As a rule of thumb, when the pause between two adjacent sentences implied by the period seems a bit too halting, try a semicolon.
I find it easier to think about the utility of semicolons from the perspective of individual sentences to be combined. And therefore, if a properly used semicolon were to be replaced with a period, the two resulting sentences should still make sense in isolation, they'd just feel ever so slightly too far apart.
"Semicolons bring the drama. That's why I love them." Does it work? Yes. Is there a clear through-line from one sentence to the next? Yes. Does the pause between the sentences feel a bit too abrupt, though? Maybe!
("Establish clear through-line" can be another nice reason to combine sentences with a semicolon.)
I think of semicolons as a sort of silent conjunction. Thus I read TFA's title as something like "Semicolons bring the drama, and that's why I love them".
That silent conjunction is joyful; that's why I use it.
I actually prefer the (grammatically incorrect) sentence-starting “And”.
Sentence-starting “And”s bring the drama. And that’s why I love them.
Or even better:
Sentence-starting “And”s with line breaks bring even more drama.
And that’s why I love them.
Yeah, all kinds of rule breaking with this (pluralized quote word). But that’s how I like to write.
> grammatically incorrect
And he said to them, starting sentences with and is fine and normal. Haven't you read e.g. the bible where it occurs constantly? https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/and#Usage_notes
Further, sentence (or clause) initial "and" can means if/as though, also existing in other Germanic languages:
> wir werden siegen, und wenn wir sterben müssen
> Further, sentence (or clause) initial "and" can means if/as though, also existing in other Germanic languages
Does this exist in English? An can mean "if" - not in the modern language, that's not a possibility at all, but in archaic texts - and this an does apparently derive from the word and, but I've never seen and itself used that way.
Too much drama; too much!
I will sometimes do this when, for whatever reason, I don't want to capitalize that next letter. It's the 'T' in 'That'; too loud!
> I find it easier to think about the utility of semicolons from the perspective of individual sentences to be combined. And therefore, if a properly used semicolon were to be replaced with a period, the two resulting sentences should still make sense in isolation, they'd just feel ever so slightly too far apart.
I find it easier to think about the utility of semicolons from the perspective of individual sentences to be combined; and, therefore, if a properly used semicolon were to be replaced with a period, the two resulting sentences should still make sense in isolation -- they'd just feel ever so slightly too far apart.
Also, when the pause between two adjacent sentence is awkwardly inadequate, try writing a dot above the comma.
;)
> Also, when the pause between two adjacent sentence is awkwardly inadequate, try writing a dot above the comma.
Ah, you missed the chance to refer euphoniously instead to the pause between clauses!
Back in the good old 1980s, I witnessed how a teacher, in front of the whole school assembly in the gym, cracked a joke about Mrs. Claus (of Santa) being the "subordinate Claus". It drew some boos; today it would likely be blood.
If he tried saying that in a shopping maul, near a pair of Claus, it could be a death sentence. Certainly elf abuse.
The join between two phrases has the point that abrases; the pause between the clauses has the clew that is true!
Semicolons are used by people who find highly nested code to be natural and necessary; they add another level to the outline. I love semicolons and couldn't write without them.
But the phrase after the semicolon is at the same level as the initial phrase (I would have loved to employ nesting with parentheses while writing in natural language (though I restrict myself to one level when writing for others (but not at all in private writing)))?
Well, not always; one prominent use of semicolons is as the delimiter of an outer list of inner, comma-delimited lists. They're also used in a similar-but-not-quite-identical way to delimit lists in which the items are extremely long.
To qualify for [some involved definition], the situation must satisfy:
(1) Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah, blah blah blah blah, blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah, blah blah; AND
(2) Blah blah blah blah blah, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah; AND
(3) either
(a) Blah blah blah blah; OR
(b) Blah blah blah blah blah blah, blah blah, blah blah, blah blah blah blah blah.
> But the phrase after the semicolon is at the same level as the initial phrase
If you mean my sentence in the GP, here's how I think it parses:
A1 ; A2 . B
A . B . CI don't think that is a "soft period" as parent is saying is the use of semicolons. I think it is - as the name implies - a semi colon. Or a soft colon, if you will.
It could sooner be replaced by a colon than a full stop. And I agree with your usage.
> Semicolons are used by people who find highly nested code to be natural and necessary: They add another level to the outline.
> It could sooner be replaced by a colon than a full stop.
Use it as you like, of course, but by the rules of grammar that is quite misleading. A semicolon must separate (or connect) two independent clauses, just like a period; a colon has many uses. Here is the Chicago Manual of Style:
"A colon introduces an element or a series of elements illustrating or amplifying what has preceded the colon. Between independent clauses it functions much like a semicolon (see 6.56), and in some cases either mark may work as well as the other; use a colon sparingly, however, and only to emphasize that the second clause illustrates or amplifies the first. (The colon usually conveys or reinforces the sense of "as follows"; see also 6.64.) The colon may sometimes be used instead of a period to introduce a series of related sentences (as in the third example below)."