Mixing
Can I use a comma between “so «adjective»†and “that «clause»�
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
Now I am writing a scientific paper, and I want to write a sentence as follows:
A has a chemical composition so similar to that of B that it also has a high potential.
As you can see, the first 'that' is used to substitute for 'chemical composition', and the second 'that' is used to introduce the following clause.
However, I am so worried because it seems to confusing due to the repetition of 'that'. (Because I am not a native, I cannot make a sentence with assurance...)
So, I tried to use a comma before the second 'that', but I don't know if it will be a correct sentence.
sentence-construction punctuation
edited Sep 6 at 17:13
psmears
40539
asked Sep 6 at 9:17
Sungil
565
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
Now I am writing a scientific paper, and I want to write a sentence as follows:
A has a chemical composition so similar to that of B that it also has a high potential.
As you can see, the first 'that' is used to substitute for 'chemical composition', and the second 'that' is used to introduce the following clause.
However, I am so worried because it seems to confusing due to the repetition of 'that'. (Because I am not a native, I cannot make a sentence with assurance...)
So, I tried to use a comma before the second 'that', but I don't know if it will be a correct sentence.
sentence-construction punctuation
edited Sep 6 at 17:13
psmears
40539
asked Sep 6 at 9:17
Sungil
565
4
I've seen a few questions on ELL worrying about whether it's okay to use the same word twice in a sentence. (See this questions, for example.) Usually, those fears are unfounded. There's nothing wrong with your sentence with two instances of that.
– J.R.♦
Sep 6 at 9:31
1
Clarity is always best: "...similar to the composition of B, which has a high potential as well." Use which, but not that, when the information introduced is unnecessary for identifying the thing or person described. In this case, which has to be set off with a comma.
– Sara
Sep 6 at 9:43
2
@Sara I think not. The second that here is not a relativizer but a subordinator marking the complement of so; it is not B but A which "also has a high potential".
– StoneyB
Sep 6 at 9:52
1
Thanks a lot@StoneyB I really didn't see it that way.
– Sara
Sep 6 at 9:59
1
@Sara That[!] is an example of why I like to be very sparing in the use of that :)
– StoneyB
Sep 6 at 10:08
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
Now I am writing a scientific paper, and I want to write a sentence as follows:
A has a chemical composition so similar to that of B that it also has a high potential.
As you can see, the first 'that' is used to substitute for 'chemical composition', and the second 'that' is used to introduce the following clause.
However, I am so worried because it seems to confusing due to the repetition of 'that'. (Because I am not a native, I cannot make a sentence with assurance...)
So, I tried to use a comma before the second 'that', but I don't know if it will be a correct sentence.
sentence-construction punctuation
edited Sep 6 at 17:13
psmears
40539
asked Sep 6 at 9:17
Sungil
565
Now I am writing a scientific paper, and I want to write a sentence as follows:
A has a chemical composition so similar to that of B that it also has a high potential.
As you can see, the first 'that' is used to substitute for 'chemical composition', and the second 'that' is used to introduce the following clause.
However, I am so worried because it seems to confusing due to the repetition of 'that'. (Because I am not a native, I cannot make a sentence with assurance...)
So, I tried to use a comma before the second 'that', but I don't know if it will be a correct sentence.
sentence-construction punctuation
edited Sep 6 at 17:13
psmears
40539
asked Sep 6 at 9:17
Sungil
565
edited Sep 6 at 17:13
psmears
40539
edited Sep 6 at 17:13
psmears
40539
edited Sep 6 at 17:13
psmears
40539
40539
asked Sep 6 at 9:17
Sungil
565
asked Sep 6 at 9:17
Sungil
565
asked Sep 6 at 9:17
Sungil
565
565
4
I've seen a few questions on ELL worrying about whether it's okay to use the same word twice in a sentence. (See this questions, for example.) Usually, those fears are unfounded. There's nothing wrong with your sentence with two instances of that.
– J.R.♦
Sep 6 at 9:31
1
Clarity is always best: "...similar to the composition of B, which has a high potential as well." Use which, but not that, when the information introduced is unnecessary for identifying the thing or person described. In this case, which has to be set off with a comma.
– Sara
Sep 6 at 9:43
2
@Sara I think not. The second that here is not a relativizer but a subordinator marking the complement of so; it is not B but A which "also has a high potential".
