comma

[wowenglish1]

I would like to know the difference in the meaning between "1" and "2".

1. He has a wide range of experience having worked in technical, production, and marketing positions.
2. He has a wide range of experience, having worked in technical, production, and marketing positions.

 

[Eric Davis]

I would like to know the difference in the meaning between "1" and "2".

1. He has a wide range of experience having worked in technical, production, and marketing positions.
2. He has a wide range of experience, having worked in technical, production, and marketing positions.

I'm not a teacher; however, that looks like a participle phrase, which is trying to modify a noun. Try this:

Having worked in technical, production, and marketing positions, he has a wide range of experience.

 

[Eric Davis]

I know I didn't answer your question, so I will wait to hear from someone else who understands comma usage better than I.

 

[Eric Davis]

The real difference is that the first sentence needs a comma after "experience".

Why? Why does the first sentence need a comma after experience? Is it because the participle phrase is considered non-essential?

 

[susiedqq]

IMHO -

1. (having . . . .positions) modifies experience.
2. (,having . . . . positions) modifies he.

 

[Eric Davis]

IMHO -

1. (having . . . .positions) modifies experience.
2. (,having . . . . positions) modifies he.

The first would be a very awkward sentence as such. Wouldn't we write it like this?

He has a wide range of experience working in technical, production, and marketing positions.

 

[kfredson]

Why? Why does the first sentence need a comma after experience? Is it because the participle phrase is considered non-essential?

In a sense, that is true. The entire phrase clearly modifies the first part of the sentence; the comma sets it off to make this clear. You can also think of it in the following way. As you read the sentence you would naturally pause between the two clauses. When there is such a pause it is normal to use a comma to establish the rhythm of the sentence and to make it clear that you are going in a new direction.

 

[Eric Davis]

In a sense, that is true. The entire phrase clearly modifies the first part of the sentence; the comma sets it off to make this clear. You can also think of it in the following way. As you read the sentence you would naturally pause between the two clauses. When there is such a pause it is normal to use a comma to establish the rhythm of the sentence and to make it clear that you are going in a new direction.

I thank you for your input. I find myself searching for more concrete...rules for comma usage. I have found a few.

Again, I thank you for your help.