The melancholy decline of the semicolon
unherd.com
unherd.com
The evolution of languages, words, alphabets, and special characters helped shape the way we think about things, and since the 20th century, that hasn't changed that much.
These days, I use it to type stuff like (ﾟヮﾟ ) ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ and a black box symbol that HN won't let me type, but is eye catching for when you're scanning logs. Symbols like checkmark, ×, the thinking emoji, and the hourglass are useful when taking notes.
Lots can be found in the Windows 10 emoji finder (Win + Period), but AHK is more customizable. Also WinPeriod is juuuuust that much more friction and I find AHK fits into my flow better. This flow shapes the way I think.
⎄oo → °
⎄<- → ←
⎄(12) → ⑫
⎄25 → ⅖
Of course, you can change the compose key rules.
Instead of having separate AHK scripts, I have "one script to rule them all". When Windows launches, "my precious" loads all my scripts. Many of them I use in MS Word.
In all seriousness, I think standardizing letters and symbols has done a lot to promote basic literacy. And there are plenty of language innovations like slang, emojis, kaomoji, new words like email, the prevalence of alternate text treatments like bolds, italics, underlines, strikethroughs, etc etc.
Like in India we have a very common expression "I'm writing to intimate you.." which my American boss got really angry to read. For us it just means i'm writing to tell you, but many people esp from older gen use this a lot here to sound cool.
> No wonder text is so emotionless and people misread and get angry
Native speakers definitely struggle with this as well. There is a diffucult balance between being too succinct (curt, impolite) and excessively wordy (feels forced or contrived, muddles the message).
Personally, when I communicate st work, I tend to phrase things as questions- either as a standalone comment or as a preamble to my argument. That way, I am (hopefully) clear that I am trying to be inclusive, rather than divisive, and I think it makes people less likely to project emotion from their own assumptions into what I write.
This is a documented Indian English usage: "https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/intimate" (see the verb section).
Indian English has retained some strong markers from the British colonial period. There's no clear guide for how prestige and emulation will affect usage, but "to intimate" in either verbal form is a literary archaism in North American English.
While the second (intransitive) version from that wiktionary page is Indian, the first use is most certainly not an archaism in North American English. In fact, it was listed as a normal definition in the first dictionary that Google returned with a definition.[0] The pronunciation does shift with which definition we intend, which nicely keeps "intimate details" from sounding too much like "mating". :-)
I understand your point and applaud your literacy. However, it's not a verb in common usage, and if our friend is using the verb to intimate in North American business English in any sense, I would advise him that the term is an archaism.
We can discuss at further leisure whether any given literary usage has at least one foot in the crypt of liberal education. ^_^
OED shows that the Indian English usage that we are discussing definitely comes from prior British English acceptations.
> which nicely keeps "intimate details" from sounding too much like "mating". :-)
OED also offers "one who intimates" to be an "intimater". (o;
It's a bit literary, yes, and would be out of place if used verbally or in a business communication, but it is not archaic.
Or Swedish :- ) Semicolon works in the same way, in Swedish. I think I didn't know much about the semicolon, though, until I had read a few books (in Swedish) about writing books (in Swedish).
Maybe most Latin languages? Oh not Greek. Hmm interesting how it works in Arabic, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semicolon
It’s not that they’re a danger or anything. It’s that you write in a certain way to convey a certain tone and short, period punctuated, sentences is just how you convey anger. You can try to fight the river on this one but it’ll be tough.
"It looks like you forgot to do X. That's needed to do Y."
I would actually prefer the second one here. It's neutral and to the point.
I guess the problem with the first one is that the reader might interpret the semicolon exactly in the way that you intended it, as an attempt on your behalf to "control the tone". Depending on the personal disposition of the receiver he or she may or may not like it.
Or chat channels. Unless you really know the person well.
For generations that grew up as text as the primary form of communication we had to figure out how to convey tone and writing style and emojis is what we had. Tone and the expression of tone are disconnected even when speaking in person and have grammar like rules.
I will forever refuse this idea. I use a period to end my sentences because that’s how a sentence ends, not to communicate a tone.
I use semi-colons as a sort of conjunction, not unlike the example you gave, in part to give me a way to lengthen sentences that would otherwise seem much too short.
https://www.npr.org/2020/09/05/909969004/before-texting-your...
The context for your advice is that writing long sentences is/was popular poor style. Especially for young and new readers of English.