– StoneyB
Sep 6 at 9:52
1
Thanks a lot@StoneyB I really didn't see it that way.
– Sara
Sep 6 at 9:59
1
@Sara That[!] is an example of why I like to be very sparing in the use of that :)
– StoneyB
Sep 6 at 10:08
add a comment |Â
4
I've seen a few questions on ELL worrying about whether it's okay to use the same word twice in a sentence. (See this questions, for example.) Usually, those fears are unfounded. There's nothing wrong with your sentence with two instances of that.
– J.R.♦
Sep 6 at 9:31
1
Clarity is always best: "...similar to the composition of B, which has a high potential as well." Use which, but not that, when the information introduced is unnecessary for identifying the thing or person described. In this case, which has to be set off with a comma.
– Sara
Sep 6 at 9:43
2
@Sara I think not. The second that here is not a relativizer but a subordinator marking the complement of so; it is not B but A which "also has a high potential".
– StoneyB
Sep 6 at 9:52
1
Thanks a lot@StoneyB I really didn't see it that way.
– Sara
Sep 6 at 9:59
1
@Sara That[!] is an example of why I like to be very sparing in the use of that :)
– StoneyB
Sep 6 at 10:08
4
4
I've seen a few questions on ELL worrying about whether it's okay to use the same word twice in a sentence. (See this questions, for example.) Usually, those fears are unfounded. There's nothing wrong with your sentence with two instances of that.
– J.R.♦
Sep 6 at 9:31
I've seen a few questions on ELL worrying about whether it's okay to use the same word twice in a sentence. (See this questions, for example.) Usually, those fears are unfounded. There's nothing wrong with your sentence with two instances of that.
– J.R.♦
Sep 6 at 9:31
1
1
Clarity is always best: "...similar to the composition of B, which has a high potential as well." Use which, but not that, when the information introduced is unnecessary for identifying the thing or person described. In this case, which has to be set off with a comma.
– Sara
Sep 6 at 9:43
Clarity is always best: "...similar to the composition of B, which has a high potential as well." Use which, but not that, when the information introduced is unnecessary for identifying the thing or person described. In this case, which has to be set off with a comma.
– Sara
Sep 6 at 9:43
2
2
@Sara I think not. The second that here is not a relativizer but a subordinator marking the complement of so; it is not B but A which "also has a high potential".
– StoneyB
Sep 6 at 9:52
@Sara I think not. The second that here is not a relativizer but a subordinator marking the complement of so; it is not B but A which "also has a high potential".
– StoneyB
Sep 6 at 9:52
1
1
Thanks a lot@StoneyB I really didn't see it that way.
– Sara
Sep 6 at 9:59
Thanks a lot@StoneyB I really didn't see it that way.
– Sara
Sep 6 at 9:59
1
1
@Sara That[!] is an example of why I like to be very sparing in the use of that :)
– StoneyB
Sep 6 at 10:08
@Sara That[!] is an example of why I like to be very sparing in the use of that :)
– StoneyB
Sep 6 at 10:08
add a comment |Â
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
up vote
14
down vote
accepted
There are times when a comma may be added for the sake of readability. For example:
Those that know, do. Those that understand, teach.
                                 â€“ Aristotle
However, I think your sentence reads fine and needs no comma. Moreover, sentences that contain the word that two times are not uncommon. As a matter of fact, sometimes the two that's appear consecutively:
Don't be seduced into thinking that that which does not make a profit is without value.
                                 â€“ Arthur Miller
If you still insist your sentence seems awkward, here's what I might do instead of trying to fix it with a comma:
A also has a high potential, because it has a chemical composition so similar to that of B.
answered Sep 6 at 9:57
J.R.♦
94.7k7123237
3
Some more helpful reading: When should I accept my answer? and Are thanks for answers unnecessary? Cheers.
– J.R.♦
Sep 6 at 10:02
3
So, you're saying that that "that" that follows "that" is not wrong?
– Acccumulation
Sep 6 at 18:40
2
If you really want to use a comma to split up the long sentence, change the connecting words to something like "A has a chemical composition that is very similar to B, and therefore it also has a high potential."
– alephzero
Sep 6 at 20:04
add a comment |Â
up vote
13
down vote
SUPPLEMENTAL to J.R.'s answer:
A comma would not be appropriate before the second that: this that marks the complement of so ... and consequently should not be disjoined from it.
