MSGID: 2:221/6.0 5f29a874   
   REPLY: 1:153/7715.0 f278d410   
   PID: SmapiNNTPd/Linux/IPv6 1.3 20200711   
   CHRS: LATIN-1 2   
   TZUTC: 0300   
   TID: hpt/lnx 1.9.0-cur 2020-04-15   
   Hi Dallas!   
      
   > Hi Wayne -- on Aug 02 2020 at 23:40, you wrote:   
   >   
   > WH> If I may, let me ask some questions.  My intuition says I should always   
   > WH> isolate a vocative in between commas.  ``Hi, Anton.''  However, I pretty   
   > WH> much never see anyone writing that way.  Isn't that a grammar rule?   
   >   
   > The vocative comma use varies with formality. For a good explanation,   
   > see https://www.macmillandictionaryblog.com/hello-vocative-comma -- but the   
   > quick and dirty explanation is that in informal writing it's optional.   
   > IMO, the only time it absolutely must be used (in order to ensure   
   > clarity) is in a   
   > sentence such as "I'm fighting John" which is different from "I'm   
   > fighting, John".   
      
   That makes a lot of sense.  Grammar is meant to put order and   
   unambiguity.  But I'd like to find out the rules from authoritative   
   references like those dictionaries of English usage you referred below.   
   (Thanks for the references, by the way.  I appreciate that.)   
      
   > Gmail seems happy to fill in (autofill) text (at least in the Windows   
   > version on a PC). If I address a message to Frank, and begin typing   
   > Hi it writes "Hi Frank", but if I type Hi, it leaves the   
   > text alone. Make of that what you will! :-)   
      
   Interesting. :-) Maybe it decides on what's correct by observing   
   people's wisdom and in this case it can't really make up its mind.   
      
   > WH> You wrote ``furthermore, [...]''.  That also matches my intuition.  But   
   > WH> I often see people ignoring this comma.  Perhaps this is an optional   
   > WH> comma.  Is it?  What is the book you go to to cite such rules?   
   >   
   > This is called a conjunctive adverb, and the rule seems to be that you   
   > always have a comma after a conjunctive adverb.   
   >   
   > The books Ardith and I use most are the 2000 "New Fowler's Modern   
   > English Usage" and the 2016 "Garner's Modern English Usage". Fowler's   
   > tends more toward British usage and Garner seems more American. Here in   
   > Canada, of course, we're bilingual. :-)   
      
   These references seem to be dictionaries of English usage.  Pretty nice.   
   But I'm looking for a respect grammar book.  Do you know any?   
      
   My preference is for American English.  But in the absence of one, I'll   
   take a British, an Australian, or, of course, a Canadian one! :-)   
      
   Thank you!   
      
   ---    
    * Origin: nntps://news.fidonet.fi (2:221/6.0)   
   SEEN-BY: 1/123 90/1 120/340 601 123/131 221/0 6 226/30 227/114 702   
   SEEN-BY: 229/101 275 424 426 664 1014 240/1120 1634 1895 2100 5138   
   SEEN-BY: 240/5832 5853 8001 8002 8005 249/206 317 261/38 280/5003   
   SEEN-BY: 313/41 317/3 320/219 322/757 331/313 333/808 335/206 364   
   SEEN-BY: 335/370 342/200 382/147 2454/119 4500/1 5020/1042   
   PATH: 221/6 335/364 240/1120 5832 229/426