In your first example, "I have three daughters, one of whom, Robin, is
happy" is correctly punctuated. "I have three daughters, one of whom
Robin is happy" is incorrect.
"I have a daughter, Robin, who is happy" would be correct for a
speaker who had only one daughter, but "I have a daughter Robin who is
happy" is appropriate if, as in your case, the speaker has more than
one daughter.
Similarly, "My daughter, Robin, is happy" and "My daughter Robin is
happy" have different meanings. The first sentence implies that Robin
is the speaker's only daughter, while the second carries no such
implication. If, in fact, you have three daughters, then "My daughter
Robin is happy" is the correct choice. In each of these sentences, the
word "Robin" functions as an appositive (a word or phrase that renames
a noun). Robin's name is surrounded by commas only if the name is,
within the context of the sentence's meaning, a nonrestrictive
appositive.
One rule of thumb for distinguishing a nonrestrictive element from a
restrictive one is this: the information conveyed by a nonrestrictive
element may be deleted from the sentence without changing the overall
meaning of the sentence, or lessening the sentence's specificity. In
the case of a speaker who has only one daughter, if "Robin" is dropped
from the sentence, the sentence becomes "My daughter is happy," which
carries the same meaning as the original sentence. If a speaker who
has three daughters drops "Robin" from the sentence, some of the
sentence's meaning is lost: we no longer know which daughter is happy.
"Set nonrestrictive (nonessential) appositives off with commas. In
other words, if there is only one of the items under discussion, set
the appositive off with commas.
My husband, Bill, is a carpenter. (Speaker has only one husband.)
My brother, Joe, is a lawyer. (Speaker has only one brother.)
My daughter Ann is a doctor. (Speaker has more than one daughter. The
daughter named Ann is a doctor.)"
Rice University Editorial Style Guide
http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~opa/pubs/ed_style_guide/punctuation.html
"A restrictive element, which does not require commas, does just what
the name implies: it restricts the meaning of the word or words it
modifies. A nonrestrictive element, which does require commas
separating it from the rest of the sentence, provides additional
information to your sentence but does not restrict the meaning of the
word or words it modifies. Note that this is not the same as simply
saying that it modifies the word, for restrictive and nonrestrictive
elements are modifiers. The decision of whether or not an element is
restrictive or nonrestrictive comes solely from context. Look at the
following two sentences:
--My brother Bill is a fireman. ['Bill' restrictive]
--My brother, Bill, is a fireman. ['Bill' nonrestrictive]
The context of the first sentence is that I have two brothers and that
the one named Bill is the fireman; my other brother, Frank, is an
engineer. The name Bill in the first sentence restricts the possible
meanings of the word brother. The context of the second sentence is
that I only have one brother; providing his name gives additional
information to the sentence but does not restrict the possible
meanings of \tab the word brother, for the word can only refer to one
person. The concept of restrictive and nonrestrictive elements is the
most tricky of comma rules because the determination of whether an
element is restrictive or nonrestrictive can be difficult."
Supplement to "St. Martin's Handbook"
http://parallel.park.uga.edu/~lisaboyd/102M/s98/gramhand.html
As the excerpt from the St. Martin's Handbook says, this can be a
tricky rule. When in doubt on the matter of whether or not to use a
comma, I find it helpful to speak the sentence aloud, in a natural
tone of voice. Commas are often appropriate in the places where there
is a brief pause and/or a drop in pitch.
Here you'll find an excellent article on the punctuation of
restrictive and nonrestrictive clauses:
Chicago-Kent College of Law
http://www.kentlaw.edu/academics/lrw/grinker/LwtaClauses__Restrictive_and_Nonrest.htm
Your final question is "Are restrictive clauses not parenthetical and
not set off by commas?" A restrictive clause is essential to a
sentence's meaning. Such a clause is not surrounded by commas. A
nonrestrictive clause (also called a parenthetical clause) is set off
by commas. Here's a good explanation:
"Relative clauses can be broken down into two types: (1) restrictive
and (2) non-restrictive. A restrictive clause provides information
that is pertinent or essential to the meaning of the sentence. A
non-restrictive clause, also called a parenthetical or an appositive,
contains information that is extra. Information contained in a
non-restrictive clause may be removed from the sentence altogether
without changing the overall meaning of the sentence. Because this
information is not crucial to the meaning of a sentence, it is set
apart with commas, or, more emphatically, with dashes, or parentheses.
Both kinds of clauses can be signaled by the use of wh word (which,
when, where, and who). That is used to signal a restrictive clause.
Because a restrictive clause contributes to the basic meaning of the
sentence, it is not separated from the rest of the sentence with
commas or other surrounding punctuation."
Arizona State University
http://www.asu.edu/clas/english/englished/docs/Restrictive_Clauses_pp_27-28.pdf
Search terms used:
"restrictive clause" + "commas"
"nonrestrictive clause" + "commas"
"parenthetical clause" + "commas"
"restrictive appositive" + "commas"
"nonrestrictive appositive" + "commas"
I hope this is useful! If anything is not clear, or if a link doesn't
function, please request clarification. I'll be glad to offer further
assistance before you rate my answer.
Best wishes,
pinkfreud |