Now, I can write that way in English -up to some limit to do with those ambiguities-, but when I do, I find it irritates certain readers.
A rewrite of the preceding sentence:
I can write that way in English, up to some
limit to do with those ambiguities. When I
do, I find it irritates certain readers.
Usually I write sentences as they pop into my mind, then I edit them down into more numerous, shorter sentences.
This is interesting to me, because I do the exact opposite. I write my clauses more or less independently, then try to string the related clauses together with linking words punctuation in a way that flows naturally.
I can't imagine composing long, complex sentences on the fly, and the only people I've seen that manage to do this in conversation are unusually erudite.
That sentence should have used a colon, not a semi-colon, IIANM.
The digital world churns; Twitter is not an arena known for reflection. Semicolons, then, are snottily elitist and shadily indirect.
The elitist snottiness is in assuming people live their lives on Twitter and the like. They don't.
the semicolon has been usurped by ... the Dash
Well, _maybe_ some authors use more dashes than they used to (I actually doubt that, but never mind) - but a dash is not a substitute for semicolon. Their semantics are too different for that to be possible, IMHO. Take the first sentence in this paragraph: You can't replace the dash there with a semicolon, as that would mean splitting the "maybe" and "but" clauses into separate, not-directly-related clauses; you just can't do that.
indicating a pause
Not just a pause; a semicolon is also a semantic distancing. Two phrases separated by a comma are really an inseparable part of the same idea idea; if you separate them by a semicolon, they can each stand in their own right.
I think you are mistaken. The two clauses are full sentences. They could have been separated by a full-stop/period, but the semi-colon makes them part of the same "thought".
A semicolon is a period and a comma combined. This makes me think that if the first part logically should end with a question mark or exclamation mark, we should have corresponding symbols for that.
The semicolon is part of the division of the expression of thought in supersets and subsets of structural affinity: comma, semicolon, period, new paragraph. (Which also means that the semicolon has a necessary role in general: whenever the structure is best defined also using that level of affinity.)
The dash, the colon and the brackets are instead related to the modality of relation: the colon to express dependency, the dash to provide detail, the brackets to insert a note parallel to the main flow.
(Note: there is also a sub-function of the semicolon to separate list items. I did not use it in the paragraph just above as I intended to exploit the "nuclear" aspect of comma-separated list items, but that is a rhetorical option and the semicolon would have been necessary for more complex items.)
According to Fowler (The King's English), there was a time when the difference between , ; : . was merely quantitative (which explains the name `semicolon').
By the way, you made me note that 'full-stop' is British English and 'period' is American English. As some of us prefer to write in International English - "OED", or "British spelling with -ize graecisms" in international contexts, I have never considered if there is some solid orientation also about terminology - 'full-stop' vs. 'period', 'lift' vs. 'elevator'...
I think it's a decent compromise. All the Zs make it look weird to British readers, and all the Us make it look weird to Americans.
https://www.un.org/dgacm/en/content/editorial-manual/punctua... ("full stop").
I was in college only ten years ago, and my English professor’s key insight to punctuation is that it’s to define framing and tempo for your sentences.
That the sequence you listed is the pause count — similar to different empty spaces in music. Punctuation is just the negative space to frame your thoughts!
And perhaps a bit of tonality.
This discussion makes it painfully clear to me that I over-punctuate. I mean, I knew I leant more towards elaborate sentence-construction than is fashionable; I've never liked txt-speak, and my thumbs are too fat and flabby for operating miniature virtual keyboards.
I try to write literate emails. That is also unfashionable, apparently, but I think it's considerate to the reader to use the expressive power of the language. In fact emails now seem to mostly be an alternative channel for sending txts. I think this is because of mobile apps that present the same UI for txts and emails.
So I send a carefully-considered email, with paragraphs and all that, and I get back a reply of the form "Yes! <emoticon> <emoticon>".
On semi-colons, I use them to append a clause with sentence structure (roughly subject, main verb, object) to the main part of a sentence, while keeping the two clauses together as a single "thought".
It also is a type of vocal intention. Are you acquainted with John Cleese playing the "Hungarian gentleman with phrase book" in the Monty Python sketch? «I will not buy this record [mounting pause, then release] it is scratched». The first part is preliminary, incomplete, it requires the second, expressed as a release after the mounting premise: the sentence is pronounced as having a colon (I cannot check the exact sample right now - that is how I remember it).
