will figure it out without the little swirl cluttering up the page.

Give me swirls and clutter. Just because there are so many rules concerning correct punctuation doesn’t mean that we should jettison those qualifying, clarifying, stylizing squiggles, swirls, dots and dashes. Clutter, my Aunt Fanny!

No, I believe punctuation – even pesky apostrophes – helps corral English usage, which could easily go madly off in all directions (just ask someone who is learning English as a second language.)

Punctuation is a tool that helps writers communicate with style and, most importantly, clarity. It helps readers understand, too. (Does the million-dollar comma fiasco ring a bell?)

Give me my apostrophes (and commas, and semi-colons and the whole squiggly lot), please. They’re some of the sharpest tools in my writing toolbox. 

I rest my case!