Category: Life

A subject clause, like the subject of a simple sentence, is not divided by any punctuation mark from the rest of the sentence, being closely connected with it, since this clause is the subject of the whole complex sentence, and only a brief pause is needed.

Neither the place of such clause in the sentence, nor the way of its introduction, influences the punctuation. It may come at the beginning of the sentence, or, when introduced by the anticipatory ‘it’, at the end.

Subject clauses are joined to the rest of the sentence by means of the conjunction ‘that’, by the conjunctive adverbs ‘how’, ‘why’, ‘when’, ‘where’, and by the conjunctive pronouns ‘who’, ‘what’, ‘which’. For example: “It seemed utterly grotesque to him that he should be standing there facing a charge of murder”.

In rare cases there is a comma after a long subject clause to denote a pause: “Why his widow, of all women, should have come into the country, was the great interrogation”.

A predicative clause, like the predicative of a simple sentence, is not marked off by any punctuation mark from the rest of the sentence, being closely connected with it, since this clause is the predicative of the whole complex sentence, and only a brief pause is needed.

The way of introduction does not influence the punctuation. These clauses are introduced by the conjunctions ‘that’, ‘as if, ‘as though’, ‘whether’, by the conjunctive pronouns ‘what’, ‘who’, ‘which’, and by the conjunctive adverbs ‘why’, ‘how’, ‘when’, ‘where’. When’ introduced asyndetically, a predicative clause is marked off by a comma, or by a dash to indicate a longer pause: “The trouble with our young men is that they are still too romantic”.

The corresponding Russian subordinate clauses are marked off by commas. They are not introduced asyndetically.

Often some part of the sentence, or some clause, which should be set off by commas according to the rules of punctuation, comes between the link verb and the predicative clause, thus splitting them: “The result was that, by the time everything was ready, the tea was waiting.”

An object clause, like an object of a simple sentence, is not separated by any punctuation mark from the principal clause, being closely connected with the verb or the verbal it depends on. Almost no pause is needed before an object clause.

If the object clause precedes the principal clause, there may be a comma between them to denote a pause and emphasis.

Object clauses are often introduced asyndetically; also, by the conjunctions ‘that’, ‘if, ‘whether’, ‘lest’, by the conjunctive adverbs ‘how’, ‘when’, ‘where’, ‘why’, and by the conjunctive pronouns ‘what’, ‘which’, ‘who’.

If it precedes the principal clause, there may be a dash between the two clauses following the principal clause: “I couldn’t tell who the speakers were”.

And preceding the principal clause: “What was great and strong to him, she missed”.

There may be a comma before an object clause, if the latter adds a specifying, explanatory meaning to some object of the main clause: “So you must tell me all about it, what it does and what it makes and sells”.

Restrictive (or limiting) attached attributive clauses are joined to the principal clause either asyndetically (‘contact clauses’), or by the relative pronouns ‘that’, ‘which’, ‘who (whom)’, by the relative adverbs ‘when’, ‘where’, without any punctuation mark to denote close connection, with the antecedent in the main clause. For example: “All I can say is that my whole life is changed”.

Non-restrictive (or descriptive) detached attributive clauses introduced by the relative pronouns ‘who’, ‘which’, and by the relative adverbs ‘when’, ‘where’, are normally set off by a comma or double commas to denote their detached character and the additional information concerning the antecedent in the main clause: “The governor, who was an angry man, received them with great courtesy”.

A descriptive attributive (continuative) clause modifying the whole principal clause is marked off from the “latter by a comma or double commas. Such clauses are introduced by the relative pronoun ‘which’.

Appositive attributive clauses modifying abstract nouns, such as ‘information’, ‘feeling’, ‘thought’, ‘idea’, ‘fact’, ‘notion’, ‘remark’, ‘impression’, ‘expression’, etc., are introduced by the conjunctions ‘that’, ‘whether’, normally without any punctuation mark: “Andrew had no idea whether he was doing well or badly”.

An adverbial clause of time preceding the main clause is normally set off by a comma, like a lengthy adverbial modifier of time, to denote weak dependence, rising tone, and a pause. (This is not a strict rule, some writers omit the comma.)

Adverbial clauses of time are introduced by the conjunctions ‘when’, ‘as’, ‘before’, ‘after’, ‘while’, ‘since’, ’till’, ‘until’, ‘directly’, ‘as soon as’: “When these two came to tea, there would be whispers and glances of understanding”.

When placed in the middle of the main clause, thus splitting it, and acquiring a detached character, an adverbial clause of time, is set off by double commas: “One evening, he said, after he had been struggling like that, and long after he had quit seeing people, he wrote his second novel”.

When following the main clause, an adverbial clause of time is usually not set off by any punctuation mark, occupying the regular place of an adverbial modifier of time, and being tightly attached to the principal clause: “Ah, we rarely feel the charm of our own tongue until it reaches our ears under a foreign sky”.

Like an adverbial modifier, an adverbial clause of time may have a detached character, so it is marked off by a comma, even though it follows the principal clause, which is usually pronounced with a falling tone: “The keen bite of the wind met them, as they stepped out of the cage”.

An appositive adverbial clause of time, following an adverbial modifier of time, is marked off by a comma or double commas, to denote its detached, explanatory and additional character: “Now, when he had corked the bottle, the sheriff bit off a chew of apple”.

Adverbial clauses of time introduced by the connective groups ‘hardly – when’, ‘scarcely – when’, ‘no sooner–than’, ‘barely – when’, ‘barely – before’ are never set off by any punctuation mark from the principal clauses, being very closely connected with them, the first parts of these groups belonging to the principal clauses: “No sooner had this letter arrived than her mind was at work planning a meeting”.

An adverbial clause of condition preceding the principal clause is usually set off by a comma to denote weak dependence, rising tone, and a pause. The same in case of inversion.

Adverbial clauses of condition are introduced by the conjunctions ‘if, ‘in case’, ‘unless’, ‘provided’: “Should you care for a full explanation of the action we are compelled to take, you may call any day between 11.10 and 11.40 a.m.”.

In case an adverbial clause of condition follows the main clause, there is normally no punctuation mark before the subordinate clause to denote close connection with, and absolute dependence on the principal clause: “Don’t let me detain you if you wish to see it”.

Sometimes an adverbial clause of condition has a detached character, showing faint dependence; so there is a comma, even if the subordinate clause follows the main clause, which is usually pronounced with a falling tone: “She should have cherished it, if her imagination had been caught”.

