Is the following comma placement correct?
A is twice the number of B and, the closer A is to 0, the closer B is to zero.
0
-
Side note: Although I'm unsure if it's a rule in the English language, I've always been told to never mix digits (0) with their word representations (zero) in the same sentence/paragraph/paper. It's preferred to stick with one or the other. – GnoveltyGnome Mar 18 '16 at 16:38
-
true, I was adapting the original sentence, and made some modifications to maintain "privacy". – user3825755 Mar 21 '16 at 9:11
1
Short answer: the first comma is not required. It's useful because you are stacking up three clauses in a row. A better approach, though, would be either to put the first clause in a separate sentence
A is twice the value of B. The closer A is to zero, the closer B is to zero.
You could alternatively use a comma and "and" in place of the full stop.
If you want to express causality (because of the first clause, the second and third clauses are related), it would be use "therefore" or "so" or "and so".
A is twice the value of B therefore the closer A is to zero, the closer B is to zero.
You can put a comma before "therefore" if you like.
1
The first comma should be before "and" because "and" is joining two independent clauses. It should be written like this:
A is twice the number of B, and the closer A is to 0, the closer B is to zero.
