Non-Preposed "(al)though"/"even though"-Clauses: Should a Comma Always Precede Them?

[Lycidas]

Normally, learners are taught to use a comma after dependent clauses at the beginning of a sentence, and not to use a comma before dependent clauses at the end of a sentence. I think many would agree that sometimes a comma is warranted before sentence-final dependent clauses. There may be weird stuff with negation or a desire to express something as an afterthought.

I question the wisdom, however, of applying the general rule to sentence-final "(al)though"/"even though"-clauses. I'm teaching from a textbook that does apply the general rule to them, and that bothers me. Consider the (b) sentences below. Do you think a comma is needed after "test"? Of course, the sentences can be understood either way, but isn't it nevertheless desirable to use a comma there?

(1a) Although he studied hard, he did not pass the test.
(1b) He did not pass the test although he studied hard.

(2a) Though he studied hard, he did not pass the test.
(2b) He did not pass the test though he studied hard.

(3a) Even though he studied hard, he did not pass the test.
(3b) He did not pass the test even though he studied hard.

I'm a little on the fence about sentence-ending "even though"-clauses, which I think might be OK without a comma setting them off, at least in some cases. I'm not sure. Please feel free to apply examples of your own to this question. Even though I have used the same basic example, the question is intended to apply to any such clause that exists or can be imagined.

 

[jutfrank]

I suspect this isn't so much about grammar rules as about usage of these particular conjunctions.

I too find (1b) uncomfortable without the comma. I think this is because we don't usually say a clause starting with although after the clause it's subordinate to. There's something about the use of although that wants it to be at the beginning of the sentence because it's a way of preparing the hearer for the message that the speaker wishes to convey. We set up the hearer with a concession, then counter it with what is more important. When we do put although clauses after the independent clause, it seems to me to be almost something of a concessionary afterthought, which is why the pause/comma seems required when we do. The same goes for though, which I think is really just an alternative word for although.

I also share your sense that the comma is not as required when substituting although for even though. This is because the use of even though differs from that of although/though. We do commonly put even though clauses at the end of sentences.

We might test whether my suspicion about this being about these particular words is right by considering different conjunctions:

(4a) If he'd studied harder, he would have passed the test.
(4b) He would have passed the test if he'd studied harder.

Do you have a similar problem with the lack of comma in (4b)?

 

[Tarheel]

I like that rule.

 

[Lycidas]

I suspect this isn't so much about grammar rules as about usage of these particular conjunctions.

Thanks, Jutfrank. Yes, I think that there is something in the nature of how "(al)though" is used to introduce a dependent clause which makes it different from other types of what traditional grammar calls subordinating conjunctions and which renders the usual rule about not using a comma before sentence-ending dependent clauses inapplicable to it.

Surely the difference is in syntax, too. Perhaps clauses introduced by "(al)though" adjoin to the independent clause as a whole rather than to the verb phrase. That's what I'm inclined to think. While this would not exactly make them non-adverbial (since there are sentence-level adverbials), it would make them adverbials of a different nature from, say, adverbial clauses introduced by "when," "after," "until," "since," etc.

(After writing that last sentence, I should like to add, as a footnote, that this discussion also applies to non-preposed non-temporal/concessive "while"-clauses!)

I too find (1b) uncomfortable without the comma. I think this is because we don't usually say a clause starting with although after the clause it's subordinate to. There's something about the use of although that wants it to be at the beginning of the sentence because it's a way of preparing the hearer for the message that the speaker wishes to convey. We set up the hearer with a concession, then counter it with what is more important. When we do put although clauses after the independent clause, it seems to me to be almost something of a concessionary afterthought, which is why the pause/comma seems required when we do. The same goes for though, which I think is really just an alternative word for although.

I agree with those observations for the most part. It does seem far more common to place clauses introduced by "(al)though" at the beginning of an independent clause rather than at the end of it, and this may be exactly for the reason you give. But they do seem to have a role, as you say, at the end of a sentence, too. And this role is perhaps different from the role they play at the beginning.

I like how you've called this role "a concessionary afterthought." This would make such clauses in that position of the same semantic type as when they begin a sentence. My example set in the OP seems just such a case. I think that, in live usage, I would use "do"-support for emphasis, as well as a comma, for (1b).

