Interrupting a sentence with no punctuation needed

In this series on interruptions in sentences, we have looked at interruptions in parentheses, interruptions with dashes, and interruptions with commas. But it is also possible to interrupt a sentence with no punctuation around the interruption. You do this when the interruption is actually a crucial part of the sentence. In grammar terms, this is called “essential.” These interruptions are “essential” because they help define or identify the exact thing you are talking about. They restrict the discussion to the exact item you mean. Here is an example:

The small arrow on the Styles group title bar opens the Styles pane.

The phrase on the Styles group title bar interrupts between the subject arrow and the verb opens. There is no punctuation surrounding this interruption because it is essential to help the reader find the exact arrow you are talking about out of all the arrows that might exist on a typical computer screen.

The poet Robert Frost wrote “Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening.”

Here there are no commas around Frost’s name because his name is essential to the sentence. It identifies which poet you are talking about. Without his name, the reader would have to ask, “Which poet, out of all the poets in the world and throughout history, are you talking about?”

Notice that if you put his name first, there would be no question of who you were talking about, because his name clearly identifies him. In that case any further description, such as the words a 20th-century American poet, would be a nonessential interruption and require commas:

Robert Frost, a 20th-century American poet, wrote “Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening.”

Here are some additional examples of interruptions:

1. The book that is in the center of the coffee table is very important to me.

2. World Art: The Essential Illustrated History, which is on the coffee table, is my favorite art book.

In sentence 1, the interruption is essential to identifying the book out of all the books in the world. The essential information cannot be surrounded by commas.

In sentence 2 the book has already been fully identified before the interruption. The interruption merely adds additional description that is not needed for identifying the item. Commas are needed.

Interruptions: Dashes versus Parentheses versus Commas

Three different punctuation marks battle for the opportunity to mark interruptions in your sentence. Which are you going to use? The answer should depend on the type of interruption and on its relevance to your sentence.

Some interruptions are completely irrelevant to the meaning of the sentence, and you want your reader to actually skip right over them and continue reading your sentence. This kind of interruption is indicated by parentheses. The classic parenthetical interruption is an instruction to the reader to look at a table, figure, bibliographical entry, or appendix for more information. Here are some examples:

Pie charts (see Figure 1) are designed to show the percentage breakdowns of the elements that make up a whole.

Whether the stone appears to travel in a straight line or a parabola is all relative (Einstein, 1950).

Other interruptions are actually part of your sentence, and you do want your reader to read them. The only reason they are considered interruptions is that they could have been left out of your sentence with no loss in clarity. These are signaled by commas. They are often commentary about the sentence or additional description.

The first singer, they all agreed, could actually win the contest. (independent comment)

The first singer, a young man from Alabama, could actually win the contest. (additional description)

The third kind of interruption is a surprise. Not that I am going to surprise you with what the third kind of interruption is—but that the third kind of interruption is literally a surprise to the reader. It is a sudden, unexpected interruption that may be even more important than the content of the rest of the sentence. This kind of interruption is like when your boring sitcom rerun is interrupted by a tornado warning in your area. When you return to your sitcom, everything is different. You don’t care as much about the sitcom as about the information contained in the interruption. Here are some examples:

Jane Smith—did I remember to tell you that she is the one who is making the final decision about whether we receive the $2 million contract?—is on the phone.

The supplies we ordered—the color laser printer, the high-resolution flat-panel monitors, and the upgrade to our Adobe Creative Suite software—will be here sometime this week.

Clearly, there are interruptions, and then there are INTERRUPTIONS. Punctuate them appropriately, and your reader will know exactly how to handle them.

Can you start a sentence with “hopefully”?

Short answer: Yes.

Long answer: Some people used to say you could not, but grammar books now say you can. The controversy used to be about whether hopefully is an “independent comment” like finally, actually, regrettably, fortunately, and many other words. These words act as asides to the reader to indicate the writer’s opinion or attitude about the entire sentence. If you need a more technical term, they are “sentential modifiers,” adverbs that modify the entire sentence.

If you are curious about some of the players in the controversy, they are The Careful Writer by Theodore Bernstein, The Chicago Manual of Style, and The Gregg Reference Manual. My opinion, stated above, agrees solidly with The Gregg Reference Manual. Chicago says that the usage I cite above is “here to stay,” but snips, “But many careful writers deplore the new meaning” [emphasis added—could this be a nod to readers of Bernstein?] Bernstein has not been updated, fyi, since 1965.

Yet another voice in the squabble is The Oxford Dictionary of American Usage and Style, by Bryan Garner. The advice here? All the controversy has ruined this word. Never use it at all, because no matter what you do, someone will think it is wrong.

Meanwhile, Merriam-Webster.com utterly dismisses Bernstein and all critics and solidly supports the use of hopefully as an independent comment.

So there you have it. My vote is to use it until people get over its history. After all, most people have long forgotten the “impact” wars of the late 1980s. But on the other hand, I recently encountered “impact is a noun only” still alive and well in the style guide of a large organization. Ultimately, I guess, each writer must make up their* own mind.

*Watch for a future article on the use of their.

Can you start a sentence with And, Yet, or But?

