[Grammar] comma and hyphen difference?

[HeartShape]

Hi,

I just saw this sentence on a website: ‘I was a teacher for 17 years - but I couldn’t read’. If the hyphen was replaced with a comma what would be the difference in meaning?

 

[emsr2d2]

A comma would be incorrect. The dash could simply be removed (not replaced with anything) and you would have a grammatical sentence.

 

[HeartShape]

A comma would be incorrect. The dash could simply be removed (not replaced with anything) and you would have a grammatical sentence.

Why would it be incorrect?

Wouldn't it still be grammatically correct if a comma was used because "but" is a conjunction and a comma usually follows but.

If we examine the sentence: "I was a teacher for 17 years" and "I couldn't read" both are complete sentence isn't that right?

I know by not having a comma it means all the information is essential for the purpose of that sentence, but what is the other meaning if a coma was used?

Also I have always wondered - what is the author trying to convey by using the hyphen in this situation?

 

[emsr2d2]

Apologies. A comma would be fine. I managed to miss the word "but" originally and thought it said "I was a teacher for 17 years - I couldn't read". Using a comma would have led to a comma splice.
Sorry for the confusion. A comma is OK before "but".

The speaker/writer assumes that the listener/reader would be very surprised by the part after "but".

 

[HeartShape]

Once last note: would it still be grammatically correct to omit the dash or comma so it reads: "I was a teacher for 17 years but I couldn’t read" to emphasise essential information?

 

[emsr2d2]

Yes.

 

[HeartShape]

Hi,

I want to revisit this question as I seem to lost focus on the original question.

1. I was a teacher for 17 years but I couldn’t read.

2. I was a teacher for 17 years, but I couldn’t read.

Is there a difference in meaning between the two sentences?

 

[jutfrank]

I want to revisit this question as I seem to lost focus on the original question.

1. I was a teacher for 17 years but I couldn’t read.

2. I was a teacher for 17 years, but I couldn’t read.

Is there a difference in meaning between the two sentences?

No, there's obviously no difference in meaning, but there's a difference in effect. The comma tells the reader to pause a little longer than they otherwise would. You can probably guess as well as we can why a writer might choose to do this.

 

[teechar]

I want to revisit this question as I seem to lost focus on the original question.

I'm not sure what that means, and the underlined part is ungrammatical.

 

[HeartShape]

I'm not sure what that means, and the underlined part is ungrammatical.

How about now(I have revised two versions):

1. I want to revisit this question as I seem to have lost focus on the original question.
2. I want to revisit this question as I have lost focus on the original question.

 

[GoesStation]

How about now(I have revised two versions):

1. I want to revisit this question as I seem to have lost focus on the original question.
2. I want to revisit this question as I have lost focus on the original question.

Both sentences are grammatical. Do you mean that members stopped focusing on the original question?

 

[HeartShape]

Both sentences are grammatical. Do you mean that members stopped focusing on the original question?

I guess so, because we strayed to different questions.

 

[HeartShape]

By the way, I have revised my sentence to the following:

1. I want to revisit this question as I have seemed to lost focus on the original question.
2. I want to revisit this question as I seem to have lost focus on the original question.



Which sentence is better structure?

 

[GoesStation]

By the way, I have revised my sentence to the following:

1. I want to revisit this question as I have seemed to lost focus on the original question.
2. I want to revisit this question as I seem to have lost focus on the original question.



Which sentence is better structure?

Only sentence 2 is grammatical. In sentence 1, you used a past participle where you need an infinitive.

Neither sentence conveys the idea I think you're aiming for, though.

 

[jutfrank]

1. I want to revisit this question as I have seemed to lost focus on the original question.
2. I want to revisit this question as I seem to have lost focus on the original question.

Which sentence is better structure?

As a native speaker, as you say you are, which one sounds better to you?

 

[teechar]

HeartShape, please correct the information on your profile.

 

[HeartShape]

Only sentence 2 is grammatical. In sentence 1, you used a past participle where you need an infinitive.

Neither sentence conveys the idea I think you're aiming for, though.

What idea are you thinking then?

 

[HeartShape]

As a native speaker, as you say you are, which one sounds better to you?

Sentence 2 sounds better on the ear. I written sentence 1 after doing some analysis on it, and I just wanted to check if the restructuring was sound.

 

[HeartShape]

HeartShape, please correct the information on your profile.

What needs correcting?

 

[emsr2d2]

I written

That doesn't seem like something a native English speaker would write.