Comment by IncRnd
3 years ago
>If you've never seen it then that surely says more about what you notice than the content of what you've read.
I'll agree with this. It also brings up the point, if punctuation isn't seen - is it useful? Probably not to me - maybe yes to others.
You might not be able to pick out the bassline in many of your favorite songs but that doesn't mean you wouldn't miss it were it not there.
---
"Spelling, grammar, and punctuation are a kind of magic; their purpose is to be invisible. If the sleight of hands works, we will not notice a comma or a quotation mark but will translate each instantly into a pause or an awareness of voice [...] When the mechanics are incorrectly used, the trick is revealed and the magic fails; the reader's focus is shifted from the story to its surface."
- Janet Burroway, Writing Fiction: A Guide to Narrative Craft
Thank you. It seems you misread the discussion.
Following this thread, the discussion isn't about the existence or absence of punctuation. The discussion is about the case of three specific punctuation marks, which appear extremely similar if not identical. These punctuation marks are being discussed after reading an article about their differences, which are only apparent to those among us who find memorization more important than clarity.
In this exact context, the question is whether all three punctuation marks are needed when literally none of them is distinctive enough as punctuation from the other two. If you read the comment to which I had replied, you will see them also make that point.
FYI this is a pretty condescending response to come back to. From the site guidelines:
> Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.
Moving on from that.
> In this exact context, the question is whether all three punctuation marks are needed when literally none of them is distinctive enough as punctuation from the other two. If you read the comment to which I had replied, you will see them also make that point.
Indeed I did read it, I disagree.
Going back to your original comment I don't think it's reasonable that you've never seen an em-dash in "business or personal writing" but I would totally accept that you haven't noticed the punctuation in those contexts. This is partly my point, if these marks are used correctly then it makes sense you've never spotted them.
I'm saying that the people who read literature containing en and em dashes would notice the difference were they not there. I'd echo what another commenter said: these marks wouldn't be missed until they're gone but we would definitely miss them.
1 reply →
The comment you're replying to makes perfect sense in exactly the context you describe, so your reply seems quite bizarre. Maybe you didn't read it properly? (See how unhelpful that tone is?)
For the analogy about not explicitly hearing the baseline, but the music still being affected by it: maybe you interpreted it just a little too directly? The analogue to removing the baseline is not the total removal all three of those punctuation marks. Instead, it's the removal of the distinction between them. I think it was pretty clear (and apt).
Quoting Erik Spiekermann “Typography is like air. We only notice it when it's bad”