The Semicolon

 In Praise of the Semicolon

A publisher's 'reader' once remarked that I was somewhat over-using the semicolon.

I was, of course, huffed and defensive. I thought I could justify every single semicolon in the manuscript I had submitted.  Then I reflected that the publisher's 'reader' only meant that I used the semicolon somewhat more that other writers of English prose, and I felt better about myself. Perhaps there was something about the semicolon that I had realised which others had missed. 

I humbly follow two guides in matters of English style: H.W. Fowler's "Dictionary of Modern English Usage", and Strunk & White's "The Elements of Style" (3rd edition). (The latter is 100% American, but I am not so prejudiced as to let that condemn the book; I have not found a single fault in their understanding of English grammar and style, and I find the book excellently lucid, whereas Fowler's every sentence seems designed to challenge the reader's I.Q..) 

Strunk says –

If two or more clauses grammatically complete and not joined by a conjunction are to form a singles compound sentence, the proper mark of punctuation is a semicolon. (My emphasis.)
'Mary Shelley's works are entertaining; they are full of engaging ideas.'
'It is nearly 5:30; we cannot reach town before dark.'
If a conjunction is inserted, the proper mark is a comma.
'Mary Shelley's works are entertaining, for they are full of engaging ideas.'

Fowler says–

"The use of semicolons to separate parallel expressions that would normally be separated by commas is not in itself illegitimate; but it must not be done when the expressions so separated form a group that is to be separated by nothing more than that, or even not separated at all from another part of the sentence; to do so is to make the less include the greater, which is absurd."
'If, as Mr Gibson Bowles contends, the Law of Nations is all plain sailing; if it is a thing of certainties and plain definitions, it would be strange that a conference of jurists should have . . . .' (Fowler prefers '. .sailing, if . . ')

I think both authors would agree that the semicolon can (usually) be replaced by a full-stop, though Fowler is scathing of that style as tiring to the reader, and corrupting to the writer. So, you either string together several short sentences, or you use semicolons. A string of comas can get very confusing, and leaving them out is no improvement. 

My default style (my unconsciously preferred style) seems to be based on the way I talk to myself while writing. But, of course, a speaker can add emphasis by varying volume and speed. I make every effort to guide the reader-at-first-sight into a correct understanding of the logic. 

Herbert Read, in 'Part II' of his 1928 book "English Prose Style" , names eight styles with a chapter each: Exposition, Narrative, Fantasy, Imagery-and-Invention, Intelligence, Personality, Eloquence, and Tradition. An expository style attempts utter clarity. Narrative style tries to tell a story, injecting into the text emotions such as doubt, anticipation, relief; inappropriate for an instruction manual. Under Fantasy,  Sir Herbert lumps Alice in Wonderland and James Joyce's Ulysses, which we see are both weak in logic. Under Imagery & Invention he places prose works that verge on the poetic. 

As for Intelligence, Personality, Eloquence and Tradition, I think Sir Herbert is trying to devise sieves that will catch types of prose style that escape the first four categories. 'Intelligence' seems designed to catch learned or philosophical writings; perhaps a sub-class of 'Exposition'. 'Personality' catches Tristram Shandy, and perhaps any author that can be identified by his idiosyncrasies. 'Eloquence' is another sub-class of 'exposition' where the logic of succeeds markedly. The title 'Tradition' offers to catch (and date) any remaining examples of style that escape all the previous heading as having no noticeable feature other than resembling something familiar.

I conclude that I am usually aiming at an expository style, verging on the intelligent, allowing a little emotion and imagination when my objective is to amuse, and traces of poetry when aiming to move my readers, while avoiding any marked floweriness. I certainly aim to follow the rules and avoid the errors flagged by Strunk and Fowler.