Meaningful Connections: The Semicolon

by J. Lea López

I think semicolons get a bad rap. I've been asked on more than one occasion about the proper use of semicolons. I've also heard other people respond to such questions with snarky replies like, "I just don't use them at all. Solves that problem!" If you're someone who struggles with semicolons, hopefully today I can clear up some of your confusion. The following example sentences are taken from my current work in progress.

Semicolons and Lists

I'll get this one out of the way because it's the usage I am least often asked about, and it's probably not one that will come up as often in fiction as the main usage we'll be discussing. When you're listing something in a sentence and the individual list items contain commas, you can use semicolons to separate the items in the list so that you don't end up with a sentence that looks like William Shatner dropped all his extra commas in it. For example, if I'm naming places I've lived, I might tell someone, "I've lived in Towson, York, Pittsburgh, and Manchester." No need for a semicolon anywhere in there. But if I want to include the states along with the cities, that automatically adds four commas between each city and state. In that case, I'll separate each list item with a semicolon, and it'll look like this:

I've lived in Towson, Maryland; York, Pennsylvania; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; and Manchester, New Hampshire.

If I just list them as Towson, Maryland, York, Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh... etc. it becomes unclear whether I'm saying that I've lived in Towson, and I've lived in Maryland, and I've lived in York, and I've lived in Pennsylvania, and so on.

Independent Clauses, Comma Splices, and Conjunctions

The most basic explanation you've probably heard is that you use a semicolon to join two independent clauses. An independent clause can stand on its own as a complete sentence.

Independent clause: Tears well up behind my eyelids.
Independent clause: I squeeze them tighter so I won't cry.
Correct semicolon use: Tears well up behind my eyelids; I squeeze them tighter so I won't cry.

It sounds easy enough, but I know that many people still falter when it comes to using semicolons. Have you had a critique partner or editor call you out on comma splices? Those occur when you use a comma alone to join two independent clauses, and they are incorrect. You don't want to end up with comma splices any more than you want to incorrectly use a semicolon.

Comma splice error: Tears well up behind my eyelids, I squeeze them tighter so I won't cry.

Another way to join two independent clauses is with a comma and a conjunction. However, you don't use conjunctions when you join clauses with a semicolon. (You can use a semicolon and conjunction with lists as shown above.)

Comma and conjunction (correct): Tears well up behind my eyelids, and I squeeze them tighter so I won't cry.
Semicolon and conjunction (incorrect): Tears well up behind my eyelids; and I squeeze them tighter so I won't cry.

A semicolon can replace a period between sentences, and it can also replace the comma and conjunction between independent clauses. It can replace those, but should it? This is where I think a lot of people falter in their use of semicolons.

Meaningful Connections

A semicolon isn't something you just go tossing into your manuscript between sentences for the sake of variation. There's more to it than that. A semicolon joins two clauses that are closely related; your intended meaning is a vital part of this punctuation choice. This is where the thrill and joy of writing, of crafting worlds and lives and stories practically from thin air, should push aside any disdain you may have for the banality of grammar rules. Personally, I think grammar is pretty rad, but I know most of the people asking me about how to use semicolons don't necessarily share my enthusiasm. It's not a matter of The "rules" say I "can't" use a comma here, because "rules" or whatever. (And I totally hear you using those scare quotes in your mind when you complain about grammar like it's some old curmudgeon yelling at you to get off his lawn. Don't deny it.) A semicolon is an option that allows you, the author, to better convey the meaning of and relationship between the words you've so carefully chosen. The relationship between clauses feels very different when separated with different punctuation. Let's take a look at another example.

Separate sentences: I can still smell him in our bed. I didn’t mind it for the first few days, but tonight it’s unbearable.

Comma and conjunction: I can still smell him in our bed, and I didn’t mind it for the first few days, but tonight it’s unbearable.


Semicolon: I can still smell him in our bed; I didn’t mind it for the first few days, but tonight it’s unbearable.

Using two separate sentences in this example would be perfectly acceptable. Each thought stands on  its own grammatically, and there's nothing wrong there. Joining them with a comma and conjunction results in a long, awkward sentence. It doesn't really work because it tries to force a closer relationship between the two sentences than there actually is. There isn't a strong enough correlation to warrant joining the sentences that way. (Compare that to the example in the previous section, where there was a strong enough relationship that using a comma and conjunction would've been a decent choice.)

But the semicolon! Be still, my grammar-loving heart! Because the two sentences are closely linked, a semicolon is a great way to express that connection. As the author, it's your prerogative to choose the punctuation based on what you want your words to convey. For me, in this instance, using a period and creating two separate sentences felt a bit too detached. This comes from a female narrator whose fiance has very recently died. There is emotion and meaning in that small space between sentences, and using a semicolon to bring them together subtly highlights that relationship.