Adverbial clauses of place introduced by the conjunctions ‘where’, ‘wherever’ are, like adverbial modifiers of place, not marked off by any punctuation mark from the principal clause. For example: “Andrew began to read where, at college, he had left off”.

An adverbial clause of cause (or reason), like an adverbial modifier of cause, is generally not set off by any punctuation mark when placed after the principal clause, to indicate absolute dependence on the latter. These clauses are introduced by the conjunctions ‘because’, ‘since’, ‘as’: “She was touched by a faint feeling of guilt because she couldn’t lock it from the outside”.

An adverbial clause of cause placed at the head of the sentence is normally marked off by a comma to denote weaker dependence on the main clause, rising tone, and a pause: “Because he was writing, he, of course, neglected his job, his wife, his kids”.

An adverbial clause of cause, like an adverbial modifier of cause, may have a detached character; so it is separated by a comma from the principal clause, which is usually pronounced with a falling tone in such case: “They had had trifling disagreements, because they were both obstinate”.

An adverbial clause of purpose, like an adverbial modifier of purpose, is usually not set off by any punctuation mark from the main clause to denote its attached character. Such clauses are introduced by the conjunctions ‘that’, ‘lest’, ‘so’, ‘so that’, ‘in order that’: “He went in dread of Llewellyn and the Committee lest he should be suddenly dismissed”.

An adverbial clause of comparison introduced by the conjunctions ‘as’ – after the adverbs ‘as’, ‘not so’ in the principal clause –, ‘than’ – after the adverbs ‘more’, ‘less’, ‘better’, ‘worse’, etc. – are usually not set off by any punctuation mark to denote their close connection with the principal clause and the adverbs: “I was as obstinate as she was”.

Adverbial clauses of comparison introduced by the conjunctions ‘as if, ‘as though’ are usually not set off by any punctuation mark from the principal clauses to denote close connection with the verbs they modify. The principal clauses wouldn’t be complete without these subordinate clauses: “At breakfast next morning Christine behaved as though the whole episode were forgotten”.

Adverbial clauses of comparison introduced by the conjunctions ‘as if, ‘as though’, mostly after adverbial modifiers of manner or comparison in the principal clauses, which are usually pronounced with a falling tone, may have an explanatory, detached character; so they are marked off by a comma; in case of a longer pause, by a dash: “She was speaking with difficulty, as though she had to think hard about each word”.

Adverbial clauses of comparison introduced by the connective adverb groups ‘the more – the more’, ‘the less – the less’, ‘the sooner – the better’, ‘the further – the better’, ‘the harder – the more interesting’, etc., are mostly set off by a comma: “The more he dealt in the habits of animals, the more he knew that he was a man and needed other men”.

Adverbial clauses of result (or consequence), like adverbial modifiers of result, are not marked off by any punctuation mark, being, mostly, closely connected with adverbial modifiers of degree in the principal clause.

Adverbial clauses of result are introduced by the conjunctions ‘that’ – after the adverb of degree ‘so’, or the prepositional phrase ‘to such an extent’ – and ‘so that’ – often after the adverbs of degree ‘very’, ‘extremely’: “My appearance disturbed these charming children to such an extent that they rushed up and down the corridor in a frenzied state”.

Adverbial clauses of result are sometimes introduced asyndetically without any punctuation mark: “Denny lit a cigarette, his fingers shaking so violently he could barely hold the match”.

Adverbial clauses of concession, no matter what place they may occupy in the sentence, are always set off by a comma from the principal clause, having a detached character.

These clauses are introduced by the conjunctions ‘though’, ‘although’, ‘even if, ‘even though’; by the adverb ‘however’, by the pronouns ‘whatever’, ‘whoever’, ‘whichever’, and the connective groups ‘no matter how’, ‘no matter what’, ‘no matter who’, ‘no matter which’, ‘no matter when’, ‘no matter where’. For example: “Oh, so you divide up a brawl according to races, no matter who was right?”

In case an adverbial clause of concession is introduced asyndetically, by means of inversion, there is a comma between the two clauses, to denote rising tone of the subordinate clause, which usually precedes the main clause, and a pause: “Tired as I was, I began to run frantically home”.

An adverbial clause of attending circumstances, like the corresponding adverbial modifier, is marked off by a comma from the principal clause to denote its detached character, falling tone, and a pause. Such clause is introduced by the conjunction ‘while’: “Silently she kissed her mother, while tears fell fast”.

In case of double or several degrees of subordination, the punctuation remains exactly the same as is necessary before each type of subordinate clause: “Now he began to question if there were not some truth in what Denny said”.

The independent clauses of a compound sentence joined asyndetically are divided by a comma to denote a brief pause, falling tone, and often enumeration of closely connected actions. The copulative conjunction ‘and’ might be inserted between the clauses: “One hand went to the heart, the other outstretched toward the flag”.

In case of a longer pause and weaker connection, to denote enumeration of actions, the independent clauses of a compound sentence joined asyndetically are divided by a semicolon, especially if there is a comma, or commas, within these clauses: “The doors of the small sitting-room, bedroom, kitchen and bathroom were open; the walls were distempered apple-green, the floors covered with dark-green linoleum”.

The second or third independent clause of a compound sentence may have an adversative meaning. Such clause is introduced by a comma; in case of a longer pause, by a semicolon. The adversative conjunction ‘but’ might be inserted between the clauses. For example: “He has looked at me with those eyes of his. They do not love; they threaten; they are savage as a wild tiger’s”.

The second or third independent clause of a compound sentence joined asyndetically may have a causal meaning. Such clause is mostly introduced by a colon or a dash, sometimes by a comma. The causal conjunction ‘for’ might be inserted between the clauses: “No one replied: they had probably not understood”.

There is usually a comma before the dash.

The second or third independent clause of a compound sentence joined asyndetically may have a resultative meaning, and it is introduced by a comma or a semicolon. The resultative conjunction ‘so’ might be inserted between the clauses: “The door was open; sounds came from the kitchen”.

When the second or third independent clause of a compound sentence has an explanatory meaning, it is introduced by a colon or a semicolon: “But think: we could have whole columns of newspapers devoted to us for days”.

Both parts of a disjunctive question, being independent clauses of a compound sentence joined asyndetically, are divided by a comma to denote falling tone, connection of meaning, and a short pause: “You can do that, can’t you?”

Sometimes there is a dash between the clauses to denote a longer pause: “You didn’t throw away any cocoa last time you were here – did you?”

