Post History
Why do writers add unnecessary commas to sentences just because they're long? While it's true that some writers, maddeningly, do not use sufficient punctuation, it's also the case that some people...
Answer
#4: Attribution notice removed
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/41874 License name: CC BY-SA 3.0 License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
#3: Attribution notice added
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/41874 License name: CC BY-SA 3.0 License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
#2: Initial revision
**Why do writers add unnecessary commas to sentences just because they're long?** While it's true that some writers, maddeningly, do not use sufficient punctuation, it's also the case that some people add punctuation when it's not necessary. Finding that sweet spot is what we all want, but we have different ideas of how to get there. A comma represents a pause. Sometimes a long sentence needs a harder pause, a period. Sometimes it needs rephrasing. Other times only a comma will do. And sometimes the sentence doesn't need a pause at all. > Why don't writers add commas to lengthy sentences, to make them far more readable? Here is your title. You can write it with or without a comma. Each way has a different meaning. With the comma: Why don't they do this? The reason they should do this is to make it more readable. Without the comma: Readability is the reason writers should add commas to long sentences. It's subtle but it is a difference in meaning. Both are acceptable but I prefer it without a comma. Even though I'm generally in the comma-heavy writer camp. In your quoted example, that first added comma is one I'd never add. The other two are fine but I'd much rather break the sentence up into several. Keeping it as one long sentence is what impairs readability. Adding more commas might help a bit, but not as much as changing the sentence structure.