?Is this a better way to use punctuation.

[konerko14]

When I'm reading, I always notice that whenever theres a question mark or exclamation point involved in a sentence, I dont see it until after I have read the sentence. Then when I see the punctuation mark I realize that I didnt capture the meaning of that sentence correctly. So instead of having these punctuation marks at the end of a sentence, why not put them at the beginning?

?Theres only one left, and its the worst of the bunch.

! I like using my hands.

[IAmMetaphysical]

?Then why are you putting periods at the end

[konerko14]

?Then why are you putting periods at the end

To mark the end of a sentence.

[Eternal]

...I guess you must be a fan of Spanish... And I like their method even better - placing the punctuation mark in front and in the back.

[DavidOdden]

To mark the end of a sentence.

.That isn't a good enough reason ?Why not mark beginnings of sentences .All you need to know when you're reading is whether you're in sentence 1 of sentence 2 ?Can you give an example of a sentence where you could not tell that it was a question until you got to the very end ?Do I usually know before I get to the end whether I'm reading a question .I usually know before I get to the end whether I'm reading a question

[konerko14]

.That isn't a good enough reason ?Why not mark beginnings of sentences .All you need to know when you're reading is whether you're in sentence 1 of sentence 2 ?Can you give an example of a sentence where you could not tell that it was a question until you got to the very end ?Do I usually know before I get to the end whether I'm reading a question .I usually know before I get to the end whether I'm reading a question

?You enjoy using my new style of punctuation already, dont you.

?Whats the point of marking the beginning of a sentence with a period. The main purpose of my idea is to inform the reader at the appropriate time when a question is asked or when an exclamation point is used. There are such sentences where it isnt always clear as to whether its a question or statement, such as:

1. Those apples are green and blue, but with no artificial chemicals?

-?at what point would a typical reader know its a question.

2. I have a keyboard, mouse, and Mr. Potato Head?

-?looked like a statement at first, didnt it.

?What about when an exclamation point is used. Its nearly impossible to pick it up on certain sentences before you see it at the end of the sentence. Such as:

1. I like to use my hands!

-I think most readers would pick up on the emotion of that sentence a bit too late.

2. Why are there no napkins placed around the table?!

-?What about that one.

[DavidOdden]

.So there is really only a limited set of cases where you want the preposed question mark ,namely pure intonation questions ,like your first two examples .I'm curious how often you actually encounter such examples in writing .Maybe :I think sentences like "Those apples are green and blue, but with no artificial chemicals?" suck in writing( and when you read them aloud ,you know very early from the intonation ) .With "Why are there no napkins placed around the table?!" ,I derive the fact of it being a question from the "why"

.The location of the punctuation is purely conventional :there's no rationalist explanation for the fact that the punctuation goes at the end except historical precedent .Consistency then says either" Everything at the end "or" Everything at the beginning " .The only examples where a question mark really serves the purpose of uniquely signalling a question is when it's a pure intonation question ,but such questions are lousy writing style in English .Exclamation marks are different ,so you can't use syntactic and lexical cues to determine that a particular sentence is to be read exclamatorily .So that would argue that exclamation marks should ,for functional reasons ,go at the beginning .But the principle of consistency would say that everything else should go in that same position

[softwareNerd]

?Should we make this a new standard for the forum

[Groovenstein]

I think sentences are generally short enough that you see the punctuation pretty quickly. Unless maybe you're talking about Hemingway.

[DavidOdden]

?Should we make this a new standard for the forum

.ecalp lanoitidart eht ni ti gnipeek fo tros elihw tsrif noitautcnup eht teg ot yaw rehtona s’ereht kniht I

[KendallJ]

.So there is really only a limited set of cases where you want the preposed question mark ,namely pure intonation questions ,like your first two examples .I'm curious how often you actually encounter such examples in writing .Maybe :I think sentences like "Those apples are green and blue, but with no artificial chemicals?" suck in writing( and when you read them aloud ,you know very early from the intonation ) .With "Why are there no napkins placed around the table?!" ,I derive the fact of it being a question from the "why"

If I understand this correctly you are saying that syntax gives clues to the type of phrase before you reach the sentence? (gotcha!) If it does not give clues, then is becomes definitionally, "bad english".

I think the 2nd issue is that spoken english intonation denotes a sentence by modifying the end of the phrase. Therefore even if you start reading a sentence as a statement, such as your green apples, you can still modify the end of the phrase when you realize it is a question instead. It just feels a littel awkward.

My take away is that in any language, intonation, punctuation, and the act of reading are integrated in such a way as to not make it a big deal. It's so automated now that the new punctation feels more awkward than the standard way.

