Commas, Part 8

Commas, Part 1
Commas, Part 2
Commas, Part 3
Commas, Part 4

Commas, Part 5

Commas, Part 6

Commas, Part 7

After a long hiatus, the comma series continues! In this lesson, we will deal with using commas, relative pronouns, and non-restrictive clauses/expressions.

What are restrictive and non-restrictive clauses? First, these tend to be relative clauses introduced by relative pronouns like that, which, who, whom, whoever, whomever, and whose. (These pronouns can also serve as the subject of the clause, not merely as a way to introduce it.) A restrictive clause is a clause containing necessary information. By extension, then, a non-restrictive clause contains unnecessary information, i.e., information not essential to the central meaning of the sentence.

• The bitch whom I hate will be spending the day with me. (restrictive, necessary info)
• Ice cream, which I love, comes in many flavors. (non-restrictive, unnecessary info)

In the first example above, it's necessary to know that the speaker hates the bitch, so this is a restrictive clause. Being restrictive, the rule is that there's no comma.

In the second example, you can remove the clause "which I love" and not change the essential information of the sentence, which is that ice cream comes in many flavors. "Which I love" is just a side note, a parenthetical, a tossed-off remark. So, being a non-restrictive clause and therefore unnecessary information, the phrase gets surrounded with commas to show it can be lifted safely out of the sentence. "Ice cream comes in many flavors" is perfectly intelligible.

The concept of "restrictive" and "non-restrictive" applies to more than just clauses: it also applies to appositives (words or phrases that act like adjectives, modifying or qualifying nouns). Here are two examples:

• My friend Brad is a popular dancer at The Sloppy Wet Hole.
• My friend, Brad, is a popular dancer at The Sloppy Wet Hole.

These seem like almost exactly the same sentence, right? But knowing what you now know, you can see that the appositive "Brad" is necessary information in the first sentence, but unnecessary in the second. In the first sentence, it's important that your remark is* a specific reference to your friend Brad. In the second sentence, what's important is that you have a friend who happens to be named Brad who works as a dancer at The Sloppy Wet Hole. It's a subtle distinction, but it comes down to necessary versus unnecessary.

And this brings up an important issue: when to use commas. In the case of the Brad examples above, with appositives, it's a judgment call. How necessary is it that we know that Brad, in particular, is your dancer friend? You decide. Both ways of writing the sentence—with commas or without—are correct. That said, there can sometimes be nuances associated with the use or non-use of commas. Look:

• My brother Fred lusts after farm animals.
• My brother, Fred, lusts after farm animals.

In the first example, "Fred" has no commas because his name is necessary information, the implication being that you have other brothers, so it's important to know we're talking about Fred and not Tom or Bill. In the second example, the implication is that you have only one brother, and his name is Fred. Because you have only one brother (and assuming your interlocutor knows this), the fact that his name is Fred is less relevant to the essence of the sentence. Hence the commas to show unnecessary information.

Back to clauses. A lot of people will say that that and which are pretty much interchangeable as relative pronouns these days, and that's more or less correct in informal speech, so don't obsess over whether to use that or which when talking. Go ahead and be sloppy. When writing, however, especially when writing formally, there is a technical distinction: use that with restrictive clauses and comma-which with non-restrictive clauses. Don't let me ever catch you writing which in front of a non-restrictive clause without also writing a comma! There will be hell to pay if I ever find you.

WRONG: My trusty socket wrench which I love with a passion is always there in my toolbox.
RIGHT: My trusty socket wrench, which I love with a passion, is always there in my toolbox.

Depending on how the sentence is structured, you might need only one comma.

• Clayton thought Irma was the Devil, which is saying something.
• Please bring me that cleaver, which I need to take care of your screaming sister.

Note, too, that in the above examples, you can't use that as an alternative. Like it or not, you're stuck with comma-which.

The relative pronoun whose can go either way—restrictively or non-restrictively.

• The man whose dog ate my cat is now my next-door neighbor. (restrictive)
• Phil, whose sister I used to fuck, is a stand-up fellow. (non-restrictive)

Some other examples of comma use and non-use with all the relative pronouns:

• The cats that I find tastiest tend to be Siamese.
• This magic lantern, which you will need inside that cave, occasionally makes farting and lip-smacking noises.
• Janice cooked waffles, which was a relief after a month of goddamn pancakes.
• Jack, who is no friend of mine, offered me earthworms in exchange for my Rolex.
• The priestess who branded your buttocks is named Jen of the Cursèd Nipple Sisters.
• Mikhail, whom you know through your breakdancing/seal-hunting society, is the guest speaker tonight.
• The kid whom I despise will serve as a target at the shooting range.
• I will find and skin whoever did this.
• Clare said she would kill and eat whomever she met first.
• The boy whose eye fell out is crying like a little bitch.
• Myron, whose reputation preceded him, entered the hall to horrified gasps and one sexual moan.

Hope you learned something.

And now, a quiz: correct any of the following sentences that need correcting. Maybe a that needs to change to a which (or vice versa), but more likely, you'll need to add or delete commas. Assume the context is formal writing, so no sloppy usage allowed!

QUIZ

1. The syphilis, that I thought I'd beaten, came back with a vengeance.

2. Martin, whose car was as big as his ego, cruised by my house slowly and tauntingly.

3. That movie which played last night made me cry snot bubbles.

4. Things eat things, that eat eggs. And things, that eat things, that eat eggs, also eat eggs.

5. Madame was upset when she found out you had killed the goose that shat the golden turd.

ANSWERS (highlight to see)

1. The syphilis that I thought I'd beaten came back with a vengeance. (or) The syphilis, which I thought I'd beaten, came back with a vengeance.

2. No error.

3. That movie, which played last night, made me cry snot bubbles.

4. Things eat things that eat eggs. And things that eat things that eat eggs also eat eggs.

5. No error.

__________

*Someone will come along and ask why I didn't use the subjunctive be here, as in, "It's important that you be there on time." I used is because "your remark is a specific reference to your friend Brad" is a statement of fact, not something carrying imperative weight or implying a wish. The subjunctive mood is used in cases of necessity, exigence, or sometimes even strong emotion (among other cases... but this is arguably truer in languages like French, e.g., Je suis content que tu sois là.). So: is, not be.