Have I helped you clear up any questions you had about semicolon usage? If not, feel free to ask a question in the comments.

J. Lea López is an author who strives to make you laugh at, fall in love with, cry over, and lust after the characters she writes. She welcomes online stalkers as long as they're witty and/or adulatory. Kidding. Maybe. Check for yourself: Twitter, Facebook, Blog. She will also take her red pen to your words if you ask nicely enough.

In Defense of Present Tense

by R.C. Lewis

I recently heard a person with a considerable amount of authority state that writing a story in first person is a terrible idea, shouldn't be done, and that writing it in present tense is even worse. It's his opinion, and he's entitled to it, but I disagree. I'm tackling the first-person aspect over on my blog (web host is having issues, so I've cross-posted to my old blog), so I want to focus here on the idea of present tense. (And I'm mostly going to assume we're discussing present tense within first-person POV, because third-person present is a whole different puzzle.)

One argument against present tense is that it's unnatural to us in the English language. We don't tend to use it much in our speech.

(Except some people do relate anecdotes that way—it's their style—and what are anecdotes except telling a story? But anyway...)

I have a couple of issues with that argument. First, spoken language and written language are not the same thing. Spoken is a primary form while written is a secondary form. The way we speak has never been fully reflected in the way we write, and vice versa. Even written dialogue should only feel like a realistic depiction of speech, not actually be an accurate, true-to-life representation. So why would my use or non-use of spoken present tense have any bearing on whether writing a story in it is appropriate?

Second, of course we don't use (spoken) present tense the way we do in written stories, because we don't narrate life as it's happening. (At least, most of us don't. And I might be a little concerned about anyone who does.)

"Then why is your protagonist narrating their life as it happens?" you may ask. "Isn't that just as ridiculous?"

In my opinion, no. It isn't. Because when I read, I don't process it as the character telling me the story. To me, the story simply happens, and the narration is a construct to deliver that thing called "story" to my brain. I don't generally feel like the character/narrator is talking at me—they're just living the story.

Of course, I understand this is a particular philosophy and approach to reading—one I know plenty of people don't share in, and one which I discuss a bit more in the first-person post.

All that said, I'll make some concessions. The first time I read a novel written in present tense, it was awkward. I wasn't used to it, and almost every sentence felt strange. But not being used to something doesn't automatically make it wrong. Little kids just learning to read aren't used to sentences that don't follow simple subject-verb-object structure. The first time they encounter a sentence like the one I'm writing right now, they might feel very awkward indeed. You get used to it. In fact, the only time I seem to notice present tense anymore is when it's done badly. Which brings me to ...

... Sometimes it's done badly.

Present tense is tricky. You can't note or reflect on anything until it comes into the sphere of your POV character's perceptions. I once changed some material from past to present and discovered I had to shuffle sentences around in a paragraph to make things work. And sometimes a story (or even a voice or style) doesn't really seem to support the choice for present tense.

So why use it? What do we gain?

Some say immediacy. That can be true, but I've read things in past tense that seemed to have just as much immediacy. The difference with past tense is that it's a bit easier to ease off the immediacy when it's not needed. If present tense truly creates immediacy by its very nature, then that immediacy will be much more constant throughout the story. And I think that's probably what I mean by stories that do or don't support use of present tense—some stories can handle that immediacy better than others.

Don't use present tense just because The Hunger Games did.

There's also a distinction between past and present that hits me more subconsciously as a reader. If I read a story in past tense, I don't actively think about it, but there may be a feeling deep down that the character knows what's going to happen in the next paragraph, next chapter. Not always—skillful writers still manage to keep the suspense level high when they want to—but sometimes. (Then there are the blatant cases, ending a chapter with "That was the last time I saw my father alive.")

With present tense, we make all discoveries at the same time as the character. Their problems are exactly as big as they seem, with no hindsight to put them in perspective. That can be a good thing.

Every tool has a use. We just have to make sure we use them all mindfully and correctly.

Do you have opinions on present tense—for OR against? Love it? Hate it? Why? Please share (respectfully!) in the comments.

R.C. Lewis teaches math to teenagers—sometimes in sign language, sometimes not—so whether she's a science geek or a bookworm depends on when you look. That may explain why her characters don't like to be pigeonholed. Her debut novel Stitching Snow (which is in first person, but past tense) is coming from Disney-Hyperion in 2014. You can find R.C. on Twitter (@RC_Lewis) and at her website.