The independent clauses of a compound sentence joined by coordinative conjunctions or adverbs are usually separated by a comma (or commas) to denote a short pause; by a semicolon, in cases where a full-stop might be put if the conjunction were omitted, to denote a longer pause and weaker connection. There is also a semicolon if there are commas within the independent clauses: “The loud pitch of John’s voice got on his nerves, besides he could feel a draught round his legs”. (copulative co-ordination); “On my rising in the morning my preparations were soon made; or, rather, there were practically no preparations to make”. (disjunctive co-ordination); “Babbit did not care to be seen talking with such a fanatic, but in all the Pullmans he could find no other acquaintance”. (adversative co-ordination); “Few people were about, for it was really cold”. “They were tardy in recognizing this, for not one of the Junta liked him”. (causal co-ordination)

In compound sentences before ‘and’, ‘but’, ‘or’ the comma may be omitted to denote close connection: “By nine o’clock of that evening snow lay deep in the streets and the weather had become bitter cold”.

In case of several independent clauses, when the coordinative conjunction is repeated, there is a comma before each conjunction: “The Hansons expected her to go home, and she wanted to get away, and yet she did not want to go home”.

If a compound sentence contains several clauses enumerating closely connected actions, there are usually commas between the clauses, also before the conjunction introducing the final clause. In case of weaker connection, there is a semicolon between the independent clauses. For example: “The squire raised his gun, the rowing ceased, and we leaned over to the other side to keep the balance”.

An interjection is usually followed by an exclamation mark to denote great emotion: pain, anger, astonishment, acute distress, joy or delight; or several of these feelings combined.

In case of several interjections, there is usually an exclamation mark after each. There may be a dash between two interjections. For example: “Hi! stop a minute, will you?”

In case of an exclamatory sentence, there is usually a comma after the interjection, and an exclamation mark (or a dash) at the end of the sentence: “Oh, Doctor Manson! I am relieved to find you in”.

If no great emotion is expressed, nor exclamation, but such feelings as pity, sorrow, annoyance, wish, pleasure, surprise, approval or disapproval (with ‘yes’ or ‘no’), a comma is put after the interjection: “Oh, that’s too bad”.

An interjection may consist of a group of words, so there is an exclamation mark at the end of the group: “Ah dear me!”

Direct address is divided by a comma or double commas from the sentence to denote its independent character and a pause. For example: “But you have just what you like, Minnie and Margery”.

Often some other punctuation mark comes after the direct address: an exclamation mark, a question mark, a dash, or a colon, in exclamatory or interrogative sentences, before introductory words, enumeration or explanation: “Be careful, children!”

Introductory words are mainly set off by a comma or double commas from the rest of the sentence to denote their syntactical independence, their detached character, lowered tone, and a pause.

Introductory words are:

1) modal words: actually, apparently, certainly, evidently, indeed, likely, maybe, naturally, perhaps, please, possibly, probably, really, truly.

2) adverbs having a modal or connective meaning: accordingly, besides, consequently, finally, firstly, fortunately (unfortunately), hence, however, happily (unhappily), luckily (unluckily), moreover, nevertheless, otherwise, rather, secondly, still, therefore, undoubtedly: “I will not be long, perhaps”.

Introductory modal words are often attached to modal verbs (usually with a suppositional meaning): ‘could possibly’, ‘may perhaps’, ‘must certainly’, ‘should probably, ‘might as well’, etc., these groups expressing double modality, that is, a greater degree of uncertainty, doubt, probability, near certainty, etc. In such cases the modal words are never set off by any punctuation mark, being part of a compound modal predicate: “He could possibly manage, before the surgery, these two calls”.

Introductory phrases, like modal words, are usually set off by a comma or double commas. In case of an appositive explanatory meaning, and a longer pause, there may be a dash, double dashes, or brackets.

Introductory phrases are:

1) prepositional: after all, as a matter of fact, at least, by the by, by the way, for example, in any case, in fact, in general, in short, no doubt, of course, on the contrary, on the one hand, on the other hand.

2) infinitival: so to say, to be frank, to begin with, to be on the safe side, to be sure, to cut a long story short, to say nothing of, to tell the truth.

3) participial: briefly speaking, frankly speaking, generally speaking, humanly speaking. For example: “But on the other hand, you must not talk to me as if I were a fool”.

Some of the above-mentioned words and phrases are used as emphatic words and phrases with a convincing meaning. They are stressed in the sentence, pronounced in a high pitch, and are, consequently, not marked off by any punctuation mark: “Of course you have only one son”.

Words of affirmation: ‘yes’, ‘certainly’, and words of negation: ‘no’, ‘certainly’ are usually separated from the sentence by a comma to denote falling tone and a pause: “Then don’t you people matter?” “Yes, they matter”.

When ‘yes’, ‘certainly’ or ‘no’ stand alone, or when a longer pause is needed, they are followed by a semicolon or by a full-stop; by an exclamation mark to denote an exclamatory meaning, or by a question mark to denote interrogation: “Yes?” said Amos sharply. It was a cry as much as a question”.

In fluent speech ‘yes’ or ‘no’ may be closely connected with direct address, so there is no punctuation mark between them: “Oh! no sir! I couldn’t do that,” she replied quickly”.

An object, being closely connected with the predi­cate of the sentence (or with some verbal), is not set off by any punctuation mark: “He was doing a lot of harm”.

In case of enumeration, the objects are separated from each other by commas. The same in case of a repeated object used for emphasis: “Andrew stood up, instantly surrounded by his friends, by Con, Mary, the astounded Mr. Horner, by people he had never seen before”.

When objects are introduced in pairs, joined by the conjunction ‘and’, each pair is set off by a comma or double commas: “He took out a thermos and a small spirit stove, a hair brush, a shaving set and a tin of rations”.

A detached object (mostly prepositional) is set off by a comma (or double commas, if placed in the middle of the sentence) to denote a pause: “To Lewis, Morgan was the nearest human thing to the devil”.

In case of several objects, or object groups, there may also be semicolons between them to denote a longer pause: “He was accustomed to the East, to dark eyes, languishing, to curves enticingly disguised; to sex, mystery, teeth like pearls”.

A complex object is not set off by any punctuation mark: “I heard him talking the other day at a party”.

But if the second component of a complex object contains several parts, they are divided by commas: “He knew himself to be raw, inadequately trained, quite capable of making mistakes”.

An attribute is usually closely connected with the noun, or pronoun, it modifies (both in postposition and preposition), so there is no punctuation mark between them: “The colours of my eyes were a passport”.

Homogeneous attributes, including the last one, are divided by commas. The same in case of repetition for emphasis: “The thin, dark, smallish man, with a face rather like a monkey’s, grinned”.

