[General] Can I leave out the comma?

[LQZ]

In nearly every political category, landline-only owners side with traditionally conservative views, on issues as varied as the legality of gay marriage, marijuana, abortion and agreement with the Tea Party. ---taken from the NYT

Dear teacher,

My question is, if I leave out the red comma, does the meaning remain the same? If not, could you explain it to me? Thanks.


LQZ

 

[2006]

In nearly every political category, landline-only owners side with traditionally conservative views, on issues as varied as the legality of gay marriage, marijuana, abortion and agreement with the Tea Party. ---taken from the NYT

Dear teacher,

My question is, if I leave out the red comma, does the meaning remain the same? If not, could you explain it to me? Thanks.


LQZ

That comma should be removed.

 

[Editors4Writers]

In nearly every political category, landline-only owners side with traditionally conservative views, on issues as varied as the legality of gay marriage, marijuana, abortion and agreement with the Tea Party. ---taken from the NYT

Dear teacher,

My question is, if I leave out the red comma, does the meaning remain the same? If not, could you explain it to me? Thanks.


LQZ

The comma functions as a nonrestrictive clause. If you remove the comma, the meaning of the sentence will change. Not only that but it will also become a run-on sentence. Let's break the sentence into smaller pieces:

In nearly every political category [dependent clause], landline-only owners side with traditionally conservative views [independent clause], on issues as varied as the legality of gay marriage, marijuana, abortion and agreement with the Tea Party [nonrestrictive clause]. ---taken from the NYT

This sentence is grammatically and syntactically correct. A nonrestrictive clause is information that is not essential to the basic meaning of the sentence. If you remove the comma, it would still make sense: "In nearly every political category, landline-only owners side with traditionally conservative views." :up: The writer wants to provide a list of examples for the reader; however, the purpose in doing so is to elaborate on his definition of conservative beliefs here. :lol:

It is possible to make the list a restrictive clause, but then you would need to revise parts of the sentence.

So, yes, the meaning will change.

How do you feel about landline-only? There are a few things going on in that compound.

 

[LQZ]

The comma functions as a nonrestrictive clause. If you remove the comma, the meaning of the sentence will change. Not only that but it will also become a run-on sentence. Let's break the sentence into smaller pieces:

In nearly every political category [dependent clause], landline-only owners side with traditionally conservative views [independent clause], on issues as varied as the legality of gay marriage, marijuana, abortion and agreement with the Tea Party [nonrestrictive clause]. ---taken from the NYT

This sentence is grammatically and syntactically correct. A nonrestrictive clause is information that is not essential to the basic meaning of the sentence. If you remove the comma, it would still make sense: "In nearly every political category, landline-only owners side with traditionally conservative views." :up: The writer wants to provide a list of examples for the reader; however, the purpose in doing so is to elaborate on his definition of conservative beliefs here. :lol:

It is possible to make the list a restrictive clause, but then you would need to revise parts of the sentence.

So, yes, the meaning will change.

How do you feel about landline-only? There are a few things going on in that compound.

Thank you, Editors4Writers, for your detailed explanation. I have one more question: how would I revise the original sentence if I were to use a restrictive clause?

 

[Editors4Writers]

You're very welcome.

There are many ways you can make the list a restrictive clause.

"In nearly every political category, landline-only owners side with traditionally conservative views about gay marriage, marijuana, abortion and the Tea Party."

 

[LQZ]

You're very welcome. Please tell your friends about Editors for Writers, Inc. We have a fantastic editing service for academic and admission papers.

There are many ways you can make the list a restrictive clause.

"In nearly every political category, landline-only owners side with traditionally conservative views about gay marriage, marijuana, abortion and the Tea Party."

Editors for Writers, Inc. :up:

Thank you so much, Editor4writes. Actually this comma had bothered me for a long time until you answered my question. :-D

PS: I've visited your website and will tell those who need your service.

LQZ

 

[Raymott]

That comma should be removed.

I agree. I can't see any run-on problem either.
The meaning does change a bit.

 

[Editors4Writers]

不用谢，我很高兴我能有机会提供帮助。我们比那个shinewrite.com要好

Raymott, we are talking about the New Yorker here. haha, they wouldn't use a comma if it didn't serve a purpose. In my professional opinion, the author uses a comma to introduce a nonrestrictive clause.

 

[bertietheblue]

I agree with 2006: the comma serves no purpose and should be removed:

To agree with someone on something.

If there was a 'that + subordinate clause' after 'Tea Party' and not a full-stop then the 'on something' could be used non-restrictively with commas:

To agree with someone, on something, that ...

or possibly:

To agree with someone (on something) that ...