Punctuation that maybe packs more punch

The ordinary period, which for centuries has been simply ending sentences, has lately acquired a reputation for real aggression.

Melanie Stetson Freeman/The Christian Science Monitor
Isabel Zuckoff (r.) texts on a Blackberry while waiting for a friend outside South Station.

Have I been inadvertently ticking people off?

Normally one doesn’t think of punctuation as a sign of aggression. 

But I keep running into reports that the humble period (full stop) is being used to convey messages along the lines of “Go jump in a lake,” or worse – or is at least being interpreted that way.

Here’s the logic: In ordinary prose, a writer ends a sentence with a period. But in text-speak, the channel for so much communication nowadays, especially between intimates, punctuation often (generally?) disappears. And so a period at the end of a text signals real finality – not only to the message but also potentially to the relationship.

Ben Crair, writing for New Republic a while back, set up this scenario: “You text your girlfriend: ‘I know we made a reservation for your bday tonight but wouldn’t it be more romantic if we ate in instead?’ ”

His read is that if she responds with “we could do that,” it’s OK to order a pizza. 

But suppose the response looks like this, with the period: “we could do that.” In that case, Mr. Crair posited, “Then you should probably drink a cup of coffee: You’re either going out or you’re eating Papa John’s alone.”

Those of us who continue to punctuate more or less normally, even when typing with one finger, may need to reconsider. We may be in good company, though. Crair noted a comment he had had from University of Pennsylvania linguist Mark Liberman:
“ ‘Not long ago, my 17-year-old son noted that many of my texts to him seemed excessively assertive or even harsh, because I routinely used a period at the end.’ ”

The theory that periods equal anger seems to be rooted in the idea that communications by text lack the contextual clues provided by other channels, especially face-to-face conversation. And so any little thing, even a point at the end of a line, can be invested with emotion. As Erin Gloria Ryan wrote on Jezebel, “Thank goodness our old dotty end of sentence friend the period is here to help.”

We maybe shouldn’t be surprised at this. People have long said, or written out, “period” for emphasis. Back when parents communicated with their teens over the phone rather than by text, they said things like, “You need to come home now. Period.”

The Wall Street Journal used to play off this with an advertising tag line alluding to the distinctive punctuation mark in its nameplate: “The Wall Street Journal. Period.” The Journal was founded in 1889, when newspapers commonly punctuated their nameplates. But the paper has hung onto its period long after other papers dropped theirs.

I’m likely to hang on to my own habit of punctuating texts. But I plan to keep a sharper eye out for what others do, and modify my practice if that seems appropriate. After all, my goal is to punctuate my messages, not to puncture anyone’s ego.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Punctuation that maybe packs more punch
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today