Non-homogeneous attributes are not separated by any punctuation mark: “She herself was seated in the green plush armchair”.

An attributive group of words (or sentence) pre­ceding the modifying noun is hyphenated: “There is a sort of Oh-what-a-wicked-world-this-is-and-how-I-wish-I-could-do-something- to-make-it-better-and-nobler expres­sion about Montmorency”.

There are no such attributive groups in Russian.

An attribute expressed by a participial phrase is usually not set off from the noun it modifies by any punctuation mark: “The bench was on a little rise sloping down the river”.

Detached attributes mostly follow the words they modify, and are set off by a comma or double commas. Such attributes often go in pairs joined by the conjunction ‘and’: “Arthur Colum, tall, ugly and with a futile violence in every movement, threw the garden towel”.

Detached attributes preceding the nouns they modify may have a causal meaning, and are set off by commas as well. They may be adjectives, participles, and participial phrases: “Lost, bewildered, irritated, Andrew raced through the files – minutes of past meetings”.

A detached attributive participial phrase following the noun it modifies is set off by a comma or double commas: “He could have sighed with relief when Doctor Bramwell, presiding at the top of the table, viewed the cleared plates”.

A complex attribute is not separated from the noun it modifies by any punctuation mark: “The sound of people moving in the corridor brought him wearily to his feet”.

An attached (close or undetached) apposition, being closely connected with the noun it modifies, and preceding it, is not separated by any punctuation mark from the noun: “I want Doctor Griffiths to come immediately”.

A detached (or loose) apposition, following the noun it modifies, is set off by a comma or double commas (sometimes by a dash): “Trusk’s wife, a woman in her late forties, was still unusually handsome”.

An adverbial modifier of time, duration, or frequency placed at the beginning, at the end, or in the middle of a sentence, is normally not separated by any punctuation mark from the principal parts, being closely connected with the verb it modifies: “One tablespoon every three hours”.

When a lengthy adverbial modifier of time opens a sentence, it becomes emphatic, and is set off by a comma to indicate rising tone and a pause: “After a long season in the backwoods, nothing had pleased Roy more than Burton’s arguments”.

In case of several adverbial modifiers of time, commas divide them. Also, in case of repetition: “I never, never, never want to look a lobar pneumonia in the face again”.

But there is a hyphen before a repeated adverbial modifier.

An appositional adverbial modifier of time, having an explanatory or specifying meaning, is set off by a comma (or double commas): “On Saturday, the tenth of October, they moved their furniture from storage”.

A detached adverbial modifier of time usually comes in the middle (or at the end) of a sentence, and splits it, so it is set off by double commas (or a comma) to denote a pause and isolation: “All they need do would be to walk round me, and, after that, take their diploma”.

An adverbial modifier of time, expressed by a participial phrase, having a detached character, is set off by a comma (or double commas), whatever place it may occupy in the sentence: “Arriving here, he made up his mind to go in, and knocking at the door, he was greeted by Mrs. Gerhardt”.

A complex adverbial modifier of time, which is expressed by a Nominative Absolute (Participle) Construction, is always set off by a comma or double commas: “The presentation concluded, the lady of title shook hands with the gentleman fishmonger”.

An adverbial modifier of place or direction, whatever place it may occupy in the sentence, is usually not separated from the principal parts by any punctuation mark, being closely connected with them: “To the right were two small rocky mounds in the heart of the lake”.

An adverbial modifier of place may have a detached character, so a comma or double commas are used to set it off from the rest of the sentence, to denote rising tone and a pause: “Outside, it was a windy April day”.

In Russian this modifier is usually not detached.

An appositional adverbial modifier of place, having an explanatory or specifying meaning, is divided by double commas from the rest of the sentence: “Above, in my mother’s bedroom, the light was also burning”.

Before enumeration of adverbial modifiers of place there is usually a dash; there are commas between the adverbial modifiers: “Since babyhood she had been abroad but three times – to Italy, to Paris, to Pyrenees”.

An adverbial modifier of manner is usually closely linked to the verb or the verbal it modifies, so it is used without any punctuation mark in the sentence: “I will listen to you patiently”.

When an adverbial modifier of manner, expressed by a gerundial phrase, opens a sentence, it is marked off by a comma: “Without saying anything to Christine, he began to look for a convenient consulting-room up West”.

In case of repetition, or in case of several adverbial modifiers of manner, there are commas between them (in spite of a conjunction): “On her part Jennie had sincerely, deeply, truly learned to love this man”.

Before a repeated adverb there is usually a hyphen.

A complex adverbial modifier of manner, like a simple one, is not set off by any punctuation mark: “I couldn’t walk down the street without somebody turning to look at her”.

A detached adverbial modifier of manner is set off by a comma or double commas to denote isolation, lowered tone, and a pause: “But there was an ugly look on his cold, hard face, which spoke, icily, of unforgiving fury”.

Detached adverbial modifiers of manner often come in pairs joined by the conjunction ‘and’, so these pairs are enclosed in double commas: “Don’t be such a donkey, Bertie,” my father muttered to himself, mildly and cheerfully, imitating my mother’s constant reproof”.

A detached adverbial modifier of manner is often expressed by a participial phrase, which is always set off by a comma or double commas: “So Kurelovitch passed his day, moving from the brink of one crisis to another”.

An adverbial modifier of purpose, which is expressed by an infinitive, or introduced by the phrase-preposition ‘in order’ with an infinitive, is not separated from the other parts of the sentence by any punctuation mark: “He was just going for a walk to stretch his legs”.

An adverbial modifier of purpose introduced by the conjunction ‘so as’ with an infinitive is separated from the predicate by a comma to denote a pause: “She would have too much of her time lying down, so as to rest the heart”.

An adverbial modifier of purpose preceding the principal parts of the sentence is usually set off by a comma, especially when it is lengthy: “To reach the lecture hall, he had to walk almost half a mile”.

Between the predicate and the adverbial modifier of purpose there may occur some detached part of the sentence, which is set off by double commas: “We could not go round, knocking up cottagers and house-holders in the middle of the night, to know if they let apartments”.

A detached adverbial modifier of purpose is set off by a comma (or double commas): “Then the Lyttusi broke away silently from the Metaxis, to leave them exposed”.

A complex adverbial modifier of purpose is not separated from the predicate by any punctuation mark: “I put on my earphones for Captain Troin to speak to me”.

An adverbial modifier of result (or consequence) is never set off from the predicate by any punctuation mark, being closely connected with it: “The process was too complex to be carried out here”.