As J.R. remarks, the double use of that is not really problematic. It's really two different words, demonstrative that and subordinator that. They are only historically and orthographically the "same" word. In Present-day English speech they aren't even pronounced the same way: the demonstrative is always stressed, and the subordinator is always de-stressed and pronounced with a reduced vowel.
I confess, however, that I personally find the use of two orthographic ‹that›s in different senses a little jarring in written English when they're so near one another. My own solution would be to recast the sentence to eliminate the first—perhaps something like this:
A's chemical composition is so similar to B's that it also has a high potential.
You don't even need the genitive. "The chemical composition of A is so similar to B, that A also has a high potential."
– Stian Yttervik
Sep 6 at 13:35
@StianYttervik you don't need the comma in your example either - and IMO (native British English speaker) it would be better without the comma.
– alephzero
Sep 6 at 20:06
@alephzero yeah on second glance I agree. Not native speaker =P
– Stian Yttervik
Sep 6 at 21:16
I don't like @StianYttervik's suggestion; it implies that A and the chemical composition of A are the same thing.
– Anton Sherwood
Sep 6 at 22:53
1
@Sungil They are all fully understood. The subjects in these sentences are "the color of A" and "the color of B" and they are connected by a verb (being) which is a linking verb and the full verb would be "to be similar". That is transitive - that is why I defined 2 subjects. Now, the discussion here is how to represent these 2 subjects, and you are technically not changing the grammar - the structure of the sentence. It is allowed to omit subjects when they are known. "The man is similar" (to whom? if it is known, if it was discussed just before, the sentence is OK)
– Stian Yttervik
Sep 7 at 10:26
 |Â
show 4 more comments
up vote
1
down vote
Your instinct to use a comma before the second that is a good one.
Commas do not have hard and fast rules, and as J.R. points out, there are indeed times when a comma may be added for the sake of readability.
I, however, respectfully disagree with J.R.'s opinion about the use of a comma before your second that. I think that doing so makes your sentence clearer, and more easily understood. And that is the point of good writing; not being so obsessed with rules like "Don't start a sentence with 'And'", and "Don't use a comma unless it's absolutely necessary".
My rule is this: If a comma helps me to convey meaning, and if it helps my writing sound more conversational, I almost always use one.
answered Sep 7 at 3:24
zumafra
111
New contributor
zumafra is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |Â
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
14
down vote
accepted
There are times when a comma may be added for the sake of readability. For example:
Those that know, do. Those that understand, teach.
                                 â€“ Aristotle
However, I think your sentence reads fine and needs no comma. Moreover, sentences that contain the word that two times are not uncommon. As a matter of fact, sometimes the two that's appear consecutively:
Don't be seduced into thinking that that which does not make a profit is without value.
                                 â€“ Arthur Miller
If you still insist your sentence seems awkward, here's what I might do instead of trying to fix it with a comma:
A also has a high potential, because it has a chemical composition so similar to that of B.
answered Sep 6 at 9:57
J.R.♦
94.7k7123237
3
Some more helpful reading: When should I accept my answer? and Are thanks for answers unnecessary? Cheers.
– J.R.♦
Sep 6 at 10:02
3
So, you're saying that that "that" that follows "that" is not wrong?
– Acccumulation
Sep 6 at 18:40
2
If you really want to use a comma to split up the long sentence, change the connecting words to something like "A has a chemical composition that is very similar to B, and therefore it also has a high potential."
– alephzero
Sep 6 at 20:04
add a comment |Â
up vote
14
down vote
accepted
There are times when a comma may be added for the sake of readability. For example:
Those that know, do. Those that understand, teach.
                                 â€“ Aristotle
However, I think your sentence reads fine and needs no comma. Moreover, sentences that contain the word that two times are not uncommon. As a matter of fact, sometimes the two that's appear consecutively:
Don't be seduced into thinking that that which does not make a profit is without value.
                                 â€“ Arthur Miller
If you still insist your sentence seems awkward, here's what I might do instead of trying to fix it with a comma:
A also has a high potential, because it has a chemical composition so similar to that of B.
answered Sep 6 at 9:57
J.R.♦
94.7k7123237
3
Some more helpful reading: When should I accept my answer? and Are thanks for answers unnecessary? Cheers.