You can imagine the difference if it were pronounced as a dash, as a more emotionally neutral interpretation of the sentence, not stressing the implications of "the record being scratched", could bring. With colon you make the first part an incomplete premise that depends on the second part to finally gain meaning or informational value or completeness, reaching to conclusions; with dash with the second part you provide the detail that enrich the content of the first part. As a vocal intention, the musicality of the syllables would change (e.g., in «it is scratched», high-high-low vs. low-low-high), and the pause would become more of a mid-air jump suspension. (Unfortunately I do not have other examples to provide on the spot).
There can be correspondence between natural vocal intentions and punctuation - as is understandable, since punctuation very probably mimics the communicational relations implied in the acting of speech, and both are a consequence of the organization of thought.
It sounds as if you are saying that /colon/ is a pause, because in your Cleese reference, he pronounces a /colon/. If that's what you meant, then are you not begging the question? You assume that his pause was a /colon/, and conclude that /colon/ means a pause.
There is no assumption: it is an obstension. There is no conclusion: it remains an obstension. That I mentioned of Cleese's acting, is an example.
I fail to see how you could read that pseudo-logic in that post. Do not use that poor pattern as a universal key: it is not.
I blame JavaScript developers. /s
> Semicolons are hot
Dash seems a poor substitute. A dash is closer to a period. Semicolons work well for when just using multiple commas would become ambiguous. Shorter sentences also solve that, but sometimes you want a run on sentence, sometimes you want to splice more context in at this very point. & sometimes you just want to drop a conjunction
Unless you're a famous writer, isn't that against the law?
I thought you're supposed to start a sentence with a capital letter, or can anything follow a hard stop? E.g. is this kosher (?):
Microsoft copied Java. .net, they called it.
Final question; what if your name is kreeben with a lowercase 'k', is this kosher:
Grammar is hard. kreeben does not understand it.
?
Writing has no laws, only rules meant to be broken
English is also a descriptivist language, rather than prescriptivist. ie English has no spec, unlike French (tho you then have French as it is spoken & French as it is specified). As much as Oxford might want to reign it in, they are only cataloging what the collective spews
Examples of miniscule starts: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/of_Montreal where the band's name is always "of Montreal"
Which means French has no spec, either, merely people trying to create a specification and failing.
You missed an excellent chance to say 'French as she is spoke'
Using "&" in place of the word "and" does depart from common usage (though there's no "law") and does so in such an overt way that it appears pretentious.
I liked that much more visual que enough that I adopted it myself for a while. Over time, I recognized that when I found myself reaching for the technique it meant that I probably needed to restructure things into more discrete chunks that build sequentially. When possible, conveying complex information benefits from as simple a structure as the information can manage.
I had a similar experience with parentheses.
You can find a Real, Genuine Em Dash™ at https://emda.sh, or insert one using ‘C-k - M’ in Vim or ‘Compose - - -’ on Linux — not sure about other platforms.
As a side note, I am only a little offended by the idea that fiction writers should use semicolons to make their writing more literate or fancy. But I think simple writing is always better, even when you are trying to convey beauty. I believe great flowery literature is great in spite of the floweriness, not because of it.
Understanding language is not a strictly linear, one-word-after-another process, and these non-lexical clues all help us converge quickly on the intended meaning.
There have been several suggestions as to what might be just as good as a semicolon, but the period is a new one to me, and I strongly suspect that there are many cases where this substitution would interrupt a reader's flow. Given the importance, semantically, of the sentence, there are probably cases where this would corrupt the meaning.
I will admit, however, that I doubt a misunderstanding of this magnitude could be fixed by punctuation.
Given the viewpoint expressed by the last sentence in my original reply, I have little doubt there are examples where replacing a semicolon with a period could alter the meaning of an expression, but I am just not motivated enough to go look for one.
If, as your final sentence suggests, you feel that semicolons are characteristic of "the worst and most pretentious parts of literature", then I have bad news about just how pretentious writing can get. Writing that badly misuses semicolons might be the work of a pretentious author, but it is mainly just bad writing.
Ultimately, however, I think the semicolon will disappear: if one's readership finds it strange and it interrupts their flow, then it is counter-productive. I do not, however, think this would mean it was a bad idea; its demise will be just a consequence of the ever-shifting norm of usage in language. Furthermore, the substitution of other punctuation for the semicolon, as noted in the article, suggests that it had a purpose that remains to be satisfied one way or another.
