Punctuation (Page 5 of 12)

Janet, I wish it was my punctuated sentence. I'm a big fan of power punctuation.

What I'm seeing in this thread is the wondrous places Vern's powerfully punctuated sentence has taken the imaginations of several of us who aspire to creative writing.

Your context reminds me of the arc of Caitlyn Marie Jenner's nee William Bruce Jenner's "nothing".https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caitlyn_Jenner
And if you consider Jenner's early life a struggle to prove his masculinity, the "nothing" reminds me of this snippet from Shakespeare:
"...And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing."

¡Some nothing—Olympic decathlon champion—Bruce Jenner's struggle to understand himself!

Which reminds me of Dylan Thomas's great poem:
Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight,
And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way,
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight
Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Memphis Trace

It's a yes-or-no question not directed to you whose invective has gone past annoying.  Even if Janet may answer in a way that I would not like, she would answer politely sans ad hominem.

***
Submitted by Mark Allen on Mon, 02/24/2014 - 11:03am
Share This:     

Creative Punctuation Can Be Key to the Narrative

Gatsby believed in the green light, the orgastic future that year by year recedes before us. It eluded us then, but that's no matter — tomorrow we will run faster, stretch out our arms further... And one fine morning —

I fail to see an incorrectly used semicolon that you defend as "creative" or something. In fact, I fail to see any creative punctuation at all but punctuation inappropriate for the office and scientific paper.

No one said there was a creative semicolon and the subject at hand isn't specifically about a semicolon, rather creative punctuation of any kind which evidently is inept under your authority. If any punctuation can be used creatively, then what would be the basis for excluding the semicolon per se. So, I notice you don't present your credentials to oppose the thirty years experience by the author of the article. You merely keep repeating the same refrain that that poor semicolon is totally inept in any possible circumstance, creative or not.

If you fail to see the creativity, perhaps you could argue with the author of the article and pit your vast experience against his. I once thought you offered at least some hint of intelligent insight to the threads you entered. Stubborn inflexibility has made that once highly regarded insight a joke. Even Einstein conceded he made a mistake when he declared, "God does not play dice" when speaking of quantum physics. He later said that was the biggest mistake of his life. Perhaps someday the genius in you might even allow that you are not an infallible genius on the creative use of punctuation.  Until that day, I will be a little sad and disappointed for what has been lost. Take care. Vern

See Scott Kim's =Inversions= (book and website).

You're not admitting you made a mistake with A woman without; her man is nothing, too.

What mistake? I told you long ago that no one was arguing that it was correct standard punctuation. It was and is a creative humorous variation of the gender specific methods of punctuating the sentence as provided by the link which started this thread. You might also see my previous post; I'm getting the hang of your sense of humor now. LOL. Perhaps you could capitalize on it more with a change of moniker to "Chuck The Jokester." It could prove a valuable asset for your new career. Take care. Vern

Edited to mess with the punctuation.

A cheap nonsensical vehicle£ to post my 'bad grammar, bad grandma' play on words is all.

Although, seriously (a genuine enquiry); I've recently been working in a regional extremity of England (South-West) where the dialect or common use of the language has some subtle differences. One mannerism that prevails amongst the locals is the tendency to end a sentence with a re-affirmation (If you’ve seen any of the Harry Potter movies, Hagrid, the large fellow with the beard plays the part with this accent).

They'll say things like:

"It's a nice day today -- it is."
or
"We were thinking of going down the pub -- we were."
or
"You'll regret that in the morning -- you will."

or one I heard this morning:

That's not right that isn't.

Within my own writing I'm always looking for dialogue traits or manners of speech that might add more character or dimension to the dialogue, but by using proper words (used differently) within mannerisms and ‘turn of phrase’ rather than spelling out the accent phonetically.

So, what is the 'correct' or best way to punctuate this reiteration dialect?

That’s not right that isn’t.

That’s not right— that isn’t.

That’s not right, that isn’t.

That’s not right; that isn’t.

What is the actual speaking cadence?  I think you'll find it's best approximated by the comma.

A woman without; a man is nothing. uses a semicolon incorrectly according to a punctuation rule which is set in stone, and ordinary readers unfamiliar with an archaic use of without as an adverb would take that without to be a preposition without an object, and furthermore, even with reading without as an adverb, there is no verb or adjective within that phrase to modify. It is about as gross a violation of simple punctuation rules as there is, and yet you never acknowledged the mistake and even went on a tear against me for pointing this fact out even though there contained at the outset no comment from me about you personally and only about the "punctuated" sentence A woman without a man is nothing. that, in fact, requires no additional punctuation without an effort to change the obvious meaning as is.

Every punctuation rule is set in stone according to archivists and lingweenies. Unruly rules are too much for them to grasp. Creative writers, on the other hand are charged with expanding the language and the knowledge base, not carving it into stone.

Exactly which rule carved in stone, does Vern's example violate? In context, the punctuation is not only proper, it is powerful. Too much for lingweenies, apparently. Left up to lingweenies, we'd still be talking in grunts and growls.

Memphis Trace

Or: A woman without; her man is nothing.

Your first response to the above sentence: "Ordinarily the two parts of semicolon phrasing can stand alone, and the above fails. The first half ends in a preposition, has no verb, and does not make sense."

My response: "Really? I seldom deal with the ordinary. Take care. Vern"

As noted, you fully know that there are exceptions to every rule because you use "ordinarily" to qualify your statement, fully aware there are no concrete rules. I then acknowledge in the original humorous vein that ordinarily the punctuation would be wrong, but I seldom deal with the ordinary. And as stated elsewhere in this thread I assumed you accepted said exception to the rules with the understanding it was a humorous response. But no, you came back later and kept harping there is no circumstance it could be a creative use with humorous intent or otherwise. So I really don't see that challenging your inflexibility is a personal attack when you continued to attack the original humorous sentence ad nauseam. But as noted in previous posts, I now accept that it just your way of showing humor. And it really is funny when you think about it. Take care. Vern

Sorry Janet, it wasn't serious... as I mentioned, a cheap nonsensical vehicle£ to post my 'bad grammar, bad grandma' play on words is all.