– J.R.♦
Sep 6 at 10:02
3
So, you're saying that that "that" that follows "that" is not wrong?
– Acccumulation
Sep 6 at 18:40
2
If you really want to use a comma to split up the long sentence, change the connecting words to something like "A has a chemical composition that is very similar to B, and therefore it also has a high potential."
– alephzero
Sep 6 at 20:04
add a comment |Â
up vote
14
down vote
accepted
up vote
14
down vote
accepted
There are times when a comma may be added for the sake of readability. For example:
Those that know, do. Those that understand, teach.
                                 â€“ Aristotle
However, I think your sentence reads fine and needs no comma. Moreover, sentences that contain the word that two times are not uncommon. As a matter of fact, sometimes the two that's appear consecutively:
Don't be seduced into thinking that that which does not make a profit is without value.
                                 â€“ Arthur Miller
If you still insist your sentence seems awkward, here's what I might do instead of trying to fix it with a comma:
A also has a high potential, because it has a chemical composition so similar to that of B.
answered Sep 6 at 9:57
J.R.♦
94.7k7123237
There are times when a comma may be added for the sake of readability. For example:
Those that know, do. Those that understand, teach.
                                 â€“ Aristotle
However, I think your sentence reads fine and needs no comma. Moreover, sentences that contain the word that two times are not uncommon. As a matter of fact, sometimes the two that's appear consecutively:
Don't be seduced into thinking that that which does not make a profit is without value.
                                 â€“ Arthur Miller
If you still insist your sentence seems awkward, here's what I might do instead of trying to fix it with a comma:
A also has a high potential, because it has a chemical composition so similar to that of B.
answered Sep 6 at 9:57
J.R.♦
94.7k7123237
answered Sep 6 at 9:57
J.R.♦
94.7k7123237
answered Sep 6 at 9:57
J.R.♦
94.7k7123237
answered Sep 6 at 9:57
J.R.♦
94.7k7123237
94.7k7123237
3
Some more helpful reading: When should I accept my answer? and Are thanks for answers unnecessary? Cheers.
– J.R.♦
Sep 6 at 10:02
3
So, you're saying that that "that" that follows "that" is not wrong?
– Acccumulation
Sep 6 at 18:40
2
If you really want to use a comma to split up the long sentence, change the connecting words to something like "A has a chemical composition that is very similar to B, and therefore it also has a high potential."
– alephzero
Sep 6 at 20:04
add a comment |Â
3
Some more helpful reading: When should I accept my answer? and Are thanks for answers unnecessary? Cheers.
– J.R.♦
Sep 6 at 10:02
3
So, you're saying that that "that" that follows "that" is not wrong?
– Acccumulation
Sep 6 at 18:40
2
If you really want to use a comma to split up the long sentence, change the connecting words to something like "A has a chemical composition that is very similar to B, and therefore it also has a high potential."
– alephzero
Sep 6 at 20:04
3
3
Some more helpful reading: When should I accept my answer? and Are thanks for answers unnecessary? Cheers.
– J.R.♦
Sep 6 at 10:02
Some more helpful reading: When should I accept my answer? and Are thanks for answers unnecessary? Cheers.
– J.R.♦
Sep 6 at 10:02
3
3
So, you're saying that that "that" that follows "that" is not wrong?
– Acccumulation
Sep 6 at 18:40
So, you're saying that that "that" that follows "that" is not wrong?
– Acccumulation
Sep 6 at 18:40
2
2
If you really want to use a comma to split up the long sentence, change the connecting words to something like "A has a chemical composition that is very similar to B, and therefore it also has a high potential."
– alephzero
Sep 6 at 20:04
If you really want to use a comma to split up the long sentence, change the connecting words to something like "A has a chemical composition that is very similar to B, and therefore it also has a high potential."
– alephzero
Sep 6 at 20:04
add a comment |Â
up vote
13
down vote
SUPPLEMENTAL to J.R.'s answer:
A comma would not be appropriate before the second that: this that marks the complement of so ... and consequently should not be disjoined from it.
As J.R. remarks, the double use of that is not really problematic. It's really two different words, demonstrative that and subordinator that. They are only historically and orthographically the "same" word. In Present-day English speech they aren't even pronounced the same way: the demonstrative is always stressed, and the subordinator is always de-stressed and pronounced with a reduced vowel.