The coordinating conjunctions (and, yet, but, for, so, or, nor) are supposed to join things. But can they join sentences? That question has been contended for decades. Bryan Garner, however, in the Oxford Dictionary of American Usage and Style, says that the belief that a conjunction cannot start a sentence is a “rank superstition.”  And The Gregg Reference Manual says nothing about any rule against using conjunctions to start sentences, but merely warns against overusing this technique.
So starting a sentence with a conjunction is not a problem. In fact, you can even start a paragraph with one.
The only remaining question is whether to use a comma after the conjunction. The answer is no. But sometimes the conjunction may be followed by a truly parenthetical element surrounded by commas, coincidentally making a comma necessary after the conjunction. If you are putting a comma after the conjunction, make sure the phrase or clause after the comma is truly parenthetical.
Check the comma used in these sentences:

The shoes are comfortable despite the hole in the heel and the scuffed toes. But when it rains, my socks get wet. (“when it rains” cannot be surrounded by commas, because it is essential to the meaning of the sentence: the socks get wet only when it rains.)

The shoes are comfortable and you may still love them. But, as your mom says, they should be replaced. (“As your mom says” is a nonessential independent comment. If you removed it from the sentence, the meaning would not change. The shoes should still be replaced whether your mom says so or not. The two commas indicate that it is nonessential.)

In sentence 2, the comma after the conjunction but is there because of the parenthetical clause. If that clause were not there or were not parenthetical, there would be no comma.
Summary: You can start a sentence with a conjunction, and you should not put a comma after the conjunction. If there is a parenthetical phrase or clause after the conjunction, there might coincidentally be a comma there, but that comma is not due to the conjunction.

Can you start a sentence with however?

Our question this week continues the theme of rules that teachers make up to help young students write correctly. The answer is yes, you can start a sentence with however.

Once you start your sentence with however, however, you must make a decision about comma use. If the word however is used as a transition word, you use a comma after it.

The chef prepared the fish exquisitely. However, the service at the restaurant was terrible.
If it is used to mean “in whatever way,” you do not put a comma after it.

However you look at it, you win.

The reason teachers advise students not to start a sentence with however is that by doing so you often lose an opportunity to emphasize part of the sentence. In the first example above, I could have emphasized the contrast between the cooking and the service by placing however later in the sentence between two commas like this:

The chef prepared the fish exquisitely. The restaurant’s service, however, was terrible.

So go ahead. Start sentences with however. But consider whether you could get more mileage out of it by placing it after the specific idea you are contrasting.

Can you start a sentence with because?

A frequently asked question from my grammar classes is this one: Can you start a sentence with because? The short answer is, yes, if you make sure it is in fact a complete sentence. The longer answer is not an answer, but a question: where did you get the idea that you could not?

First, the short answer. You can start a sentence with because, as long as you make sure to fully complete the sentence. One clause beginning with the word because does not constitute a sentence. These are fragments:

*Because the newspapers reported it.*
*Because the river ran dry.*

If you follow the clause beginning with because with a complete independent clause, however, you are in business. These are complete sentences:

Because the newspapers reported it, the neighbors believed it.
Because the river ran dry, the dam would no longer provide electricity.

Now, the long answer. My theory as to why so many people think you cannot start a sentence with because is that school teachers use this “rule” to help students avoid writing fragments like the ones in asterisks above. You may find this rule useful yourself if you are prone to this error. Thus, if you do not allow yourself to start a sentence with because, you will automatically correct fragments beginning with because.

You might correct this fragment:

*Because I said so.*

By creating this complete sentence:

The children stayed inside this afternoon because I said so.

You may also correct fragments like the ones in asterisks above by rewriting so that because is not at the beginning:

The neighbors believed the story because the newspaper reported it.
The dam would no longer provide electricity because the river ran dry.

*Asterisks indicate a grammatically incorrect sentence.

How Not to Start a Sentence Part II

Do not start a sentence with due to or based on. Use because of or on the basis of instead. Due to and based on create adjectival phrases. Adjectival phrases modify nouns. When these phrases introduce a sentence, they are followed by a comma and are understood to be describing the noun right after the comma. Here are some problem sentences with fixes:

Incorrect: Due to an early deadline, we do not have an update on this story. [The adjective phrase Due to an early deadline appears to modify we, but in reality, we are not what is due to the early deadline.]

Correct: Because of an early deadline, we not have an update on this story. [Because of creates an adverbial phrase, which correctly modifies the verb after the comma, correctly explaining why we do not have something.]

Incorrect: Based on their analysis, the consultants recommended that we upgrade the software. [The adjective phrase Based on their analysis appears to modify the consultants, but as in the previous example, the consultants are not based on their own analysis.]

Correct: On the basis of their analysis, the consultants recommended that we upgrade the software. [On the basis of creates an adverbial phrase, which correctly modifies the verb recommended. However, this sentence sounds wordy.]

Better: After analyzing our needs, the consultants recommended that we upgrade the software.

Here is an example of based on used correctly:

Correct: Based on our careful research, this report is absolutely correct. [The adjective phrase based on our careful research correctly modifies this report: the report is in fact based on the careful research.]

Although it is possible to create a grammatically correct sentence starting with due to or based on, the great likelihood that you need an adverbial phrase, not an adjectival phrase, at the start of your sentence leads me to the advice you read above: Do not start a sentence with due to or based on.