Subj : Misinterprestation
To   : Wayne Harris
From : Dallas Hinton
Date : Sun Aug 02 2020 20:51:12

Hi Wayne -- on Aug 02 2020 at 23:40, you wrote:

WH> If I may, let me ask some questions.  My intuition says I should always
WH> isolate a vocative in between commas.  ``Hi, Anton.''  However, I pretty
WH> much never see anyone writing that way.  Isn't that a grammar rule?

The vocative comma use varies with formality. For a good explanation,
see https://www.macmillandictionaryblog.com/hello-vocative-comma -- but the
quick and dirty explanation is that in informal writing it's optional.
IMO, the only time it absolutely must be used (in order to ensure clarity) is in a
sentence such as "I'm fighting John" which is different from "I'm
fighting, John".

Gmail seems happy to fill in (autofill) text (at least in the Windows
version on a PC). If I address a message to Frank, and begin typing
Hi<space> it writes "Hi Frank", but if I type Hi,<space> it leaves the
text alone. Make of that what you will! :-)

WH> You wrote ``furthermore, [...]''.  That also matches my intuition.  But
WH> I often see people ignoring this comma.  Perhaps this is an optional
WH> comma.  Is it?  What is the book you go to to cite such rules?

This is called a conjunctive adverb, and the rule seems to be that you
always have a comma after a conjunctive adverb.

The books Ardith and I use most are the 2000 "New Fowler's Modern
English Usage" and the 2016 "Garner's Modern English Usage". Fowler's
tends more toward British usage and Garner seems more American. Here in
Canada, of course, we're bilingual. :-)


Cheers... Dallas

--- timEd/NT 1.30+
 * Origin: The BandMaster, Vancouver, CANADA (1:153/7715)

.