I confess, however, that I personally find the use of two orthographic ‹that›s in different senses a little jarring in written English when they're so near one another. My own solution would be to recast the sentence to eliminate the first—perhaps something like this:
A's chemical composition is so similar to B's that it also has a high potential.
You don't even need the genitive. "The chemical composition of A is so similar to B, that A also has a high potential."
– Stian Yttervik
Sep 6 at 13:35
@StianYttervik you don't need the comma in your example either - and IMO (native British English speaker) it would be better without the comma.
– alephzero
Sep 6 at 20:06
@alephzero yeah on second glance I agree. Not native speaker =P
– Stian Yttervik
Sep 6 at 21:16
I don't like @StianYttervik's suggestion; it implies that A and the chemical composition of A are the same thing.
– Anton Sherwood
Sep 6 at 22:53
1
@Sungil They are all fully understood. The subjects in these sentences are "the color of A" and "the color of B" and they are connected by a verb (being) which is a linking verb and the full verb would be "to be similar". That is transitive - that is why I defined 2 subjects. Now, the discussion here is how to represent these 2 subjects, and you are technically not changing the grammar - the structure of the sentence. It is allowed to omit subjects when they are known. "The man is similar" (to whom? if it is known, if it was discussed just before, the sentence is OK)
– Stian Yttervik
Sep 7 at 10:26
 |Â
show 4 more comments
up vote
13
down vote
SUPPLEMENTAL to J.R.'s answer:
A comma would not be appropriate before the second that: this that marks the complement of so ... and consequently should not be disjoined from it.
As J.R. remarks, the double use of that is not really problematic. It's really two different words, demonstrative that and subordinator that. They are only historically and orthographically the "same" word. In Present-day English speech they aren't even pronounced the same way: the demonstrative is always stressed, and the subordinator is always de-stressed and pronounced with a reduced vowel.
I confess, however, that I personally find the use of two orthographic ‹that›s in different senses a little jarring in written English when they're so near one another. My own solution would be to recast the sentence to eliminate the first—perhaps something like this:
A's chemical composition is so similar to B's that it also has a high potential.
You don't even need the genitive. "The chemical composition of A is so similar to B, that A also has a high potential."
– Stian Yttervik
Sep 6 at 13:35
@StianYttervik you don't need the comma in your example either - and IMO (native British English speaker) it would be better without the comma.
– alephzero
Sep 6 at 20:06
@alephzero yeah on second glance I agree. Not native speaker =P
– Stian Yttervik
Sep 6 at 21:16
I don't like @StianYttervik's suggestion; it implies that A and the chemical composition of A are the same thing.
– Anton Sherwood
Sep 6 at 22:53
1
@Sungil They are all fully understood. The subjects in these sentences are "the color of A" and "the color of B" and they are connected by a verb (being) which is a linking verb and the full verb would be "to be similar". That is transitive - that is why I defined 2 subjects. Now, the discussion here is how to represent these 2 subjects, and you are technically not changing the grammar - the structure of the sentence. It is allowed to omit subjects when they are known. "The man is similar" (to whom? if it is known, if it was discussed just before, the sentence is OK)
– Stian Yttervik
Sep 7 at 10:26
 |Â
show 4 more comments
up vote
13
down vote
up vote
13
down vote
SUPPLEMENTAL to J.R.'s answer:
A comma would not be appropriate before the second that: this that marks the complement of so ... and consequently should not be disjoined from it.
As J.R. remarks, the double use of that is not really problematic. It's really two different words, demonstrative that and subordinator that. They are only historically and orthographically the "same" word. In Present-day English speech they aren't even pronounced the same way: the demonstrative is always stressed, and the subordinator is always de-stressed and pronounced with a reduced vowel.
I confess, however, that I personally find the use of two orthographic ‹that›s in different senses a little jarring in written English when they're so near one another. My own solution would be to recast the sentence to eliminate the first—perhaps something like this:
A's chemical composition is so similar to B's that it also has a high potential.
SUPPLEMENTAL to J.R.'s answer:
A comma would not be appropriate before the second that: this that marks the complement of so ... and consequently should not be disjoined from it.
As J.R. remarks, the double use of that is not really problematic. It's really two different words, demonstrative that and subordinator that. They are only historically and orthographically the "same" word. In Present-day English speech they aren't even pronounced the same way: the demonstrative is always stressed, and the subordinator is always de-stressed and pronounced with a reduced vowel.
