Wikipedia says the main fixes are replacing with semicolon, making the two clauses into two sentences instead, adding a suitable conjunction after the comma, or making one clause dependent on the other.
This response brought to you by my having to look up what the hell a comma splice _was_.
If that's just a general question, then yes, technically, but it's not always the right thing to do. I'm willing to look at any specific examples, if only because I suspect that an actual sentence that raised this question would be interesting, at least structurally.
I also have this tendency to write in pairs of sentences, separated by a semicolon. I find that it almost always improves the writing, though, if in the editing pass I change things so that I'm not doing it oftener than every third sentence (i.e., there are at least two sentences without a semicolon between each one where I leave it in). The pattern gets really monotonous if you do it repetitively, and it drags the whole paragraph to a halt.
To answer the question actually asked, though: yes, if the only thing wrong is that you have two independent clauses (sentences) and you've stuck them together with a comma, you can make that grammatically correct by changing the comma to a semicolon. You can also fix it by adding a conjunction (cue the Schoolhouse Rock!); ending the first clause with a period, then beginning the second as a new sentence; or by changing one of the clauses to be a dependent clause instead, such as by adding a preposition. The foregoing is the exception to the no-2-semicolons rule Rev pointed out, wherein the semicolon serves as a "supercomma" separating list items that themselves contain interstitial commas. :)
On further investigation, it doesn't appear to be entirely true, e.g. when presenting a list where the items on the list contain their own internal punctuation. But in the context where it would replace a comma splice, I think so.
I agree completely. Indeed, I would go further and say that not only can you not fix two comma splices with two semicolons, but if you find yourself wishing to do so, you should pause and rethink what you're trying to say, because that's a definite red flag that you're not saying it with clarity and may well mean that the underlying thought is itself fuzzy.
From my junior-high grammar drilling, I would say yes, however, the sentences should be related to each other. Also, stylistically I think semicolons should be used very, very sparingly. Two sentences is almost always best.
Some grammarians say that you should always follow a semicolon with what Wikipedia calls a transitional phrase or conjunctive adverb. That's what I was taught in high school. According to that standard, replacing a comma in a comma splice with a bare semicolon would still be improper. That said, I think that most people reject that standard, including various people who hold themselves out as authoritative prescriptive grammarians.
It depends to some degree on the bits you're splicing together. Semicolons, colons, and dashes all have their uses depending on the surrounding text. I agree with others that if you're going to use a semicolon it almost always wants a transitional word showing how the two halves are related.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
randomness![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2012-01-20 02:21 am (UTC)This response brought to you by my having to look up what the hell a comma splice _was_.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-01-20 02:35 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-01-20 04:59 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-01-20 02:37 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-01-20 02:54 am (UTC)I think I have a tendency to think in comma splices so when I'm writing I drop in a semicolon instead.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-01-20 03:13 am (UTC)To answer the question actually asked, though: yes, if the only thing wrong is that you have two independent clauses (sentences) and you've stuck them together with a comma, you can make that grammatically correct by changing the comma to a semicolon. You can also fix it by adding a conjunction (cue the Schoolhouse Rock!); ending the first clause with a period, then beginning the second as a new sentence; or by changing one of the clauses to be a dependent clause instead, such as by adding a preposition. The foregoing is the exception to the no-2-semicolons rule Rev pointed out, wherein the semicolon serves as a "supercomma" separating list items that themselves contain interstitial commas. :)
(no subject)
Date: 2012-01-20 02:49 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-01-20 03:00 am (UTC)Oh! I did not know that.
That's helpful, thanks!
(no subject)
Date: 2012-01-20 03:06 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-01-20 03:25 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-01-20 03:41 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-01-20 03:40 am (UTC)"I came; I saw; I conquered" is an abomination.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-01-20 03:14 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-02-02 01:45 pm (UTC)I don't use them much, but I do use them.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-01-20 03:40 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-01-20 05:04 pm (UTC)