Stupid Punctuation Rules
Tags: Work, Humor, Writing Tips, Grammar, Writing

Stupid Punctuation Rules

This is only a sampling of stupidity, as we all know.

Photo by Dan Meyers on Unsplash

Yes, it’s true: Even a grammar fan like me can recognize that some of the rules demanded by style guides and grammar authoritarians are just plain DUMB. As the old saying goes, you have to know the rules before you can break them.

So, here are some stupid or arcane rules of punctuation that should probably be disposed of (though, of course, if your publisher demands that you conform to a particular style guides’ dictates, then you’ll probably want to do so in order to get paid.)

Stupid Rule 1. Periods and commas go inside of parentheses and quotation marks, but other punctuation goes outside.

What? This rule makes no earthly sense. Why make an exception for two marks to a rule that applies to every other punctuation mark? There’s nothing in this dictum that makes comprehension clearer. Look at these examples:

Abyssinians, or “Abbys,” are a very athletic breed of cat.

Abyssinians, or “Abbys”, are a very athletic breed of cat.

People don’t “own” cats; people are part of a cat’s “staff.”

People don’t “own” cats; people are part of a cat’s “staff”.

In neither of these two examples does moving the comma or the period to the outside of the quotation marks change the meaning of the sentence. The Brits don’t have this rule, just American English. Time for it to go.

Stupid Rule 2. The names of plays are encased in quotation marks — unless they become movies or books, at which point those same names are changed to italics.

For pity’s sake, why? Does this make any difference:

“Hamilton: An American Musical” by Lin-Manuel Miranda (musical)

Hamilton: The Revolution, by Jeremy McCarter and Lin-Manuel Miranda (book)

By convention, we understand that italics indicate a title — though many don’t realize the specifics. Since they don’t, why keep doing it? A rule is really only useful if people know about it and use it.

Stupid Rule 3. The first word of a sentence that follows a question mark is capitalized — except when it isn’t.

Okay, I wrote that a bit snarky, but it’s true: A writer is allowed to change this rule as they see fit for stylistic purposes. So, look at this example:

Will Wendy fly away with Peter? Will John? Will Michael?

Will Wendy fly away with Peter? will John? will Michael?

Both of these examples are acceptable. The second set of sentences (without the capital letters after the question mark) is a style choice some writers like. If it’s a choice, then it’s not a “rule,” right? Why make it confusing? Either capitalize or don’t — pick a side!

Stupid Rule 4. When deciding on the possessive of a common noun that ends in ‘s,’ you can decide either to add an apostrophe plus another ‘s,’ or to simply add an apostrophe to the ‘s’ at the end of the word.

Huh? Here’s another of those “you get to choose” rules. I can write either the cyclops’ eye OR the cyclops’s eye — and both are okay. Why make a rule then?!

Stupid Rule 5. If the word is a proper noun, then add an apostrophe plus ‘s’ to make the possessive…if you want to.

I swear I’m going to scream with these “if-ya-wanna” rules! Now, we’re being told that if the cyclops happens to be named “Jones,” then you could make the plural by adding an apostrophe and another ‘s’ when talking about his eye: the cyclops Jones’s eye.

Why would anyone want to make things even more confusing? Stop it already!

There are other stupid rules that I’m sure you can think of…if-ya-wanna.

Here’s your choice of my free guides: writing, personal improvement, or the environment.

DRM is an award-winning author and the publisher of What to do About…Everything, and Boomer: Unfiltered. She writes in science, writing, mental health, and the environment on A Writer’s Mind.