A complex adverbial modifier of result is not set off from the predicate by any punctuation mark: “The town was not large enough for one to stay quite anonymous”.

An adverbial modifier of cause (or reason) expressed by a prepositional phrase is usually introduced without any punctuation mark, being closely connected with the predicate. The prepositions are: ‘with’, ‘for’, ‘through’, ‘because of: “I was beginning to blink with sleepiness”.

Adverbial modifiers of cause introduced by the prepositions ‘because of, ‘for’, ‘what with’, ‘what between’ may have a detached character: “Hauptwanger, because of this very resistance, determined to win her to his mood and to outwit her father at the same time”.

Several adverbial modifiers of cause are separated by commas, and set off by a comma from the principal parts of the sentence: “What between tipping the man who had brought us home, and paying for the broken skulls, and for having been out four hours and a half, it cost us a pretty considerable number of week’s pocket-money, that sail”.

An adverbial modifier of cause expressed by a participial phrase has a detached character, and is set off by a comma or double commas: “He had gone there to keep warm, being unemployed”.

A complex adverbial modifier of cause is set off by a comma or double commas, when expressed by a Nominative Absolute Participle Construction; when expressed by a gerundial (or half-gerundial) complex, it is usually not set off by any punctuation mark: “The night being hot, they carried the suit out”.

An adverbial modifier of condition in post-position introduced by the prepositional group ‘but for’ or ‘in case of is, as a rule, not separated by any punctuation mark from the other parts of the sentence, being connected with them, and needing no pause: “What luck that she had dropped her handkerchief! He would never have known her but for that”.

An adverbial modifier of condition placed at the head of the sentence is usually set off by a comma to denote rising tone and a pause.

An adverbial modifier of condition may have a detached character, so it is set off by a comma to denote falling tone and a pause: “We could have finished the Metaxists by now, but for this large war”.

An adverbial modifier of comparison referring to a verb is usually closely connected with it, and not set off by any punctuation mark. This modifier is usually introduced by the conjunctions ‘as if’, ‘as though’, and the preposition ‘like’: “She [the car] goes like a bird”.

A lot of adverbial modifiers of comparison have become set expressions, and are not set off by any punctuation mark from the verbs or adjectives they are compared with. These modifiers are mostly introduced by the conjunction ‘as’: “Our Else was still as stone”.

An adverbial modifier of comparison following an adjective (or adverb) in the comparative degree is not separated from it by any punctuation mark. This modifier is introduced by the conjunction ‘than’: “I could understand it no more than the gossip of the birds”.

An adverbial modifier of comparison following an adjective (or an adverb) in the positive degree, and introduced by the connective groups ‘as … as’, ‘not so … as’, is not set off by any punctuation mark: “Why, it’s as simple as falling off a log”.

An adverbial modifier of comparison has – often a detached character, so it is set off by a comma or double commas to denote a pause. This modifier is introduced by the conjunctions ‘as if’, ‘as though’ and the preposition ‘like’: “All of a sudden they fled, as though in panic. I find it interesting, like a detective story”.

In case of a longer pause the detached character of an adverbial modifier of comparison may be marked by a dash: “Oh, they come and go – like the snow”.

An adverbial modifier of attending circumstances is normally set off by a comma or double commas, as it has a detached, independent character. It is usually expressed by a Nominative Absolute (Participle) Construction, or by the Absolute Construction introduced by the preposition ‘with’. It is a complex adverbial modifier: “The squire and Dr. Livesey sat, pipe in hand, on either side of a bright fire”.

An adverbial modifier of degree is so closely connected with the adjective, adverb, or verb it modifies that it is never separated from it by any punctuation mark: “The evening train from Cleveland was very late”.

Adverbial modifiers of concession introduced by the prepositions ‘notwithstanding’, ‘despite’ and the prepositional group ‘in spite of’ are set off by a comma from the principal parts of the sentence: “We started, certainly, but in spite of the hot sun and the staring daylight, the pirates no longer ran separate and shouting through the wood”.

Adverbial modifiers of exclusion (or substitution) introduced by the prepositions ‘except’, ‘save’, ‘but’, ‘instead of, are not set off by any punctuation mark, if they are closely connected with the words they restrict or specify: “By ten o’clock all but four of the eighteen hundred citizens of the town were in bed”.

When an adverbial modifier of exclusion has a detached character, it is set off by a comma, or enclosed in double commas: “Really, save for an occasional visit to the office, he seemed to spend a great deal of his time there”.

Punctuation at the end of the sentence

At the end of a declarative sentence — one-member or two-member — a full-stop (a period or a dot) is placed to denote fall of tone, completeness of the thought, and a pause. For example: “The voice dropped to a whisper”. “He swung round and walked down the road”.

At the end of an interrogative sentence, one-member or two-member – a question mark (an interrogation mark) is put to denote interrogation, request, surprise, rise or fall of tone, and a pause. For instance: “What are you talking about?” “A mutual affec­tion?”

At the end of an exclamatory sentence an exclamation mark is put to denote strong emotion (pain, surprise, delight; strict order), falling tone, completeness of the thought, and a pause: “It’s no good!”, “Silence in the court!”

At the end of an imperative sentence a full-stop is used to denote completeness of the thought, falling tone, and a pause, the mood of the verb expressing inducement, request, order: “Go ahead”. “Look”.

At the end of an incomplete sentence a dash is placed (sometimes two or three) to denote hesitation, faltering speech, incompleteness of the thought, and rising tone: “My brother is a soldier – “No fool like an – ”

At the end of a complete sentence – one-member or two-member – dots are often used to denote implication. The dots are placed before a full-stop or any other punctua­tion mark. For example: “Poor father: Not so big after all – and with no one to look after him … . And every day he had to work and was so tired to be a Mr. Macdonald ..”.

 

Punctuation in the simple sentence: the principal parts

There is no punctuation marks between the subject and the predicate, as they are closely connected, and demand no pause: “With his two very awkward par­cels he strode off to his train”.

Neither is there any punctuation mark between the subject and a compound or double predicate: “The sky shone pale”.

We can note when the predicative is expressed by an infinitive phrase, a comma sometimes precedes it to denote a pause and emphasis. For example: “The question was, how to get the pound a week”.

A complex subject, like a simple one, is usually not set off by any punctuation marks: “There is no use you staying out here to work the farm for Sam”.

A complex subject may have a detached character, so a comma is placed before it to denote a falling tone and a pause: “It’s made quite a difference, your being here”.