> … it makes little difference if you decide to look at prose written by the advisers on usage themselves. Consider the beginning of E. B. White's introduction to his revision of The Elements of Style (Strunk & White 2000). I underline the head verbs of the passive VPs … Six instances of transitive verbs appear here: took, called, required, called, known, and printed. Five of them are in the passive. That's over 83 percent.
Anecdotally, I still use the semicolon when I write. Sometimes it just seems like the most natural way to bridge two thoughts.
[1] https://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/vonnegut...
It's easy to over-use semicolons, and you often see people who have just discovered them use them all over the place for no good reason.
(autodidact developer here, feel free to ELI5 and enlighten me)
x = some_long_expression
+ another_long_expression
x = some_long_expression;
+ another_long_expression;
let x = someBuilder()
.setVal(x)
.build()
So if you're going to terminate expressions with ), and start them with (, why not just terminate them with ; instead?
Javascript is a "Semicolons Optional" language, but it's actually the worst of both worlds, as you have to be very careful not to wrap lines like
function() {
some stuff;
return
really_long_named_thing;
}
I guess that's because in the REPL Python need's to know whether the line has finished yet or not. OCaml and F# uses two semicolons ';;' for that purpose, but only in the REPL. In Haskell you can use braces and semicolons or '{:' and ':}' in the REPL.
salary = 100500
newsalary = (salary * 0.02
+ salary)
Yes, you can fix it by moving the + up a line but this should be a purely style thing, not semantics.
For example, to do method chaining across multiple lines, Python requires parentheses around the whole chain. That's a quirk of being a whitespace-dependent language.
In general, I think people who advocate for braces and semicolons just find it easier to reason about the code when they know that the formatting doesn't matter. All the flow is done via visible glyphs.
Edit: I meant to add: you need to decide whether ";" is terminates or joins statements if you have statements in the language.
The downside of assuming statements end at the end of the line is that you need to have special rules for when that isn't the case (such as Python's implicit statement continuation inside braces), while always having a terminator is simpler and more consistent (all statements end with a semicolon) at the cost of extra characters.
Just didn't got what you mean by "python's implicit statement continuation inside braces" ?
x = (
object
.method1()
.method2()
)I'm always flabbergasted at this argument.
I'll run auto tools during check-in, but not during coding sessions.
Unless you are doing this for performance reasons, this one I'll never understand.
I'd much rather type "x.someP" and hit tab then type in "x.somePropertyThatHasARidiculousNameIAlwaysForget" after having to consult the documentation yet again to get the name.
If I can't recall "x.somePropertyThatHasARidiculousNameIAlwaysForget" then there are other more serious problems.
I just prefer to press less keys. It shouldn't obscure anything in a decent IDE.
Often you are working with other people's code and having to "recall" every single property, method, etc declared is not practical, hence why I mentioned having to keep referring to the documentation for things you are not accessing very often.
If I keep forgetting that a property is .lastname and not .lastName in a library I'm using I can just type "last" and press tab.
This is even more crucial in dynamic languages like JS, where you will get a failure at runtime and not compile time.
It doesn't make you any "less of a programmer", it makes you a more efficient one once you are used to it.
Autocomplete in code seems to mostly be papering over design smells that should be fixed.
I have no control over third-party dependencies and how they name things.
That is just another layer of abstraction which leads to even more confusion.
These abstractions can be taken to the extreme in things like Java, that's how you end up with a class named "InternalFrameInternalFrameTitlePaneInternalFrameTitlePaneMaximizeButtonWindowNotFocusedState".
If you wrap that in a new interface "IFIFTPIFTPMBWNFS" or even "crazyFrameStuff" (ridiculous enough), now you have to figure out what that actually is while debugging.
If one just comes to terms with the fact that Intellisense (and showing the method signatures while implementing) is extremely helpful even to very senior developers, life can be much easier.
It's not cheating.
You're free to find Intellisense etc. useful. I just don't. I go to great lengths to have an uncluttered view of the code when I work, because I find it far more preferable to focus on just the code. I'm not against it in principle - I've just not seen any solutions like that which works for me. I don't tend to need to look up methods much; when I work on a piece of code I tend to hold the APIs in memory pretty effortlessly, so that's just not much of a consideration.
