dong6241
Member
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2012
- Member Type
- Student or Learner
- Native Language
- Korean
- Home Country
- South Korea
- Current Location
- South Korea
I have a question regarding comma rules in English.
As far as my knowledge goes, you only use comma if Subordinating Clause starts off the sentence then the Independent (Main) Clause comes after it, such as this one = "Because I ate a rotten hotdog , I got sick"
And you dont need to use any comma if Independent (Main) Clause starts off then sentence and Subordinating Clausecomes after it such as this one = "I ate a hotdog because I was hungry"
Now here's the sentence I'm confused about:
"This type of case can be easily seen as lacking merit, because each of the elements of a tort(a civil wrongdoing) was not present, and thus no law was broken."
why is comma used before the subordinating clause/conjuction ?
p.s- additional question: ", and thus no law was broken." I know , + coordinaiting conjuction connects two indepenent clauses, but "thus no law was broken" <- is this a full sentence? to me, it seems like subordinating clause because of "thus"
As far as my knowledge goes, you only use comma if Subordinating Clause starts off the sentence then the Independent (Main) Clause comes after it, such as this one = "Because I ate a rotten hotdog , I got sick"
And you dont need to use any comma if Independent (Main) Clause starts off then sentence and Subordinating Clausecomes after it such as this one = "I ate a hotdog because I was hungry"
Now here's the sentence I'm confused about:
"This type of case can be easily seen as lacking merit, because each of the elements of a tort(a civil wrongdoing) was not present, and thus no law was broken."
why is comma used before the subordinating clause/conjuction ?
p.s- additional question: ", and thus no law was broken." I know , + coordinaiting conjuction connects two indepenent clauses, but "thus no law was broken" <- is this a full sentence? to me, it seems like subordinating clause because of "thus"