In an incomplete sentence, when the predicate or the link-verb is omitted, a comma is placed after the sub­ject to denote implication, a rising tone, and a pause: “I am fond of apples; he, of pears”.

If the predicate consists of two or more modal or auxiliary verbs, or several predicatives, a comma for commas divides them: “Tony must not, should not be ruined through her!”

The subject is often separated from the predicate by introductory words, detached parts of the sentence, de­tached or appended clauses, or by a participial construction, so these words, clauses, and constructions are enclosed in commas (brackets or dashes) to denote their parenthetical character and lowered tone. The same in case of an introductory clause. If an interjection comes between the principal parts, there may be an exclamation mark after it. For example: “Elisabeth Jane, though hungry, willingly postponed serv­ing herself”.

In contracted sentences with two subjects to one predicate there is no punctuation mark between the subjects, if they are connected by a conjunction; there is a comma, if the subject is repeated for emphasis (without a conjunction): “He and Jean wrote cheerfully from the East Coast”.

A contracted sentence containing three or more sub­jects has usually a conjunction before the last one. Commas are placed between the subjects. If a longer pause is neces­sary, or if commas come in between to mark off other parts of the sentence, there is a semicolon. Before the conjunction and before the predicate commas are put as well: “The sworn evidence of six Bolivian muleteers, testifying to the shooting and to its being unprovoked; Hubert’s coun­tering, statement, the exhibition of his scar, his record, and the evidence of Hallorsen, formed the material on which the magistrate was invited to come to his decision”.

The same rule applies to Russian, except that there are no commas before the conjunction or the predicate. If the conjunction is repeated, it is preceded by a comma.

When the subjects in a contracted sentence are in­troduced in pairs, these pairs are set off from each other by double commas: “Cries and confusion, the flashes and reports of pistol shots, and one loud groan, rang in my ears”.

Sometimes the second subject of a contracted sen­tence has a detached, explanatory character, so it is set off by a comma or double commas, in spite of the conjunction ‘and’: “Arguments arose, and shouted speculations”.

In contracted sentences with two or more predicates to one subject there is usually no punctuation mark between the predicates if they are connected by the conjunctions ‘and’, ‘or’, ‘either… or’, ‘as well as’, ‘neither … nor’. If they are joined by the conjunctions ‘but’, ‘nor’, there is a comma between the pred­icates. For example: “His daughter sits down and opens a parcel of photographs”.

If the first predicate of a contracted sentence has dependent words of its own after it, there is usually a com­ma before the conjunction ‘and’ to denote isolation: “He raises his shoe to unlace it, and catches sight of the slippers”.

When a contracted sentence has no conjunction, a comma is placed between the predicates to denote a short pause and enumeration of connected actions. The same in case of a repeated predicate (or a part of the predicate) used for emphasis.

The last predicate is, in most cases, preceded by a con­junction, before which a comma may be put or omitted: “He never talked, never inquired, never suggested”.

In case of a longer pause and weaker connection, there is a semicolon between the predicates of long contracted sentences. Also, when there is already a comma in the sen­tence: “She sweeps a litter of disarranged papers out of the way; snatches a sheet of paper from her stationary case, and tries to write. At the third time she gives it up; flings down her pen; grips the table angrily and exclaims”.

The study of modern punctuation is not possible without the knowledge of its origin, evolution, features of the development in languages. The high level of modern philological research, studying the text primarily in terms of communicative language features, does not allow one to limit ourselves to describing the current system of punctuation, or set of rules for the use of punctuation. A simple statement can no longer meet the researcher’s syntax: only careful study of the history and gradual development of English punctuation, revelation of the features of the functioning of the punctuation marks in the course of historical development of language can contribute to a better understanding of the semiotic system. Punctuation is used not only to send a letter to the syntactic relations, but also consciously is used by an author for the transfer of semantic and expressive inflections of speech, providing the expression of a text. Punctuation is an excellent guideline for the reader to help understand the meaning of utterances, and how and what rhythmic-prosodic means of reproduction should be used.

In our research we are going to focus on the use of punctuation marks in English sentences in accordance with their function.

The relevance of this work is due to the fact that the punctuation in the English language is a very problematic part of grammar. In contrast to the Russian language, in English, punctuation is not given proper attention. Many native speakers admit in a letter to such liberties with punctuation marks, that they seem to be unacceptable because of the ignorance of most of the rules of punctuation; there is rapid growth in this kind of error. Nowadays linguists are very concerned about this issue. In this work we examine this from different perspectives.

The purpose of our study is to analyze the role of punctuation in the English language.

The goals of our research are the following:

To find out the causes of problems with punctuation.

To analyze the most difficult area of punctuation.

To reveal the basic rules of punctuation for the most complicated punctuation marks in English.

The object of the work is to study the written speech of native speakers.

Each chapter of our study reveals a certain task. All parts of the research are closely connected and complete each other. The second chapter explains the general rules of punctuation at the end of a sentence, features the use of punctuation marks in the Simple Sentence, in a compound and complex sentences correspondingly, in sentences with subordination and co-ordination.

In the process of our study we used the following scientific methods:

• description
• analysis
• contextual analysis
• generalization
• the method of induction, etc.

For our scientific work we used the works and proceedings of L. N. Sklar, V.L. Kaushanskaya, F. Crews, L.Q. Troyka, H. Marius, H. Korder, G. Levin, A. Lunsford and R. Connors.

 

The History of Punctuation

Punctuation marks are symbols that indicate the structure and organization of written language, as well as intonation and pauses to be observed when reading aloud.

In written English, punctuation is vital to disambiguate the meaning of sentences. For example, “woman, without her man, is nothing” and “woman: without her, man is nothing” have greatly different meanings, as do “eats shoots and leaves” and “eats, shoots and leaves”. “King Charles walked and talked; half an hour after, his head was cut off” is less surprising than “King Charles walked and talked half an hour after his head was cut off”.

The rules of punctuation vary with language, location, register and time and are constantly evolving. Certain aspects of punctuation are stylistic and are thus the author’s (or editor’s) choice. Language forms, such as those used in online chat and text messages, may have wildly different rules.

The first writing systems were mostly logographic and/or syllabic, for example Chinese and Maya script, and they did not necessarily require punctuation, especially spacing. This is because the entire morpheme or word is typically clustered within a single symbol, so spacing does not help as much to distinguish where one word ends and the other starts. Disambiguation and emphasis can easily be communicated without punctuation by employing a separate written form distinct from the spoken form of the language that uses slightly different phraseology. Even today, formal written modern English differs subtly from spoken English because not all emphasis and disambiguation is possible to convey in print, even with punctuation.

