I met her at 6 a.m when the Sun rose.

Is the sentence impossible ( or grammatically incorrect ) just because there is no comma before the word when? Without it, would it mean there is another (extra) 6 a.m within the 24 hours?

I think it won't matter with it or without it although its meanings are not the same.

Could you help me clarify it? Thank you always.

  • 2
    Comma or no comma, the sentence means the same thing. What are you trying to say, exactly? Why do you think the comma would make a difference or suggest a "second" 6 am?
    – Andrew
    Feb 4 '18 at 21:20

You are asking about restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses.

A comma (in written English) or a pause with up-down intonation (spoken English) is used to indicate a non-restrictive clause. So a comma would be correct.

However given the context (there aren't any other 6am in the day), there is no ambiguity. The purpose of punctuation is to clarify and avoid ambiguity. Here there is none, so with or with a comma the meaning is the same.

You might consider "I met her at 6am as the sun rose." as an alternative.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.