REAL AND APPARENT MEANINGS
Let us examine somewhat more carefully the meanings of “real” and “apparent,” terms which we have used, and shall continue to use, in our study.
The real meaning of any group of words is the meaning it unquestionably conveys to the intelligent reader after careful examination, if such an examination be required by its complexity. It is also the meaning the writer presumably desires to convey.
The apparent meaning of such group of words is the meaning it conveys when read at sight.
The apparent meaning should always be the real meaning. If it is not, the language needs either recasting or regrouping. Recasting is done by changing the positions of words or by the use of new words. Regrouping is done by the use of marks of punctuation, which thus perform their functions. Each of the three end-marks also determines the character of the group it follows, as we have already seen.
In Sentences 1 and 2 we obtained the apparent, and wrong, meaning at the first reading; and we obtained the real (right) meaning at the second reading. Marks, understood by the writer and the reader, give the reader the real meaning at the first reading, at least when the marks are used properly.
In each of Sentences 1-1 and 2-1 the mark of punctuation was used to disconnect words apparently connected. In Sentence 1-1 the apparent connection was made by a conjunction (and); in Sentence 2-1 it was made by a preposition (beyond). Thus, in each corrected sentence, the comma performed the office of disjunction; and therefore the comma might be called a disjunctive. When the reader thus disconnects words he regroups them, and learns, quite automatically, the proper relation between the new groups.
Let us note carefully that we are not dealing with difficult or obscure processes, but with processes familiar to the ordinary reader, and equally familiar to the speaker, this grouping being done in speaking, as already stated, by inflections of the voice and by pauses, which are understood by very young readers.
The relations between words and groups of words are expressed in terms of grammar; but we shall avoid in our discussion, as far as possible, the use of technical terms.
In our next sentence no change in grouping is necessary unless we want to make a complete change in the meaning of the language:
3. The prisoner said the witness was a convicted thief.
The apparent meaning of this sentence is its real meaning, for its language is capable of only one construction. If, however, the writer of the sentence wished to convey another meaning, he could have done so by recasting the sentence or by regrouping it by means of marks of punctuation. If we put a comma after “prisoner” we disconnect “prisoner” from “said”; and the comma gives notice to the reader that new relations for the words “prisoner” and “said” must be sought. The only other sense relations for the words are found quite automatically the moment the eye catches the next two words, which suggest to the reader a new group. When the new group (said the witness) is complete, the reader automatically cuts it off from what follows and what precedes. Thus we have, as shown in the following sentence, a new grouping and a new meaning:
3-1. The prisoner, said the witness, was a convicted thief.
The meaning of voice-changes is understood by children long before the meaning of marks of punctuation is understood; while the full value of marks is rarely understood, even by educated and cultured people.
In spoken language the meaning of No. 3 is expressed by a continuous reading with neither pause nor voice-inflection within the sentence. The reading of No. 3-1, in order to convey its meaning to another person, requires quite a different voice process, which may be represented diagrammatically:
3-2. The prisoner said the witneswas a convicted thief.
3-2. The prisonersaid the witnesss a convicted thief.
An analysis of one’s process of reading silently, that is, to himself, will show that, in reading No. 3-1, he takes note of the commas and their meanings (disconnecting and regrouping), just as he takes note, when reading aloud, of the group depressed (written in a line below) in No. 3-2.
To obtain the real meaning of this sentence when reading silently, he reads it commatically; to impart the meaning when reading aloud, he reads it inflectionally.
Our next illustrative sentence and its variations are not much unlike the sentences just considered; but the relations between some of the words in them are not quite so familiar to young readers:
4. Boys like Henry never fail in school.
The meaning of this sentence is unmistakable, and at no point within it is a mark of punctuation even suggested; but in a similarly formed sentence doubt as to the meaning may arise:
4-1. Boys like men may be courageous for principle’s sake.
“Like Henry” in No. 4 suggests some distinguishing quality that Henry is known to possess,—for instance, diligence. Then, “boys like Henry” means “diligent boys.” But “like men” suggests no particular qualities ascribed to boys; and therefore, if the term “like men” is not applicable to or intended for “boys,” we cut it off by commas. Thus an apparent relation is shown not to be the real relation; and therefore we must regroup the words, seeking the new meaning through our knowledge of the meaning of language thus regrouped. The regrouped sentence will read as follows:
4-2. Boys, like men, may be courageous for principle’s sake.
Regrouping of this kind cannot be automatically made by a writer, or automatically apprehended by a reader, until the meanings of both the unpunctuated and the punctuated language are perfectly familiar to the writer or the reader. One’s familiarity with language need not be purely technical to make it accurate and thorough; but we cannot readily discuss the language of our illustrative sentences without using some technical (grammatical) terms.
“Like men” in No. 4-1 is an adjective, and is in the natural position of an adjective of this kind. “Like men” in No. 4-2 is an adverb, and is out of its natural position, thus readily giving rise to a wrong grouping of the words in the sentence. To prevent such wrong grouping, commas are used; and they will be used by a writer quite automatically when the purpose and effect of such use are understood.
