A comma question

Christracy19 said:

You guys use:

This, that, and there.

Or:

This, that and there.

I've seen people use both methods, curious what you guys say.

Click to expand...

VIVA LA COMMA OXFORD.

If someone wants to discuss that...

Oxford comma!

Tra-la, tra-la, and tra-la!



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_comma

Ahem. *tap tap* Is this thing on?

I love my man,
my cat, my momma,
pizza, cycling,
and Oxford comma.



Thank you. That is all.

I typically go with the oxford comma, but for the occasional situation I opt to go without.

Oxford comma all the way!

My favorite example for this:

With Oxford comma: We invited the strippers, JFK, and Stalin.

Without: We invited the strippers, JFK and Stalin.


Eliminating the Oxford comma results in ambiguity and makes it appear that JFK and Stalin might be strippers. There's a funny image to go with this example.

Oxford comma always.

I hate Oxford commas. They're ugly. But I live in the US, and I understand most markets expect them here nowadays. So I go with them (twitch twitch).

Roxxsmom said:

I hate Oxford commas. They're ugly. But I live in the US, and I understand most markets expect them here nowadays. So I go with them (twitch twitch).

Click to expand...

I also live in the U.S., about as far away from the Brits as possible, but I recommend the Oxford comma, because its absence sometimes does affect meaning. If it's there, it never does, unless used by mistake. That, and that alone, is why "most markets expect them." If they do.

caw

Roxxsmom said:

I hate Oxford commas. They're ugly.

Click to expand...

OMG, HATER!!!! *piles on Roxxsmom*

Christracy19 said:

You guys use:

This, that, and there.

Or:

This, that and there.

I've seen people use both methods, curious what you guys say.

Click to expand...

This, that, and there. Long live the Oxford comma.

Roxxsmom said:

I hate Oxford commas. They're ugly. But I live in the US, and I understand most markets expect them here nowadays. So I go with them (twitch twitch).

Click to expand...

They're consistent. They're unambiguous. What's not to love?

blacbird said:

I also live in the U.S., about as far away from the Brits as possible, but I recommend the Oxford comma, because its absence sometimes does affect meaning. If it's there, it never does, unless used by mistake. That, and that alone, is why "most markets expect them." If they do.

caw

Click to expand...

I was taught that the commas in a series/list of words replace the "ands" that exist (by implication) between the adjacent words, and since there's an and between the last two words in a series, the comma is redundant, unless the absence changes the meaning of the sentence. There are times when they're logical, of course, if their absence changes the meaning of the sentence and context doesn't make it clear which interpretation would be correct.

I don't know why the differences have evolved, but it seems like people who feel the way I do are in a distinct minority these days in the States at least. I never realized (until I joined AW) that is was such a big deal. I went back and added them to my manuscript

No one got on my case about it when they were critting stuff I've written, but then, some of my critting partners are British. But I can't personally ever remember having a problem with understanding I'd read because of the absence of the serial comma. To be honest, they're not even something I notice that often in other people's writing.

I only use the Oxford comma when not using it changes the meaning of the sentence, as someone said earlier:

With Oxford comma: We invited the strippers, JFK, and Stalin.

Without: We invited the strippers, JFK and Stalin.

Another (non-Oxford by still comma) goodie:

With comma: Let's eat, Grandma!

Without: Let's eat Grandma!

I'm a comma when logical type of gal, and as such, I do use the serial comma when it makes the most sense to use it. I'll also use it sometimes when not including it or including it won't change the meaning of the words at all. But in those cases, what I use it or leave it out for is rythm. As long as it is gramatically correct, the meaning doesn't chang by its inclusion or exclusion, and it presents the type of rythm I'm going for, then I see no problem with it. Logic in all things.

"Oxford Comma."

Mentioned in another thread a few days ago.

Had no clue what it was. Thnx to this thread I now know.

Cool.

Like Lillith I sometimes do and sometimes don't.

Ox-ford! Ox-ford!

I only use the Oxford comma where there is potential for confusion. Otherwise, it's superfluous .

Interestingly, I'm pretty sure the Big Boss at a place I worked some years ago referred to it as 'The Harvard Comma.'

I also remember someone working very hard to stamp it out of my writing. In the end, while I favor the comma, I try to apply sense to its use. There are times when it definitely feels needed, and times when it does not.

oxford

Roxxsmom said:

I was taught that the commas in a series/list of words replace the "ands" that exist (by implication) between the adjacent words, and since there's an and between the last two words in a series, the comma is redundant, unless the absence changes the meaning of the sentence.

Click to expand...

And yet--when you join two independent clauses with "and," the rules say there should be a comma before "and."

I was taught to put the comma in, then I was taught to leave it out, and sometime later I was either taught to put it in again or else I just decided to revert. Not sure which. This is what comes of changing schools and school systems every year or two throughout childhood.

Buffysquirrel said:

I only use the Oxford comma where there is potential for confusion. Otherwise, it's superfluous .

Click to expand...

No, no. When it's present, all is right with the universe.

BethS said:

No, no. When it's present, all is right with the universe.

Click to expand...

Heh. Alternatively, people use it because then they don't have to learn when not to use it.

*runs away*

Would you need the final comma for this sentence?

Bob needed to go to the grocery store for milk, so he could get rid of his milk cows, save a bunch of money, and not wonder about how healthy the milk actually was.