Ancient Chinese classical texts were transmitted without punctuation. But by the Song dynasty, addition of punctuation to texts by scholars to aid comprehension became common.

The earliest alphabetic writing had no capitalization, no spaces, no vowels and few punctuation marks. This worked as long as the subject matter was restricted to a limited range of topics (e.g., writing used for recording business transactions). Punctuation is historically an aid to reading aloud.

The oldest known document using punctuation is the Mesha Stele (the 9th century BC). This employs points between the words and horizontal strokes between the sense sections as punctuation.

The Greeks were using punctuation marks consisting of vertically arranged dots – usually two (cf. the modern colon) or three – in around the 5th century BC. Greek playwrights such as Euripides and Aristophanes used symbols to distinguish the ends of phrases in written drama: this essentially helped the play’s cast to know when to pause. In particular, they used three different symbols to divide speeches, known as commas (indicated by a centered dot), colons (indicated by a dot on the base line), and periods or full stops (indicated by a raised dot).

The Romans (circa the 1st century BC) also adopted symbols to indicate pauses.

Punctuation developed dramatically when large numbers of copies of the Christian Bible started to be produced. These were designed to be read aloud and the copyists began to introduce a range of marks to aid the reader, including indentation, various punctuation marks and an early version of initial capitals. Saint Jerome and his colleagues, who produced the Vulgate translation of the Bible into Latin, developed an early system (circa 400 AD); this was considerably improved on by Alcuin. The marks included the virgule (forward slash) and dots in different locations; the dots were centred in the line, raised or in groups.

With the invention of moveable type in Europe began an increase of printed material. “The rise of printing in the 14th and 15th centuries meant that a standard system of punctuation was urgently required.” The introduction of a standard system of punctuation has also been attributed to Aldus Manutius and his grandson. They have been credited with popularizing the practice of ending sentences with the colon or full stop, inventing the semicolon, making occasional use of parentheses and creating the modern comma by lowering the virgule. By 1566, Aldus Manutius the Younger was able to state that the main object of punctuation was the clarification of syntax.

By the 19th century, punctuation in the western world had evolved “to classify the marks hierarchically, in terms of weight”.

The standards and limitations of evolving technologies have exercised further pragmatic influences. For example, minimization of punctuation in typewritten matter became economically desirable in the 1960s and 1970s for the many users of carbon-film ribbons, since a period or comma consumed the same length of expensive non-reusable ribbon as did a capital letter.

Having studied the history of the development of punctuation, we have come to the conclusion, that the way of punctuation was very diverting and complicated. Some scientists suppose that we have no new information for its progress, others disagree with it. But we consider that this branch of grammar can be developed. It can change its structure, may alter its constituent parts. We suppose whether to use or not depends on the style of a language, the situation and interlocutors.

We live in a society that is increasingly focused on visual, not verbal. For many people the main source of information and entertainment is the TV. The average viewer looks at, annually, approximately 30,000 commercials. In each of them before him, trying to convey the same idea whatever your problem (dandruff, dirty sink in the kitchen or excessive obesity), you can buy an item which will solve it (Postman & Powers, 1992). Many of the advertising messages intended to persuade the consumer, presented in the form of visual images, accompanied by dialogues, which are of secondary importance.

What is visual argument?

Visual images play an important role in magazines, Newspapers, video games and message boards. Their influence is particularly difficult to assess because it is often very thin. Take the example of cigarette advertising. Smoking is associated with beauty, glamour, youth, health and popularity (Kidd, 1991). In the visual advertising of cigarettes popular subject is horses and nature. Beautiful and happy people smoke and enjoy life.

Horses represent power and unfettered independence they like people who don’t falter the fact that Smoking leads to many diseases. Through careful market research highlighted the market segments of buyers of cigarettes and are developed is addressed to each segment; for example, young women with education above school who wear jeans and have a working profession. The images used in this advertisement to be very different from images.

Pig-like man surrounded by gold, were supposed to represent the capitalist. This image was widely distributed in the years when the Soviet Communists had to support the idea that “capitalism is evil”. American poster wartime (1942) depicts an evil, scheming the Japanese and the Nazis, which close to capture the United States, although the U.S. has never been in danger. Soviet recruiter invites everyone to join the fight for a great cause. He has the same pose and facial expression as the recruiter with the American poster who told us that “we need uncle Sam”.

Effective visual arguments

Intended for more educated women they are portrayed Smoking while talking or reading.

Visual images used in political campaigns. Consider the description of commercials used in the election campaign for Governor of California. The Republican Wilson, who served as the Governor was portrayed visual arguments in advertising as a leader, which is not to be blamed for the problems in California, Democrat brown has presented himself in human form, able to brilliantly solve all the problems of the state of California.

Television commercial brown of California presents black and white scenes, depicting the decline of urban life, and only he shot brown in color. And Wilson, by contrast, shows a scene of constant violence and covert gang of illegal immigrants, and only the sad face of Wilson expresses concern about these serious problems.

Visual arguments examples

Visual images can have a powerful influence on public opinion and policy. Who can forget the faces of starving children from Somalia, which eloquently argued the urgency of the U.S. troops to save them from harm?

And who can forget the picture, as the body of a dead American soldier dragged through the dusty streets of Somali city the movie that made us hurriedly leave Somalia? What if we showed the other pictures? Suppose that instead of a dead peacekeeper, which dragged through the streets, the media would show us how Somalis receive food and clean water these people managed to survive thanks to the peacekeepers. The scenes that we are shown, have a profound effect on our thinking.

Visual arguments ideas

Presents some of the old propaganda posters that were popular in the early and mid XX century note the image of the fat capitalist. The authors specially made his appearance repulsive his pig-like face and bulbous body, a sea of gold around him indicates that he is interested only in material wealth. Compare this poster with the American poster from the Second world war, which depicts the dangerous and comical face of our enemies. Notice how close they are to US. See also the man who urged the to enlist volunteers in the Soviet army, pointing a finger personally to each. Compare it to posters that were popular in the U.S. around the same time, when we all knew that “you need uncle Sam”.

Did you know that ‘swum’ and ‘swam’ are both correct forms of the verb ‘swim’? This article explains how to use irregular verbs, such as ‘swim’, correctly as their role in a sentence changes.

This article explores the tricky transformations of verbs as they move from plain form, to past tense form, to past participle form. In the final instalment of this series, we will also cover the present participle form of verbs.