I confess, however, that I personally find the use of two orthographic ‹that›s in different senses a little jarring in written English when they're so near one another. My own solution would be to recast the sentence to eliminate the first—perhaps something like this:
A's chemical composition is so similar to B's that it also has a high potential.
answered Sep 6 at 10:03
community wiki
StoneyB
You don't even need the genitive. "The chemical composition of A is so similar to B, that A also has a high potential."
– Stian Yttervik
Sep 6 at 13:35
@StianYttervik you don't need the comma in your example either - and IMO (native British English speaker) it would be better without the comma.
– alephzero
Sep 6 at 20:06
@alephzero yeah on second glance I agree. Not native speaker =P
– Stian Yttervik
Sep 6 at 21:16
I don't like @StianYttervik's suggestion; it implies that A and the chemical composition of A are the same thing.
– Anton Sherwood
Sep 6 at 22:53
1
@Sungil They are all fully understood. The subjects in these sentences are "the color of A" and "the color of B" and they are connected by a verb (being) which is a linking verb and the full verb would be "to be similar". That is transitive - that is why I defined 2 subjects. Now, the discussion here is how to represent these 2 subjects, and you are technically not changing the grammar - the structure of the sentence. It is allowed to omit subjects when they are known. "The man is similar" (to whom? if it is known, if it was discussed just before, the sentence is OK)
– Stian Yttervik
Sep 7 at 10:26
 |Â
show 4 more comments
You don't even need the genitive. "The chemical composition of A is so similar to B, that A also has a high potential."
– Stian Yttervik
Sep 6 at 13:35
@StianYttervik you don't need the comma in your example either - and IMO (native British English speaker) it would be better without the comma.
– alephzero
Sep 6 at 20:06
@alephzero yeah on second glance I agree. Not native speaker =P
– Stian Yttervik
Sep 6 at 21:16
I don't like @StianYttervik's suggestion; it implies that A and the chemical composition of A are the same thing.
– Anton Sherwood
Sep 6 at 22:53
1
@Sungil They are all fully understood. The subjects in these sentences are "the color of A" and "the color of B" and they are connected by a verb (being) which is a linking verb and the full verb would be "to be similar". That is transitive - that is why I defined 2 subjects. Now, the discussion here is how to represent these 2 subjects, and you are technically not changing the grammar - the structure of the sentence. It is allowed to omit subjects when they are known. "The man is similar" (to whom? if it is known, if it was discussed just before, the sentence is OK)
– Stian Yttervik
Sep 7 at 10:26
You don't even need the genitive. "The chemical composition of A is so similar to B, that A also has a high potential."
– Stian Yttervik
Sep 6 at 13:35
You don't even need the genitive. "The chemical composition of A is so similar to B, that A also has a high potential."
– Stian Yttervik
Sep 6 at 13:35
@StianYttervik you don't need the comma in your example either - and IMO (native British English speaker) it would be better without the comma.
– alephzero
Sep 6 at 20:06
@StianYttervik you don't need the comma in your example either - and IMO (native British English speaker) it would be better without the comma.
– alephzero
Sep 6 at 20:06
@alephzero yeah on second glance I agree. Not native speaker =P
– Stian Yttervik
Sep 6 at 21:16
@alephzero yeah on second glance I agree. Not native speaker =P
– Stian Yttervik
Sep 6 at 21:16
I don't like @StianYttervik's suggestion; it implies that A and the chemical composition of A are the same thing.
– Anton Sherwood
Sep 6 at 22:53
I don't like @StianYttervik's suggestion; it implies that A and the chemical composition of A are the same thing.
– Anton Sherwood
Sep 6 at 22:53
1
1
@Sungil They are all fully understood. The subjects in these sentences are "the color of A" and "the color of B" and they are connected by a verb (being) which is a linking verb and the full verb would be "to be similar". That is transitive - that is why I defined 2 subjects. Now, the discussion here is how to represent these 2 subjects, and you are technically not changing the grammar - the structure of the sentence. It is allowed to omit subjects when they are known. "The man is similar" (to whom? if it is known, if it was discussed just before, the sentence is OK)
– Stian Yttervik
Sep 7 at 10:26
@Sungil They are all fully understood. The subjects in these sentences are "the color of A" and "the color of B" and they are connected by a verb (being) which is a linking verb and the full verb would be "to be similar". That is transitive - that is why I defined 2 subjects. Now, the discussion here is how to represent these 2 subjects, and you are technically not changing the grammar - the structure of the sentence. It is allowed to omit subjects when they are known. "The man is similar" (to whom? if it is known, if it was discussed just before, the sentence is OK)
– Stian Yttervik
Sep 7 at 10:26
 |Â
show 4 more comments
up vote
1
down vote
Your instinct to use a comma before the second that is a good one.
