There are such turns in the Russian language that cannot be said immediately - these are introductory constructions or sentence members, which, of course, creates a certain difficulty in the punctuation marks. Today we consider one such case. Is it really necessary to mark with commas?
Rule itself
Nominally nothing to be confused. If the object of study is an introductory combination and it is similar in meaning to the expressions “actually” and “really”, then commas are always put. But when the meaning is “in fact” and “in reality,” then the commas are completely redundant.
The reader must have been horrified by the intricacies of isolation or, conversely, non-isolation, even if he does not despair. Practice shows that authors of fiction also prefer not to puzzle over commas and not to use them in this case.
Moreover, all the same, whatever one may say, it is very difficult even for the author to understand whether he expresses some kind of emotion, which means that he “stands out” with commas or states a fact that actually took place. All this is very controversial and arbitrary. And well, if there was one author. And suddenly there is an editor who sees the text a little differently. In any case, we give examples:
- "Vanya actually drank a liter of milk."
- "I actually already packed my things and came to say goodbye."
In the second sentence, mentally replace “in fact” with “actually”, and nothing will collapse.
The only problem is that a double interpretation is also possible here. After all, the nameless hero really packed up things. Therefore, whatever one may say, it’s worth recognizing the wisdom of authors of fiction who answer negatively to the question: “Is“ in reality ”separated by commas?”
You can eliminate the structure and forget about it
The easiest way to save yourself from suffering is to remove the introductory phrase from the phrase, even if it is not. In many sentences, where there is an object of research, the latter, of course, adds some colors, shades of meaning, but they can be neglected in order to save yourself from language torture.
For instance:
- “The color of the car was actually blue.”
- "Lena could actually play Chopin."
Honestly, in the second sentence I still want to remove the commas, and this, in turn, proves the validity of our previous thought: in such constructions “in fact” can be removed without any hesitation and damage to the meaning.
Another way is to strive for greater clarity.
In honor of linguistic practice, you need to write sentences so that they are not ambiguous. In other words, you can get rid of introductory words, even if they are not introductory at all. In the two examples above, nothing will change if we remove “really”, and the commas will have absolutely nothing to do with it - how wonderful!
If you don’t completely leave the object of research, then you can safely use it. Moreover, tradition does not insist on highlighting it, for example, in such sentences:
- "No, Serega, you are not telling everything like that, in fact everything was like that."
- “I did not get a“ 4 ”, in fact I got a“ 5 ”.”
Here, after all, the question does not arise, after "in fact" the comma is put or not. Everything is actually obvious. And when there is no juxtaposition of two points of view, then it is possible to interpret this and that.
Synonyms - here is salvation
The surest means is to replace with a synonym, or rather, a semantic analogue. Moreover, this should not be a substitution of one for another, sewed on soap. The proposal must be shifted towards either an introductory combination, or that element of the proposal that does not need to be isolated.
But, when there is already no strength to choose and suffer from the question, “in fact” stands out with commas or not, you can resort to replacements and thereby put an end to torment. Replacement Options:
- in reality (usually does not require commas, but the author can do everything);
- practically (does not need isolation);
- actually (similar to the previous one);
- It turns out (may stand out, or maybe not, depending on the context);
- really (similar to the previous one).
In other words, if you can painlessly replace the object of study with words that occupy the first three positions in the list, then commas are not needed.
Author, editor, reader
The topic is complex and dual. And in fact, nothing definite can be said about it, for much here is decided by the will of the author. The reader as the addressee will accept any copyright position. If he is sufficiently educated, he will find an explanation for why in one place or another "in fact" commas are separated or, on the contrary, are not separated. The reader in this sense is more tolerant than the editor.
The editor, on the contrary, may have a different opinion about the text in front of him. In the end, what matters is who is the last resort, for whom it is written.
The Russian language is so complicated that almost any difficult rule has several exceptions, so you cannot choose any one way of writing. When a person is completely exhausted and cannot understand, after “in fact” a comma is needed or not, then let him turn to the word “turns out”. True, here we must look at the context. For example, three sentences:
- “I’m calling him, I’m calling, but he, it turns out, is sleeping.”
- "I knock, knock, but he really doesn’t hear."
- "He is where he always dreamed."
The first two cases express the speaker’s attitude, and in the third “in reality” he can’t replace “turns out” in any way, because the meaning of the sentence will “float”.
But the good news is that, we never get tired of repeating, tradition insists on the absence of punctuation marks. Therefore, the final answer to the main question is this: commas are not needed.