I spent years actually looking at implementing visual languages because I liked the idea of providing more contextual information and views of information flows etc. to aid development, but I've yet to find something that works better for me than an uncluttered view of the text.
My point being that where you draw the line between what you consider automated vs not is pretty arbitrary.
let x = if y { a } else { b }Meanwhile Rust avoids any kind of behaviour that isn't clearly visible in the code. That includes unambiguous syntax, like the mandatory curly braces for loops and conditions. And of course the semicolon as a clear separator, which comes in handy when iterators or the builder pattern are used.
Really, Rust only doesn't look like OCaml because less people would use it if it wouldn't have braces and semicolons.
Found this post, for example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5607912
I wouldn't mind Python's whitespace indents in Rust though!
Of course you could, because a semicolon-less return doesn't work in the middle of a statement.
You can't do
bla;
a
bla bla;
b
bla;
return a;
bla bla;
b
{123 456} + {789}
> the only punctuation mark that regularly unites readers and writers in deep-seated repugnance
There is not a subject and a verb; this is a fragment and does not stand alone. Prepending "it is" to the second clause would make this a proper sentence by making the second clause an independent clause instead of merely a noun modified by an adjectival prepositional phrase.
Edit: I nerdsniped myself and it might not be strictly accurate to call it a prepositional phrase; 'that' is technically a conjunction in this case used to link its own subordinate clause, but that subordinate clause still does not complete the clause fragment whose subject is "[punctuation] mark." It's still just a modified noun.
E.g.
"We were joined by three families: John, his wife, Mary, and their son, George; the Middletons; and our neighbours, Jim and Sally from next door."
Alas, whenever I use it, invariably someone who's never seen it used this way will simply have a tantrum until I completely rewrite the whole thing in the most tedious way possible; it's almost not worth using it, for this reason alone.
duplocomma
I can with certainty conclude that you have never ever read any Cormac McCarthy or Charles Dickens, and you should, if only to illustrate each extreme of the milieu which you've thus far ignored.
Why should one avoid using it.
Pride has nothing to do with it - to use logarithms for magnitudes is not "showing off".
I’ll double down on my original point. If, in 2021, you’re 100% sure you absolutely positively need to be using a semicolon in your writing, you need to reevaluate your position.
For the average person, using a semicolon is an affectation like wearing a fedora. Some people look good doing it but most don’t.
Also, it so happens that I wear a fedora. It's not an affectation, it's just a felt hat. My natural scalp insulation started to fall out a decade or so ago, so I started wearing beanies. But now I feel much more at home under a fedora - apart from anything else, the hat works as a sort of miniature umbrella.
Which kind of public are you courting?
Personally, I’m not. So I’d rather just not use semicolons.
(I.e. not "OK with giving off those vibes", I guess)
See, I don't much care what vibes I give off. If people don't like my "vibes", I find different people to associate with. I don't pair my fedora with a snappy costume; I've always been a slob as far as clothes are concerned.
In fact I was complimented only yesterday on my "ensemble", which consisted of a leather bomber jacket with a lumberjack shirt hanging out, a pair of baggy training pants, and a hat. My instinctive (and rather rude) response was that I don't wear "ensembles", that this was just random strips of fabric I had stapled to my body when I rolled out of bed.
I'm not Hemingway, although I do appreciate the value of short sentences for making prose clear and easy-to-understand. I'm not a punctuation nazi; I don't think less of people for not using the same style of punctuation and sentence-construction that I do.
I think your "likely accurate" guesses about who I am are probably wildly inaccurate, given that you've based them on a single 5-line post to a web forum. FWIW, I have no idea who you are, or what kind of person you are, except that you seem to be inclined to jump to conclusions based on scant evidence.
Maybe, maybe not. But I could've predicted your entire response nearly word for word.
Someone who uses instruments properly and competently?¹
You have chosen different vibes: you have not just avoided some, you have embraced others. "Conformist" has not, historically, been used as a compliment.
Within epistemology, if researchers had put "group adherence" before "truth adherence", humanity - very loosely speaking - would still be using epicycles, ignore bacteria, use for the subatomic newtonian equations (which would not exist, because of course "distant action is unthinkable") etc.
So, here is one profile you could guess: someone who knows that distributions are bell curves instead of slopes - the extreme is less frequent than the median -, so someone who knows that "common sense" expresses a wish, when replacing the proper expression "good sense". So, someone who tries to carry on one's work objectively irregardless (and often in spite) of spurious fads and trends.
