The Return of the Revenge of More Grammar Help
I’m back in the beta saddle, and that means it’s time for me to overthink grammar and come crying to you all for help.
The red is so dark in parts it’s turning black.
In this sort of situation, where the sentence could also be written as “The red is so dark in parts that it’s turning black,” would it be correct to put a comma in place of “that?” “The red is dark in parts, it’s turning black.” I’ve seen examples of such with and without the comma but can’t find an actual statement on it.
On reflex, the elf’s left eye followed Kabru’s hand.
Would this need to be “By reflex” instead?
I tried hiring people to come to my flat, but either they couldn’t get me to relax, or they didn’t want the liability of leaving while I was asleep.
Regarding the comma after “relax,” I had thought that you shouldn’t use a comma to separate a correlative conjunction set (either/or), but it looks like there's some disagreement on that. Here are the sources I consulted, which say different things:
There was a smaller door set into the larger ones, and that was what Mithrun opened after the keypad made a chirping sound, and Kabru heard the lock disengage with an audible clack.
Regarding the comma after “sound.” This is a situation that’s been tripping me up a lot lately. Because while that comma is separating independent clauses, “the keypad made a chirping sound” and “Kabru heard the lock disengage” both follow “after.” Do they need to be separated into separate thoughts when they seem to belong together? I do not know how to properly express my confusion about this.
He carefully set the man’s feet in his lap, noticing that even after a shower, they felt cold and the tendons were rigid and tight.
The same sort of situation as above. “They felt cold” and “the tendons were rigid and tight” both proceed from “after a shower.” They both describe the things happening after the shower. Do they need to be separated by a comma? Or is it correct without one?
This eventually resulted in a legal dispute after the death of Lord Kerensil in the year 504, where it was proven that Malthus was the legitimate heir, and Mithrun was in fact an illegitimate child.
The same situation again. “Malthus was the legitimate heir” and “Mithruin was an illegitimate child” are both what was proven. Does that comma need to be separating them?
I appreciate any help anyone can give, especially with those last three examples.
(All snippets are included with the permission of the authors.)