Commas around nonrestrictive phrase

[Scott]

Is the following grammatically correct

I would give it 3.5 if possible because it is better than merely good.

Or does it require being written as follows to be grammatically correct:

I would give it 3.5, if possible, because it is better than merely good.

When answering, please provide an explanation. Preferably name what source you are using or what expertise you have. This is because in the International Grammar Forum and at OnlineBookClub.org in general we don't stick to a specific style guide, so if you are checking a specific style guide or checking at a blog/website that uses a specific style guide, the answers there may not apply here.

[jgraney8]

Is the following grammatically correct

I would give it 3.5 if possible because it is better than merely good.

Or does it require being written as follows to be grammatically correct:

I would give it 3.5, if possible, because it is better than merely good.

When answering, please provide an explanation. Preferably name what source you are using or what expertise you have. This is because in the International Grammar Forum and at OnlineBookClub.org in general we don't stick to a specific style guide, so if you are checking a specific style guide or checking at a blog/website that uses a specific style guide, the answers there may not apply here.

The short phrase, if possible, would need commas because it is a parenthetical expression. A parenthetical expression is one that is not necessary to the sentence but may add a comment or remark. My source to explain this comma use is Grammar Once and For All http://www.grammar-once-and-for-all.com ... pressions/. My background includes nearly 30 years teaching writing and grammar to second language students.

As for not using a specific style guide, that causes problems sometimes for reviewers because editors seem to use different style guides making some grammatical corrections appear arbitrary.

[Espie]

Is the following grammatically correct

I would give it 3.5 if possible because it is better than merely good.

Or does it require being written as follows to be grammatically correct:

I would give it 3.5, if possible, because it is better than merely good.

When answering, please provide an explanation. Preferably name what source you are using or what expertise you have. This is because in the International Grammar Forum and at OnlineBookClub.org in general we don't stick to a specific style guide, so if you are checking a specific style guide or checking at a blog/website that uses a specific style guide, the answers there may not apply here.

The short phrase, if possible, would need commas because it is a parenthetical expression. A parenthetical expression is one that is not necessary to the sentence but may add a comment or remark. My source to explain this comma use is Grammar Once and For All http://www.grammar-once-and-for-all.com ... pressions/. My background includes nearly 30 years teaching writing and grammar to second language students.

As for not using a specific style guide, that causes problems sometimes for reviewers because editors seem to use different style guides making some grammatical corrections appear arbitrary.

I. Question: Is it grammatically correct to enclose nonrestrictive or parenthetical elements with commas?

Answer: Yes. I agree with @jgraney8 .

II. Question: Is it grammatically required to enclose the phrase if possible in sample sentence 2 with commas?

Answer: Normally, yes. There may be exceptions, though, depending on certain factors.

1. The comma use is correct if the phrase is really meant to be nonrestrictive or parenthetical.

References:
https://www.macquariedictionary.com.au/ ... esource/6/
https://theeditorsblog.net/2012/09/17/r ... ed-commas/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comma

2. The commas are not required if the phrase is restrictive or essential to the whole sentence's thought.

References:
Same as above.

3. The commas may be omitted if the interruption caused by the phrase is "slight." As it's often difficult to determine if a word, phrase or clause is restrictive enough to allow comma omission, Strunk came up with this alternative provided that both (and not just one of the) commas are omitted.

Reference:
https://www.bartleby.com/141/strunk.html

III. Question: Is the phrase if possible really nonrestrictive or parenthetical that would require enclosing commas?

Answer: It normally is, but there could be exceptions depending on the sentence writer's viewpoint.

1. For example, in sample sentence 2, the use of comma seems to acknowledge that it is possible (at least up to a certain degree) to give a 3.5 rating. Thus, the phrase is nonrestrictive or parenthetical if that is true. However, whereas 3.5 ratings could be possible outside the OBC, OBC reviewers currently don't have that option.

2. Giving 3.5 stars is not really possible within OnlineBookClub.org (OBC) at present. Thus, a reviewer may consider the phrase restrictive or essential (and not nonrestrictive or parenthetical) to emphasise that the statement's meaning is only true if a 3.5 rating is possible. Of course, there are different ways that sample sentence 1 could be reworded to sound better and become clearer; however, it may be grammatically correct as it is (i.e. without the commas).

References:
review-team/guidelines.php
https://www.macquariedictionary.com.au/ ... esource/6/
https://theeditorsblog.net/2012/09/17/r ... ed-commas/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comma

IV. Question: As an OBC reviewer, will I choose sample sentence 1 or sample sentence 2?

Answer: I'd opt for sample sentence 2 for my reviews.

I'd normally choose to use the commas because:
-I tend to be risk-averse;
-We currently don't have a single style guide here (yet); and,
-It's hard to predict what reference an editor or reader will be using, so it's better to stick to safer conventions.
However, this doesn't mean that sample sentence 1 is always wrong.