Past Participle Form

When the verb appears with (and after) the verb to have or to be, it takes what is called past participle form. It gives the verb a passive voice.

Regular Verbs in Past Participle Form

Regular verbs have the same form in past tense and past participle form. The plain form ‘walk’ becomes ‘walked’ in past tense and past participle form. You notice that in past participle form ‘walked’ needs a preposition — you have to be walked somewhere:

Past tense form is I walked; I have walked; I had walked.

Past participle form is I was walked to (the shops); I will be walked alongside (the river); I am being walked over (the bridge).

Irregular Verbs in Past Participle Form

Some irregular verbs take the same form as their past tense form. The plain form ‘buy’ is an irregular verb that becomes ‘bought’:

Past tense form is I bought; I have bought; I had bought.

Past participle form is I was taught (by a teacher); I will be taught (on Wednesday); I am being taught (about Ancient Greece).

You will notice the need for prepositions again. In the above example, they are ‘by’, ‘on’ and ‘about’ respectively.

Some irregular verbs undergo another transformation from their past tense form. ‘Sing’ is an example of this transformation; watch it go from plain form to past tense to past participle form below:

I sing on TV; I sang on TV; I have sung on TV before; the song was sung on TV.

Here are some more examples:

• I write the words; I wrote the words; I had written the words; the words had all been written before.
• I forget the words; I forgot the words; I had forgotten the words; the words had been forgotten.
• I break the back of it; I broke the back of it; I had broken the back of it; the back of it had been broken.
• I sink the boat; I sank the boat; I have sunk my boat; the boat was sunk.

Now I return to the example we started this article with: what about ‘swim’, ‘swam’ and ‘swum’?

I swim in the pool; I swam in the pool; I have swim in the pool many times; the pool has been swum in.

We hope this article has been helpful in explaining the tricky transformations of irregular verbs.

The number of homophones in the English language is one of the reasons English is such a complex language. Homophones are words that sound the same but have different meanings.

This series aims to explain the difference between a few of the most commonly confused words in academic writing. We’ll even share some of our tricks for remembering the difference between them. By the end of this article, you should know the difference between “practice” and “practice”.

For our definitions, we’ve used the Macquarie Dictionary: the authority on Australian English spelling. Practice/practise is one of the easiest homophone pairs to confuse and we still find ourselves having to double check our own writing to ensure we’ve used the right spelling.

“Practice”

“Practice” is a noun. (You might remember a noun is a person, place or thing.) The Macquarie Dictionary defines “practice” as a “habitual or customary performance” and the “exercise of a profession or occupation”.

In the examples, “She manages a Law practice” and “it’s common practice”, practice is a noun (or thing).

It’s also used as an adjective, such as in “Jane took a practice shot”.

“Practise”

On the other hand, “practice” is a verb or doing word. You could practise guitar; you could be practising examination techniques. The Macquarie Dictionary defines “practice” as “to carry out, perform, or do habitually” and “to perform or do repeatedly in order to acquire a skill or proficiency”.

This “practice” is an action.

Spelling Tricks for “Practice” and “Practise”

You might think the definitions sound similar, but the main thing that differentiates the terms is that “practice” is a verb (an action) and “practice” is a noun (a thing). We remember the difference in their spelling with our little trick: “ice” is a noun, therefore “practice” is the noun.

To check you’ve used the right spelling in the right context, consider substituting “practice” (the verb) with other verbs and “practice” (the noun) with other nouns.

In the sentence, “Toby wants to practise his violin this afternoon”, “practice” could be substituted with other verbs, such as “play” or “perform”, and the sentence makes sense.

In the examples that follow, we know that “practice” should be used because substituting a verb doesn’t work as it did with the previous example:

“He runs a large practice.” (“Practice” is a noun here; substituting a verb, such as “perform”, doesn’t make sense.)

“Please complete this practice examination paper.” (“Practice” is an adjective here and using a verb in its place makes no sense. The verb in this example is “complete”. You could reword this sentence to “Please practise your examination technique with this sample paper” if you wanted to use “practice”.)

We hope this gives you the confidence to use practice and practise correctly.

The concept of aspect is often conflated and mixed up with the concept of tense. Although English largely separates tense and aspect formally, its aspects (neutral, progressive, perfect and progressive perfect) do not correspond very closely to the distinction of perfective vs. imperfective that is common in most other languages. [8]
The division between aspect and tense in English is not really strict. For example, you can either say – “Have you eaten yet?” as well as – “Did you eat yet?” The second form is frequently used in the USA, though it is not grammatically correct, but it still can be applied.

There are two different types of aspect – lexical and grammatical. The aspect expressed formally is called grammatical aspect. Lexical aspect usually is not marked formally. They are given by the situation itself, not by the forms of the verbs. Lexical or situation aspect is called Aktionsart.

One of the factors in situation aspect is telicity. Telicity is an ability of the verbs to possess the natural endpoint. For these verbs there a time when the process or the action is completely finished. For instance, the verb to eat implies that the object of the action will some time be totally eaten. The other factor in situation aspect is duration.

In some languages, aspect and time are easily distinguished. The tenses can be expressed with the help of direct modifications of verbs. The verbs may be further modified by the progressive aspect, the perfect aspect, or both. Each tense is named according to its combination of aspects and time.

The progressive aspect is expressed with the help of the auxiliary verb to be and the Participle I of the main verb. The perfect aspect is recognizable by the auxiliary to have and the Participle II of the main verb.

Here is the list of aspects which correspond with the tenses.

For the present tense:

Present Simple (not progressive, not perfect): “I do”

Present Progressive (progressive, not perfect): “I am doing”

Present Perfect (not progressive, perfect): “I have done”

Present Perfect Progressive (progressive, perfect): “I have been doing”

For the past tense:

Past Simple (not progressive, not perfect): “I did”

Past Progressive (progressive, not perfect): “I was doing”

Past Perfect (not progressive, perfect): “I had done”

Past Perfect Progressive (progressive, perfect): “I had been doing”

For the future tense:

Future Simple (not progressive, not perfect): “I shall do”

Future Progressive (progressive, not perfect): “I shall be doing”

Future Perfect (not progressive, perfect): “I shall have done”

Future Perfect Progressive (progressive, perfect): “I shall have been doing”

Another aspect that exists in English, but is no longer productive, is the frequentative, or multiple. It expresses continuously repeated action; it is ignored from most discussions of English linguistics, as it suggests itself only by Scandinavian suffixes no longer heard independently from the words to which they are affixed (e.g., “chatter” for “chat”, “crackle” for “crack”, etc.).