I've gotten a lot of emails recently about where to put periods and commas relative to quotation marks. The notes were prompted by a recent column in which I mentioned that, in American English, a period or comma always comes before a closing quote mark (as in "fella.") rather than after one (as in "fella".).
The responses I got, and there were quite a few, all made the same point: That's not logical. Sure, my correspondents conceded, it sometimes makes sense to put a period before a closing quote mark, for example in a sentence like: Joe said, "Take it easy, fella." But if quotation marks are there just to point out we're talking about the word "fella," folks argued, the period should come at the end of the sentence: Joe never uses the word "fella". Anything else, my correspondents asserted, is illogical.
To which I reply: Who invited logic to the party? If punctuation were logical, we wouldn't use the same mark for initials as we do to end a sentence, creating a theoretical need for double periods in sentences like: He got his B.A. If punctuation were logical, we wouldn't have a mark in book publishing that is nonexistent in news media, the en dash. If punctuation were logical, we wouldn't use quotation marks to set off "words as words" like "fella" anyway. Some other symbol would do that job. If punctuation were logical, you wouldn't see "healthcare laws" in one publication and "health-care laws" in another with both being correct. And we certainly wouldn't have a system in which "the dog's" could be either a contraction or a possessive.