[DavidOdden]

If it does not give clues, then is becomes definitionally, "bad english".

Nah, I'm saying that it's bad written form to use intonation-only questions (ones where the syntax doesn't give you the clue). It's not a definitional thing, I'm making an semi-empirical claim. I suppose the question is, who gets to be the judge of "good English"? Of course in fiction writing, conversations are reported, so we learn to live with such examples.

I think the 2nd issue is that spoken english intonation denotes a sentence by modifying the end of the phrase.

It's very prominent at the end, but in speech questions and statements can be distinguished very early on (the experiment involves taking a corpus of statements and questions and chopping off the end at various points, and playing them to listeners to see whether they can tell if it's a statement or question.)

My take away is that in any language, intonation, punctuation, and the act of reading are integrated in such a way as to not make it a big deal. It's so automated now that the new punctation feels more awkward than the standard way.

.noitseuq a gnidaer m'I rehtehw fo eton latnem kciuq a ekam dna si ecnetnes eht fo dne eht erehw tuo erugif yllausu nac I ,ecyoJ semaJ yb secnetnes niatrec rof tpecxe dna ,elur wen eht wollof ot drah yllaer s'ti esuaceb ,elur noitautcnup wen eht esu ot gniog yllautca m'I kniht t'nod I

But it was an interesting idea.

[KendallJ]

Nah, I'm saying that it's bad written form to use intonation-only questions (ones where the syntax doesn't give you the clue). It's not a definitional thing, I'm making an semi-empirical claim. I suppose the question is, who gets to be the judge of "good English"? Of course in fiction writing, conversations are reported, so we learn to live with such examples.

I think we're saying the same thing. I think "bad english" should get at least part of its definition based on wether it works well or not. The point is syntax tells you early that is a question so you don't need the punctuation to do it.

Is the boat green?

vs.

The boat is green?

Your point is that the syntax of the first is clearly a question right form the get-go. And the 2nd is not, and so being confusin, empirically, it becomes "bad english".

It's very prominent at the end, but in speech questions and statements can be distinguished very early on (the experiment involves taking a corpus of statements and questions and chopping off the end at various points, and playing them to listeners to see whether they can tell if it's a statement or question.).

Nice... Is this true of syntax neutrals statements as well? Such, as the 2nd above?

[miseleigh]

Adding a question mark to a statement does not automatically make it a question? Do you think that grammar has more to do with syntax or punctuation.

If you read the same way I do, you expected that first one to be a statement, and the second a question, until you saw the punctuation mark. Would it really have helped to put the punctuation at the beginning of the sentence? They'd still both be grammatically wrong.

Questions, in my experience, always start with a question rather than a statement; the question mark is (almost) never my only cue that it's going to be a question. Even in the rare instance where a statement is intoned as a question, I tend to see the question mark peripherally a few words before I actually get to it. Maybe that's just me.

My internet is working. My internet is working? ?My internet is working? Is my internet working. Is my internet working? Only two of those work for me...

The grammar of a question

Grammatically, we show that we are forming a question by using inversion. Inversion is when we change the word order of a sentence to show that it is not a normal statement.

The most basic inversion is of subject with auxiliary. If you read the grammar section of lesson two of this course (present simple) you will know that all verbs have an auxiliary, even if the auxiliary 'do' is sometimes left out.

For example:

They (do) like football.

To make a question, you invert the auxiliary (do) with the subject (they) and get this:

Do they like football?

If the sentence contains a modal, we invert that.

For example:

You would like to play football.

Becomes 'Would you like to play football?

If the sentence has a modal and an auxiliary, we invert the modal only

For example:

Fred might have done that.

('Fred' is the subject, 'might' is the modal 'have' is the auxiliary 'done' is the main part of the verb, 'that 'is the object)

We make the question by inverting the modal to get:

Might Fred have done that?

We use the verb 'to be' as we would an auxiliary.

For example:

That is your house.

becomes Is that your house?

How often do you encounter statement-questions (for lack of a better name) in formal writing? People often speak that way, but in that case they'll handle the intonation for you... I try to avoid them when writing, mostly because I prefer to be easily understood.

There are more grammar specifics about questions here.

One more thought: what do you do if the first part of the sentence is not part of the question?

Would you insert question marks in the middle of the sentence?

.dik a saw I ecnis siht enod t'nevah I .hguoht ,nuf si sihT. ?laog s'okrenok hsilpmocca ot gninningeb eht ta kram noitseuq eht tup ot deen llits uoy kniht uoy t'noD? .aedi sdrawkcab gnitirw elohw siht tuoba wonk t'nod I.

