Note: This is the full explanation of this rule. If you are taking the SAT or ACT and want the simplified version that applies to virtually all “commas with names/titles” questions on those exams, click here.
Many people learn that a comma should be placed before a name or title, but that is not entirely true. Commas should sometimes be placed before – and after – names and titles. It all depends on the context.
Let’s start with the fact that unless a name or title is the last word(s) in a sentence, it can either be used with no commas at all, OR with a comma both before and after. It is incorrect to place only one comma before the name or title.
Incorrect: My friend, Jane has a lot more gardening experience than I do.
Correct: My friend Jane has a lot more gardening experience than I do.
Correct: My friend, Jane, has a lot more gardening experience than I do.
So what’s the difference between the the two correct versions?
- No commas around a name or title indicate that it is essential to the meaning of a sentence – the sentence will not make sense in context without it.
- Commas around a name or title indicate that it is NOT essential to the meaning of a sentence – the sentence will make sense in context without it.
You can also think of the two commas/no commas distinction in terms of one vs. many.
- No commas imply that the name or title is one of many people or things. The first correct version of the sentence above implies that the writer has multiple friends, and that s/he is talking about the specific friend named Jane.
- Commas indicate that a sentence is focusing on one particular person or thing. The second correct version implies that the writer is only talking about one specific friend: Jane. Taken out of context, it can also imply that Jane is the writer’s only friend.
If you are not sure whether commas should be placed around a name or title, try crossing the name/title out and reading the sentence in context without it. If the sentence makes sense, you probably need the commas; if the sentence doesn’t make sense, you probably do not need the commas.
For example, consider the following passage:
In the mid-nineteenth century, Susan B. Anthony and her acquaintance Elizabeth Cady Stanton became two of the leading figures in the women’s rights movement. Anthony and Stanton traveled across the United States and abroad, advocating for female suffrage as well as for the abolition of slavery. The two women also edited and published a newspaper, the Revolution, from 1868 to 1870.
Here, the name Elizabeth Cady Stanton is essential because the reference to Stanton in the following sentence does not make sense otherwise. In addition, the most logical implication is also that Stanton was one of Susan B. Anthony’s acquaintances rather than her only acquaintance.
Now consider this passage:
I’ve always been interested in gardening, but until recently, I didn’t have room for flowers or plants. When I moved into a new house last summer, however, I was thrilled to discover that there was enough space in the yard for a garden.There was just one problem – I’d never actually planted one. So I called a friend who had a lot more gardening experience than I did. Luckily, that friend, Jane, agreed to come over the next day.
In this example, the inclusion of the name Jane is useful because it provides more information about the friend’s identity, but it is not actually necessary for the sentence to make sense in context. In addition, the mention of the friend in the next-to-last sentence (So I called a friend who had a lot more gardening experience than I did) makes it clear that the writer is talking about one specific person.
Finally, let’s consider an instance in which only the comma after the name is necessary:
I’ve always been interested in gardening, but until recently, I didn’t have room for flowers or plants. When I moved into a new house last summer, however, I was thrilled to discover that there was enough space in the yard for a garden. There was just one problem – I’d never actually planted one. So I called my friend Jane, who had a lot more gardening experience than I did. Luckily, Jane said she’d come over right away.
Here, the lack of a comma before the name indicates that it is essential – it clarifies who Jane is so that the mention of her name in the following sentence make sense. In this case, however, a comma is necessary to set off the clause begun by who. Its use has nothing to do with the name.
When a name or a title appears at the end of a sentence, the name or title can follow either a comma or no comma. Again, both constructions are grammatically correct, but they have different meanings.
Compare the following pair of sentences. Although both versions are grammatically acceptable, only the second one creates a logical meaning.
Incorrect: The controversy over baseball player Satchel Paige’s true date of birth was stoked by Paige’s mother Lula.
Correct: The controversy over baseball player Satchel Paige’s true date of birth was stoked by Paige’s mother, Lula.
In the first version of the sentence, the missing comma implies that the name Lula is essential – that is, the name must be included to necessary to specify which of Paige’s mothers the sentence is referring to. But that does not make sense: Paige – an African-American man born in 1906 in Alabama – could have had only one mother. So although the sentence is grammatically acceptable, its meaning is not historically accurate.
In contrast, the comma before Lula in the second version of the sentence implies that Paige only had one mother, and that her name was Lula – a far more logical implication given the circumstances of his life.