Commas do not have hard and fast rules, and as J.R. points out, there are indeed times when a comma may be added for the sake of readability.
I, however, respectfully disagree with J.R.'s opinion about the use of a comma before your second that. I think that doing so makes your sentence clearer, and more easily understood. And that is the point of good writing; not being so obsessed with rules like "Don't start a sentence with 'And'", and "Don't use a comma unless it's absolutely necessary".
My rule is this: If a comma helps me to convey meaning, and if it helps my writing sound more conversational, I almost always use one.
answered Sep 7 at 3:24
zumafra
111
New contributor
zumafra is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
Your instinct to use a comma before the second that is a good one.
Commas do not have hard and fast rules, and as J.R. points out, there are indeed times when a comma may be added for the sake of readability.
I, however, respectfully disagree with J.R.'s opinion about the use of a comma before your second that. I think that doing so makes your sentence clearer, and more easily understood. And that is the point of good writing; not being so obsessed with rules like "Don't start a sentence with 'And'", and "Don't use a comma unless it's absolutely necessary".
My rule is this: If a comma helps me to convey meaning, and if it helps my writing sound more conversational, I almost always use one.
answered Sep 7 at 3:24
zumafra
111
New contributor
zumafra is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
Your instinct to use a comma before the second that is a good one.
Commas do not have hard and fast rules, and as J.R. points out, there are indeed times when a comma may be added for the sake of readability.
I, however, respectfully disagree with J.R.'s opinion about the use of a comma before your second that. I think that doing so makes your sentence clearer, and more easily understood. And that is the point of good writing; not being so obsessed with rules like "Don't start a sentence with 'And'", and "Don't use a comma unless it's absolutely necessary".
My rule is this: If a comma helps me to convey meaning, and if it helps my writing sound more conversational, I almost always use one.
answered Sep 7 at 3:24
zumafra
111
New contributor
zumafra is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Your instinct to use a comma before the second that is a good one.
Commas do not have hard and fast rules, and as J.R. points out, there are indeed times when a comma may be added for the sake of readability.
I, however, respectfully disagree with J.R.'s opinion about the use of a comma before your second that. I think that doing so makes your sentence clearer, and more easily understood. And that is the point of good writing; not being so obsessed with rules like "Don't start a sentence with 'And'", and "Don't use a comma unless it's absolutely necessary".
My rule is this: If a comma helps me to convey meaning, and if it helps my writing sound more conversational, I almost always use one.
answered Sep 7 at 3:24
zumafra
111
New contributor
zumafra is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered Sep 7 at 3:24
zumafra
111
New contributor
zumafra is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered Sep 7 at 3:24
zumafra
111
answered Sep 7 at 3:24
zumafra
111
111
New contributor
zumafra is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
zumafra is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
zumafra is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f178866%2fcan-i-use-a-comma-between-so-adjective-and-that-clause%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
4
I've seen a few questions on ELL worrying about whether it's okay to use the same word twice in a sentence. (See this questions, for example.) Usually, those fears are unfounded. There's nothing wrong with your sentence with two instances of that.
– J.R.♦
Sep 6 at 9:31
1
Clarity is always best: "...similar to the composition of B, which has a high potential as well." Use which, but not that, when the information introduced is unnecessary for identifying the thing or person described. In this case, which has to be set off with a comma.
– Sara
Sep 6 at 9:43
2
@Sara I think not. The second that here is not a relativizer but a subordinator marking the complement of so; it is not B but A which "also has a high potential".
– StoneyB
Sep 6 at 9:52
1
Thanks a lot@StoneyB I really didn't see it that way.
– Sara
Sep 6 at 9:59
1
@Sara That[!] is an example of why I like to be very sparing in the use of that :)
– StoneyB
Sep 6 at 10:08