--
¹Provided, of course, such is the case.
What do you mean?
I hope it's not something like "[some] people are confused by numbers, so avoid numbers". Of course (special contexts aside), those people should fix their problem with numbers, and whenever numbers are useful or duly for the purpose of communication, they should be there. The same for punctuation or any other function.
It does feel like the semicolon doesn't deserve a position on home row anymore. I would demote it for a different letter or even the question mark. Actually I might try this on my Ergodox.
Bonus points if it makes me look like a pompous loner going against society.
Reject modernity, embrace semicolons.
For example, when was the last time you saw someone on the web actually use the correct past tense of "lead (verb, transitive)"?
What often irks me, as a non-native speaker, is the wrong subjunctive (if that’s what it’s called). People say and write all the time “I wish you were there”, when they mean “I wish you had been there”. At least I’m pretty sure that’s how it’s supposed to be…
This random page I found on the internet has a pretty decent explanation of the subjunctive:
https://www.learngrammar.net/a/examples-of-the-subjunctive-m...
It is "led". I notice the web using "lead" for both the present and past forms a lot--presumably because it sneaks past spelling checkers and autocorrect. (There's also a correspondence to "read" (long e) where "read" (short e) is also the past tense. Yeah, welcome to English.)
And, I'm almost sorry for pointing it out if you haven't noticed it. Once you do notice it, you see it everywhere and it's a big, jarring speedbump when you read.
"I wish you were there" -- at another location, now or in the past.
"I wish you had been there" -- at another location, in the past.
"had been" means that the action is concluded. "were" is for both continuing and concluded actions, and more words are necessary to glark it from context.
The example you've chosen refers to an event in the past, so "were" seems to be ambiguous in that context, because it could be "you were there", prefixed by I wish - i.e. the writer isn't trying to use the subjunctive at all, which I think is nowadays OK.
"I wish you were here" is a clearer example. That is clearly present subjunctive. "I wish you had been here" would be referring to an event in the past - so that's some kind of past subjunctive.
I regret the death of the subjunctive.
Past: "She led me to that conclusion long ago."
Past, growing popular but historically incorrect: "She lead me to that conclusion long ago."
Noun: "I licked the sweet lead off the wall."
Also noun: "After six rounds of chess-boxing-sprinting, it was not clear to either of the participants who had the lead."
Also also popular but historically incorrect noun: "We have eighty thousand lead-free ornaments on this wall, each lit by an individually-addressable led."
In line with your example, I have noticed "costed" used instead of "cost" increasingly often.
"priced" is proper for both the past actions of determining the price of something to purchase or something to sell.
"Last week Sheila priced out the parts list, so it should be accurate."
"Last week Sheila priced everything on the shelves."
in every non-western country with its own language, those "some" would get rightfully ridiculed.
What is this universal, pure English you've been speaking? I must have missed the tablets on which it was written?
Non jokingly: There is no "bastardization" of a natural language. It is spoken how it is spoken and insisting otherwise is missing the point of language (I suggest it is "communication"). There is no King of English to sit and dictate the rules except for the common languages spoken.
If you want to really grok the concept, take some time to figure out what a "language" actually is. I'll give you a hint: your first 5 definitions have obvious failings.
Descriptivism is all very well; but it doesn't seem to allow for any usage to be actually incorrect.
8 days ago, 3 times.
"The doors are not always hidden - they clearly separate these two worlds, and may also led to very nice places that are just not public."
Presumably a typo.
In this regard I think the decline of the semicolon is related to the fact that we write knowing that our message will be competing for attention in a busy inbox or feed. Our audience is the harried, harassed reader. There’s not much room for reflection or whimsy in such settings.
I was feeling Melancholic, not melancholy. I know Oxford disagrees and fuck them too. Melancholy already is a perfectly nice noun.
I feel sadness/I feel sad.
I feel joy/I feel joyful.
[0] https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20180723-the-commas-tha...
I'm particularly bored tonight.
edit: grammarly says I'm wrong and that should be a colon followed by a comma separated list. I might just be old or confused.
for (let i = 0— i < 3— ++i)
{
console.log("no semicolons!")—
}However I never use it when writing anything, I'm not even sure what's its usage.
Consensus is a beautiful thing.