(1b') He did not pass the test, although he did study hard.

There may be more than one semantic type of sentence-ending clause introduced by "(al)though." I was inclined to use the term "counter-consideration" for the semantic type, counter-considerations often coming as afterthoughts to the main assertion. I was thinking of types like these.

(5) I may start another thread on the topic, (al)though that may not be a good idea, since the last thread on that topic was forcibly closed.

I think that the "(al)though"-clause in sentences like that one are suitably placed at the end, at least when the counter-consideration does come as an afterthought. I suppose it would be possible, after adjusting pronouns and so forth, to place the "(al)though"-clause in (5) at the beginning of the sentence; the sentence would then be rather suspenseful! In any case, the end position has a legitimate place when the counter-consideration occurs to the speaker mid-sentence.

I also share your sense that the comma is not as required when substituting although for even though. This is because the use of even though differs from that of although/though. We do commonly put even though clauses at the end of sentences.

Yes. I think it would be fun to try to pinpoint this difference precisely. It seems to me that clauses introduced by "even though" are often just like clauses introduced by "(al)though" except that they are emphasized. In this case, I think the comma is needed. A case like that appears in the OP of this thread. I ended the sentence with a sentence beginning with an "even though"-clause, one which could be placed at the end. If I had placed it at the end, I should have used a comma:

(6) The question is intended to apply to any such clause that exists or can be imagined, even though I have used the same basic example.

Now, contrast that type of case with a sentence-ending clause introduced by "even though" that is not introduced by a comma. I think that here (and I'm curious if you share my sense) "even though" has the same force as "regardless of the fact that" or "despite the fact that." That is, it no longer appears to be a mere concession or counter-consideration. The absence of the comma seems actually to change the semantic force of the sentence!

(7) I may start another thread on the topic even though the last thread on that topic was forcibly closed.

We might test whether my suspicion about this being about these particular words is right by considering different conjunctions:

(4a) If he'd studied harder, he would have passed the test.
(4b) He would have passed the test if he'd studied harder.

Do you have a similar problem with the lack of comma in (4b)?

Oh, no, (4b) works beautifully without a comma after "test." Similar examples could be given for clauses beginning with "after," "before," "since," "until," temporal "while," "because," "when," etc. "(Al)though" (along with concessive "while") seems to me to be special.

 

[jutfrank]

Surely the difference is in syntax, too. Perhaps clauses introduced by "(al)though" adjoin to the independent clause as a whole rather than to the verb phrase. That's what I'm inclined to think.

I'm not quite sure I understand what you mean.

I like how you've called this role "a concessionary afterthought." This would make such clauses in that position of the same semantic type as when they begin a sentence.

Yes, I think so.

I think that, in live usage, I would use "do"-support for emphasis, as well as a comma, for (1b).

(1b') He did not pass the test, although he did study hard.

I think the emphasis provided by did is a good illustration of what I said about the subordinate clause being an 'afterthought'. With the inclusion of the emphasising did in the subordinate clause, it doesn't seem as likely that the clauses in (1b) would be reversed.

(5) I may start another thread on the topic, (al)though that may not be a good idea, since the last thread on that topic was forcibly closed.

I think that the "(al)though"-clause in sentences like that one are suitably placed at the end, at least when the counter-consideration does come as an afterthought.

Yes, nice. Good example.

I think it would be fun to try to pinpoint this difference precisely.

Agreed. I'm going to think about this. I think it might be better explained in terms of 'focus' rather than 'emphasis'.

It seems to me that clauses introduced by "even though" are often just like clauses introduced by "(al)though" except that they are emphasized.

Yes, that's just the same as using although, but with more emphasis.

Now, contrast that type of case with a sentence-ending clause introduced by "even though" that is not introduced by a comma. I think that here (and I'm curious if you share my sense) "even though" has the same force as "regardless of the fact that" or "despite the fact that." That is, it no longer appears to be a mere concession or counter-consideration. The absence of the comma seems actually to change the semantic force of the sentence!

Yes, I agree that, as you put it, the 'semantic force' is different here, in the way you describe. I'd normally put this in terms of there being a different 'logical relation' between the clauses, effected by the focus of the utterance.