V. Question: Should an OBC editor penalise the reviewer who will choose sample sentence 1?

Answer: No.
I think it shouldn't be in the "Spelling and Grammar" metric of the Editor Scorecard in this case. (Your non-use of commas for in general in your sentence is not wrong either, I believe.) However, it may or may not be discussed in the "Editor's Subjective Rating" portion if the use of more widely accepted conventions need to be encouraged.

VI. Question: What is my "expertise"?

Answer: About my background, I've got no prior intention of mentioning them here. However, as it is being considered in this thread, I'm inclined to do so now.

Although I worked with English as a Second Language (ESL) and Literacy educators like @jgraney8 for more than three years, I am not one of (but have great respect for) them. Nonetheless, I have numerous years of writing and editing exposures that started from winning a poetry-writing contest in my elementary years and becoming our high school student paper's English Literary Editor. I was my alma mater's first Department of Languages Plaque awardee and first female Journalism Award recipient for my stint as our official publication's Editor-in-Chief (EIC). I have been the EIC of at least one workplace publication as well as written and edited for various others. I was one of ten Best in Revalida awardees among a graduating class of more than 300 for my MBA's on-the-spot comprehensive examination's mini-thesis and its subsequent defense.

I was born in the Philippines where American English conventions are more likely to be used. I've lived here in Australia for more than eight years now, so British English is no longer foreign to me either.

I wouldn't claim that my writing is always flawless; I even deliberately wrote with less regard to conventions when I started blogging more than two years ago. However, I could also be nitpicky if required to do so (but lenient, if not) and especially if I've got enough luxury of time. I believe in collaborative effort, so I am curious to know what others think, too.

[Espie]

(P.S. I know that this may already be off-topic, but I may as well ask while I could because I couldn't find the answer anywhere yet. Are we expected to write in American English, British English, a combination of both or a local version of the language in our reviews?

I used "defense" (the American English version) in my above comment. If I used "defence" (the British English version) in my review, would an editor mark that as an error?

I'd appreciate a clarification. Thank you in advance.)

[ayoomisope]

(P.S. I know that this may already be off-topic, but I may as well ask while I could because I couldn't find the answer anywhere yet. Are we expected to write in American English, British English, a combination of both or a local version of the language in our reviews?

I used "defense" (the American English version) in my above comment. If I used "defence" (the British English version) in my review, would an editor mark that as an error?

I'd appreciate a clarification. Thank you in advance.)

As one of the editors here on OBC, I can tell you it is allowed to use either version. But it is better to stick with one English version's convention and rules (for punctuation, spelling, and the like) consistently throughout each review.

[kandscreeley]

(P.S. I know that this may already be off-topic, but I may as well ask while I could because I couldn't find the answer anywhere yet. Are we expected to write in American English, British English, a combination of both or a local version of the language in our reviews?

I used "defense" (the American English version) in my above comment. If I used "defence" (the British English version) in my review, would an editor mark that as an error?

I'd appreciate a clarification. Thank you in advance.)

Actually, exactly what the previous comment said. It doesn't matter which you use, but you do need to be consistent throughout. If someone marks you down for using British English, you would just need to have the review rechecked.

[bookowlie]

I don't mark off when the grammar and spelling is not consistently British English or American English. I feel some UK reviewers might use a grammar program to catch errors. It's possible the tool might only pick up only certain words or grammar.

[Espie]

Checkers are really useful, especially in our multi-tasking, always-rushing, technology-driven world nowadays where we always need to keep up. Like commas (that are our thread's topic) and any other worldly thing or human convention, though, they're not the panacea for everything as there are variations on their usage or omission. I've indicated some of my further thoughts about them on the following thread:
viewtopic.php?f=72&t=83131&start=30.

Thank you, @ayoomisope, @kandscreeley, and @bookowlie, for being helpful.

[lisalynn]

I would really like to have a single accepted style guide for writing reviews. I have looked up specific grammar rules and applied them to my reviews, and was then graded wrong for following said rules.

[EvaDar]

I would really like to have a single accepted style guide for writing reviews. I have looked up specific grammar rules and applied them to my reviews, and was then graded wrong for following said rules.

I don't know that a style guide is forthcoming. It would be helpful, but it is a big project with multiple variables. There is always gray area with grammar and punctuation. If you have a source that backs up your choice and an editor marks an error, you can cite the source in the recheck process. The editor may return your points if it is a reliable source. In that case you would not lose that recheck.

[lisalynn]

I don't mean a style guide written just for this site. It would be easy to say everyone use The Associated Press Stylebook or the Chicago Manual of Style. But thanks for the advice on a recheck. I've never asked for one, I wasn't sure how it all worked.

[EvaDar]

I don't mean a style guide written just for this site. It would be easy to say everyone use The Associated Press Stylebook or the Chicago Manual of Style. But thanks for the advice on a recheck. I've never asked for one, I wasn't sure how it all worked.

Ah. I understand what you meant. Yes, I agree a standard would be helpful.