Do I need the second comma in the following sentence:

Он явил, т.е. доказал, тот факт, что Земля вращается вокруг Солнца.

  • Does the interlocutor want to clarify the meaning of an archaic word or to correct the slip of the tongue? Saying явил тот факт is ungrammatical. When reading this aloud, would you make a tonal accent on факт or on доказал?
    – Quassnoi
    Jul 20, 2012 at 21:27
  • The accent is on явил.
    – brilliant
    Jul 20, 2012 at 22:44
  • of these two words, where is the accent? Do you place a pause between доказал and тот факт?
    – Quassnoi
    Jul 20, 2012 at 23:08

3 Answers 3


You need both commas.

Rosenthal et al., Справочник по правописанию, произношению и литературному редактированию: §97. Пояснительные члены предложения.

Обособляются слова, поясняющие смысл предшествующего члена предложения. Перед пояснительным членом предложения стоят слова именно, а именно, то есть (при их отсутствии в предложении эти слова могут быть вставлены).


  • В то время, именно год назад, я еще сотрудничал по журналам (Достоевский)
  • Я... добрался наконец до большого села с каменной церковью в новом вкусе, т.е. с колоннами, и обширным господским домом (Тургенев)
  • Ну что же, поедешь нынче вечером к нашим, к Щербацким то есть? (Л. Толстой)

Here, the word доказал clarifies the meaning of quite archaic word явил. Тот факт is an object to both verbs and hence is not a part of the clarification.

If you had a sentence like this:

Он явил, то есть доказал со всей ясностью, что Земля вращается вокруг Солнца

you would need one comma less, since со всей ясностью would be a part of the clarification, and the commas separating the clafication and the dependent clause would merge.

  • the word доказал clarifies the meaning of quite archaic word явил. Тот факт is an object to both verbs -- this is exactly what is not that obvious to me. I would say it is явил = доказал факт, not явил = доказал.
    – GSerg
    Jul 20, 2012 at 19:21
  • @GSerg: явил is just an archaic form of показал (which is often used as a synonym to доказал). See, for instance, gramota.ru/slovari/dic/…. Could you please source your claim that явил implies доказал факт rather than mere доказал?
    – Quassnoi
    Jul 20, 2012 at 20:16
  • явил is just an archaic form of показал - exactly. which is often used as a synonym to доказал - not necessarily. If the original sentence was Он показал, т.е. доказал тот факт, что ... -- you wouldn't put a comma, would you?
    – GSerg
    Jul 20, 2012 at 20:31
  • 1
    @GSerg: I definitely would.
    – Quassnoi
    Jul 20, 2012 at 20:47
  • You could, but that would a) sound sort of weird and b) change the meaning, wouldn't it? It would now sound as a promptly corrected slip: Он показал... извините, я хотел сказать 'доказал', тот факт, что...
    – GSerg
    Jul 20, 2012 at 20:51

In the sentence ‘Он явил, т.е. доказал, тот факт, что Земля вращается вокруг Солнца’ you don’t need second comma, because тот факт is a complement to доказал, i.e. доказал (что именно?) тот факт, что…. The phrase ‘т. е. доказал тот факт’ is a clarification to first verb.

BTW the sentence is semantically poor. Here you use verb ‘являть’, but the construction is too complicated to use it, compare to явить миру чудо, явление Христа народу, Наконец появился свежий номер [журнала] — the thing you являешь is always closely bound to verb. Moreover, ‘являть’ should be used when they talk about some fairy tales or developments hardly appearing in real life. But your sentence is related to science, and has narrative tone, so there is more applicable another verb — just открывать. Он открыл миру, что… will make an impression you want. In that case открывать will mean ‘invent something’, ‘giving the people a knowledge of something they did not knew’. However, if you want to increase the impression, you would use something like ‘Он первым доказал, и тем самым открыл миру, что Земля вращается вокруг Солнца.’


Both are possible.

I personally would omit the comma:

Он явил [нам] (т.е. доказал [нам] тот факт), что Земля вращается вокруг Солнца.

This makes it sort of poetic (with an explanation for non-poetic people in parentheses). (I only added parentheses to visually separate the resulting logical pieces; you don't have to actually use them.)

With a comma, it is also acceptable, but then you're saying явил and доказал are sort of synonims per se, which they not necessarily are; plus, it would imply явить факт is a common phrase, which I wouldn't say it is.

  • The phrase Он явил, что Земля вращается вокруг Солнца. looks weird. With the comma, it sounds more natural, even though явил is not really a good word to use here.
    – StasM
    Jul 20, 2012 at 0:44
  • 3
    you definitely need both comas.
    – MK.
    Jul 20, 2012 at 1:26
  • You need the both commas or the parentheses.
    – Anixx
    Jul 20, 2012 at 9:19
  • @StasM You're right in saying that with the comma it sounds more natural. But this only happens because the additional comma adds perceived distance between явил and факт, and the more the distance is, the better it sounds for a native speaker, because you don't hear явил факт every day. It's not because the comma should be there. If you add even more clarifications in between, so that your reader completely forgets there was явил in the beginning when he or she gets to the end of the sentence, then it will sound even more natural.
    – GSerg
    Jul 20, 2012 at 19:26

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.