[punk]

When I'm reading, I always notice that whenever theres a question mark or exclamation point involved in a sentence, I dont see it until after I have read the sentence. Then when I see the punctuation mark I realize that I didnt capture the meaning of that sentence correctly. So instead of having these punctuation marks at the end of a sentence, why not put them at the beginning?

?Theres only one left, and its the worst of the bunch.

! I like using my hands.

I think English should go with the Spanish system of starting the sentence with upside down question marks and exclamation points.

[konerko14]

Since so many people on here claim that they know at the beginning of the sentence if its a question or statement or whatever, ?why do you use question marks and exclamations at all. If you know before you get to that point anyways, ?why put it in anywhere in the sentence.

[DavidOdden]

tRADITION DUED we like THESe crAzY TRAditio!nz that wewerebroughtupon i dont kere if yuo omit AlL ponchewashin toadally

[Qwertz]

Owch. Burn.

Granting that, in certain circumstances, placing the interrogative mark at the end of the sentence will lead to some minor confusion on the part of the reader, I don't think moving it to the front will help. For one thing, the glyph is drawn to face the text, so it would have to be redrawn to reflect the transposition (either using ¿ or a left-right mirror image, which doesn't exist in unicode; use your imagination). Furthermore, I think the traditional rule follows how English questions are differentiated in speech, as in by raising the tone at the end of the question (for details, see the film Artificial Intelligence). The same logic would recommend altering this speech pattern as well, for clarity's sake, so the listener knows what's coming.

All in all, the effort involved in making such a switch far, far outweighs the miniscule detriments of the current rule. And as far as I'm concerned, a confused reader confronted with a complicated but otherwise correctly formed sentence should read the sentence a second time. If he's still confused, he should consult a dictionary, or a treatise on English grammar and usage.

-Q

[DavidOdden]

What I really wish is that when people made statements, they wouldn't use question intonation.

For one thing, the glyph is drawn to face the text, so it would have to be redrawn to reflect the transposition (either using ¿ or a left-right mirror image, which doesn't exist in unicode; use your imagination).

Does this > ʕ < come out looking right?

[Qwertz]

That is indeed an irritating symptom of the speech of the younger generation. Like? That nasty habit of putting a question mark? At the end of every sentence? And sometimes in the middle? I sit in class with these people every day.

And yes, like that, but with a dot. How long did you hunt through the character tables looking for that?

[konerko14]

tRADITION DUED we like THESe crAzY TRAditio!nz that wewerebroughtupon i dont kere if yuo omit AlL ponchewashin toadally

That makes your statement harder to understand though. Question marks earlier in the sentence is to make it easier.

All in all, the effort involved in making such a switch far, far outweighs the miniscule detriments of the current rule. And as far as I'm concerned, a confused reader confronted with a complicated but otherwise correctly formed sentence should read the sentence a second time. If he's still confused, he should consult a dictionary, or a treatise on English grammar and usage.

-Q

Yeah, I understand. I still think when the "rules" were first created though, they should have made the punctuation how I say.

What I really wish is that when people made statements, they wouldn't use question intonation.

Sorry. I didnt realize I was doing something wrong. I actually still dont see it- my previous post makes sense to me(grammatically). I would appreciate if someone could explain how it should have been said. Here it is:

"Since so many people on here claim that they know at the beginning of the sentence if its a question or statement or whatever, ?why do you use question marks and exclamations at all. If you know before you get to that point anyways, ?why put it in anywhere in the sentence."

Edited December 4, 2006 by konerko14

[simonsays]

Since so many people on here claim that they know at the beginning of the sentence if its a question or statement or whatever, ?why do you use question marks and exclamations at all. If you know before you get to that point anyways, ?why put it in anywhere in the sentence.

According to a book I read by Tony Buzan (I can't remember which book it was as he has a lot of them), when a person reads a sentence the eye does not move from left to right. Instead, it flits around the sentence, onto the end of the sentence, then to the line beneath, then above, etc, rarely in a straight line.

This apparently happens mostly subconsciously, and if true explains why people can tell near the beginning of a sentence that its a question.

[Qwertz]

I don't think David was remarking on anything you said, but rather on the general tendency of some speakers, particularly American youths, to use question intonation (the rising of the tone at the end of the statement) when they don't mean to ask a question. Other than the usage of 'since' and 'whatever' (and the punctuation, but that's what we're discussing, so it's okay), I see nothing grammatically naughty about your sentences.

-Q

[Qwertz]

PS: How 'bout that interrobang‽ Excessive, I think.

[Inspector]

I find the use of punctuation at the beginning of sentences in English to be irritating. My subconscious is programmed to accept the standard method. Instead of just reading your posts, I have to stop at every sentence and think, "okay, what the hell?"

So, um, stop it.