What is it?
This is when a comma is used to splice two independent clauses like so:
"Jane sprinted as fast as her legs would take her, the sound of zombie feet pounded in ears."
Or try this one:
Jane enjoyed cookie-crumble ice cream, she had a weakness for anything with cookies.
What's so wrong with this: it is not the job of the comma to join two main clauses. The correct grammar usage would be to use one of the following:
(1) You could use a period to separate the two complete sentences:
Jane sprinted as fast as her legs would take her. The sound of zombie feet pounded in her ears.
Jane enjoyed cookie-crumble ice cream. She had a weakness for anything with cookies.
It is the periods role to separate two complete sentences.
(2) Or, if the sentences are closely related, you can use a semicolon to connect them:
Jane sprinted as fast as her legs would take her; the sound of zombie feet pounded in her ears.
Jane enjoyed cookie-crumble ice cream; she had a weakness for anything with cookies.
(3) Or, in some circumstances, you can use a coordinating conjunction to fix the comma splice:
A comma and a coordinating conjunction can join two independent clauses. The following words are coordinating conjucntions: and, but, or, yet, not, so, for
I had to slightly tweak the first sentence to make it work, so you would get the idea:
Jane sprinted as fast as her legs would take her, but the sound of zombie feet still pounded in her ears.
I know comma splices sneak into my writing all the time, and are something I keep an eye out for during editing. How about you? Do you suffer from comma splice syndrome?
No comments:
Post a Comment