Punctuation

[Allen165]

"The Bobcats got little from its leading scorer, Stephen Jackson; just seven points on 3-of-8 shooting before Jackson fouled out with 4 1/2 minutes left."

Is the semicolon correct? What follows it doesn't seem to be an independent clause. I would've used a comma or colon.

Thanks!
​

 

[mykwyner]

You're right. The semi colon should be a comma.

 

[Barb_D]

A comma doesn't seem to work either. I'd say either a colon or a em-dash.
It's a fragment, but it's not made complete by being linked to the first part with a comma.

(I note that in the US, we'd say "they" for the pronoun for Bobcats. Since there was a discussion recently on singular/plural, I thought I'd mention it as a side note.)

 

[mykwyner]

"Stephen Jackson" is an appositive for "leading scorer" and appositives are usually bracketed by commas.

 

[Allen165]

A comma doesn't seem to work either. I'd say either a colon or a em-dash.
It's a fragment, but it's not made complete by being linked to the first part with a comma.

(I note that in the US, we'd say "they" for the pronoun for Bobcats. Since there was a discussion recently on singular/plural, I thought I'd mention it as a side note.)

I, too, was surprised by the "its," especially since the writer is an American. But I think he had the word "Charlotte" (the name of the team is Charlotte Bobcats) in mind when he wrote "its."

I don't understand why a comma would be wrong. "[J]ust seven points on 3-of-8 shooting before Jackson fouled out with 4 1/2 minutes left" is an additional piece of information and a dependent clause.

 

[Barb_D]

"Stephen Jackson" is an appositive for "leading scorer" and appositives are usually bracketed by commas.

Of course it is. But what follows does not make a complete sentence if it's connected to the beginning. If you omit the name entirely (as you can do with an appositive), what's left is not grammatical.


Not at sentence: The Bobcats got little from its leading scorer just seven points on 3-of-8 shooting before Jackson fouled out with 4 1/2 minutes left

Okay sentence in sports reporting: The Bobcats got little from its leading scorer -- just seven points on 3-of-8 shooting before Jackson fouled out with 4 1/2 minutes left

 

[Allen165]

Of course it is. But what follows does not make a complete sentence if it's connected to the beginning. If you omit the name entirely (as you can do with an appositive), what's left is not grammatical.


Not at sentence: The Bobcats got little from its leading scorer just seven points on 3-of-8 shooting before Jackson fouled out with 4 1/2 minutes left

Of course that's ungrammatical, but nobody would write that. You would put a comma after "scorer." And then you would change "Jackson" to "he" because you've left out the guy's name.

I don't really get your argument.

 

[mykwyner]

I see nothing ungrammatical in the following:

The Bobcats got little from its leading scorer, just seven points on 3-of-8 shooting before Jackson fouled out with 4 1/2 minutes left.

or

The Bobcats got little from Stephen Jackson, just seven points on 3-of-8 shooting before Jackson fouled out with 4 1/2 minutes left.

or

The Bobcats got little from its leading scorer, Stephen Jackson, just seven points on 3-of-8 shooting before Jackson fouled out with 4 1/2 minutes left.

 

[Barb_D]

It's a comma splice if you just link it together that way. It's not a true dependent clause.
You'd have to changing it slightly.

..., who scored just... before fouling out.

 

[Allen165]

It's a comma splice if you just link it together that way. It's not a true dependent clause.
You'd have to changing it slightly.

..., who scored just... before fouling out.

So you're saying it's an independent clause after all? That's what I wasn't sure about initially.

On the one hand, it has elements of an independent clause (subject and verb), but I don't think it can stand on its own; it wouldn't make sense without the "The Bobcats got little from its leading scorer" part.

 

[Barb_D]

I see nothing ungrammatical in the following:

The Bobcats got little from its leading scorer, just seven points on 3-of-8 shooting before Jackson fouled out with 4 1/2 minutes left.

or

The Bobcats got little from Stephen Jackson, just seven points on 3-of-8 shooting before Jackson fouled out with 4 1/2 minutes left.

or

The Bobcats got little from its leading scorer, Stephen Jackson, just seven points on 3-of-8 shooting before Jackson fouled out with 4 1/2 minutes left.

If you think these are grammatical, we have to agree to disagree.

I see "just seven points.." as an explanation of what "little" means, making a colon or an em-dash appropriate. There is no way that "just seven points..." is a dependent clause. It's a noun phrase. You don't link a noun phrase to an independent clause with a comma. Or at least, you don't in this sentence and so so grammatically.

My suggestion of making it "..., who scored... before fouling out..." does create a dependent clause, making a comma link grammatical.

My other suggestion of a colon or dash keeps it as a noun phrase defining what "little"means.

I really have nothing more to say on the subject, so we'll have to agree we don't see this the same way.

 

[mykwyner]

This is beginning to bore me too.

I see "just seven points..." as an adverbial phrase modifying "little," and I would punctuate it accordingly.

I completely agree about agreeing to disagree. English punctuation is frequently a matter of style.

 

[Allen165]

I sent an e-mail to Pat O'Connor of grammarphobia.com, and here's her reply:

"You are right. The semicolon isn’t right. It should be a comma, a colon, or even a dash."

 

[Raymott]

So you're saying it's an independent clause after all? That's what I wasn't sure about initially.

On the one hand, it has elements of an independent clause (subject and verb), but I don't think it can stand on its own; it wouldn't make sense without the "The Bobcats got little from its leading scorer" part.

Isn't anyone worried that "its" is used instead of "their". Is "the Bobcats" singular?

 

[Barb_D]

(I note that in the US, we'd say "they" for the pronoun for Bobcats. Since there was a discussion recently on singular/plural, I thought I'd mention it as a side note.)

I said "they" but I meant "plural" which would be "their" of course.

 

[Raymott]

I said "they" but I meant "plural" which would be "their" of course.

Oh, so you did. Sorry, I missed that.