The use of most of the marks of punctuation should become as automatic as is the spelling of most words; but some parts of each art become automatic only after much study. The similarity between some of the difficulties presented by the arts of spelling and of punctuation seems worthy of notice at this point in our discussion. To spell the word pronounced pâr, one must know whether he is to spell the name of a fruit (pear), two things of a kind (pair), or the act of cutting (pare). Likewise, to punctuate language one must first know what relations exist between the parts of language. Every group of words, as well as every word, sustains some relation to another word or group of words in the sentence or paragraph. Somewhat exact knowledge of this relation is possessed by everybody, even by the child just beginning to talk. It is a part of one’s common sense; but, unfortunately, many text-books on language, used in the grade school, the high school, and the college, bury the common-sense knowledge of the pupil under technicalities that are never mastered. In like manner the technicalities of punctuation have made the art so difficult that it may be said to be almost a lost art. We are attempting to rediscover it through our common sense.
Let the reader challenge the first comma, when he reaches it, in No. 4-2 with “What do you say?” The answer will be, “Reader, if you think ‘like men’ is an adjective describing ‘boys,’ as ‘like Henry’ describes ‘boys’ in No. 4, you are mistaken, and you must look for another meaning.” A like challenge of the second comma, if necessary, will elicit this answer: “Reader, if you think ‘men’ is the subject of ‘may,’ you are mistaken, and you must look for another meaning.”
That the use of the commas in No. 4-2 is practically the same as their use in No. 3-1, may also be illustrated diagrammatically:
4-3. Boys like memay be courageous for principle’s sake.
4-3. Boyslike menmay be courageous for principle’s sake.
There is another and very important class of words whose sense relation is determined by the punctuation we have been considering. We shall merely touch upon this punctuation at this time, leaving it for fuller discussion later.
As the context is often necessary to show the real meaning of a word, we will supply it for our first example.
In response to a request to be excused from school, a teacher informs a pupil that he may go later. At a later hour the teacher says to him:
5. Now you may go.
The word “now” is here expressive purely of time, and suggests no other meaning than that obtained at the first reading. The sentence is another form of “You may go now,” which requires no punctuation other than the period. The word “now,” as here used, is an adverb expressing time.
In a similarly formed sentence the office of the word may be quite different; and, in order to show this fact, the comma is used.
5-1. Now we see we that cannot learn to punctuate until we comprehend the fundamental principles underlying the relations between groups of words, as well as the fundamental principles underlying the use of marks. Now, what are we going to do about it?
In No. 5-1 the first “now” conveys a sufficient idea of time to stand as an adverb, just as “now” does in No. 5; but the second “now” is a mere expletive. To show that it does not sustain its apparent relation, the relation of time, to the remainder of the clause, it is cut off by a comma.
RECAPITULATION
Let us now review and recapitulate the points we have tried to establish in our study thus far:
1. The meaning of language depends very largely upon the groupings of its words. In very simple language, words are so placed that each word is related to a word or words immediately or closely following or preceding it. In such language the reader is hardly conscious that the words are grouped, except into sentences; and no mark may be required, except the end-mark.
2. In more complex language the grouping within the sentence becomes manifest to the reader, and two constructions and two meanings of the language often become possible. In order to notify the reader which meaning the language is intended to convey, the writer may put a sign-board at the point where the meaning may be mistaken. The reader reads the sign-board, and thus keeps on the right line of thought-development.
3. In the sentences thus far studied, except No. 3-1, marks were used simply to aid the reader to catch the meaning quickly by avoiding a wrong grouping of words. In No. 3-1 the meaning of the language was entirely changed by the marks.
[Examples will be found at the end of Chapter II]
CHAPTER II
THE FUNDAMENTAL PURPOSE OF PUNCTUATION—GROUPING
We endeavored to show in Chapter I that the fundamental purpose of punctuation is to group by means of marks words whose relations in the absence of marks would be either easily mistaken or not quickly apprehended.
When to use a mark, and what mark to use, are determined by reason or by convention.
Some of the conventions that determine a punctuation familiar to most people, together with some of the problems that confront us in our study, are exhibited in the punctuation of the following sentence:
5A. Mr. Smith came to the city in 1872, and located at 1872 Wabash Avenue. He brought with him 1,872 horses, valued at $187,200.00.
How does punctuation enable the reader to obtain the meaning at one point in the above sentence, and so to group the language (figures) at another point that he can apprehend the meaning at a glance? Because of well-nigh universal usage, the above date and street numbers are read eighteen hundred seventy-two; but the same number in the next sentence is read one thousand eight hundred seventy-two. As we all know, in arithmetical notation three figures form a group, the groups so formed being named units, thousands, millions, etc. It is therefore evident that, in reading a number containing two or more such groups, the eye will be aided if the groups are indicated by some mark. (We here use the comma and the period for this purpose.) Although the left-hand group of a number may not be full, a figure in that group takes the name of the group, and so we mark it off. Thus we use commas in two of the numbers in our example, one of which (1,872) has only one figure in the second (thousand) group. This we call punctuation by reason, for we thus point off natural groups.
We do not use the comma to group the figures in the same number (1872) used in two other places in the above example. Because date and street numbers of four figures are read in groups of two figures each the eye readily does the grouping, and a mark is not needed as an aid in the grouping. This is also punctuation by reason.
In the fourth number in our example we use a comma to do one grouping, and a period to make another (the cents) group. We call the use of the period in this number conventional punctuation.
Many printing-offices do not punctuate a number containing less than five figures. Such a rule would call for 9999 and 10,000. This is purely arbitrary punctuation. Our problem is to find, as far as possible, a reason for the use of every mark, and to point out what seems to us good conventional usage in punctuation for which we can find no reason.