Oxford Commas - Do You Use Them?

[SydSim]

so funny! I am the opposite. I was taught that it was incorrect to put a comma before the "and". It looks incorrect to me when i see it in a sentence. The offender might as well have written "your" in place of "you're"! Come to think of it, i don't recall every seeing the use of such a comma in published material - now i'll be on the lookout for one. Until i saw this thread i didn't really realize that anyone actually thought the extraneous comma could be an example of proper grammar! You learn something new every day.

+1

 

[pogo791]

[ ... ] Here is a basic answer from the AP Stylebook FAQ page regarding the use of oxford commas:

"Q: Is clarity essentially the only rule determining when a serial comma should be included?
A: In a simple series, AP doesn't use a comma before the last item. For a series of complex terms, though, use commas after each for clarity." [ ... ]

I am one of those few who responded "sometimes", and I agree with the AP Stylebook on this one. Simple series can usually do without a comma. Sometimes a comma may help.

If you will pardon me for saying this, most of the examples strong advocates of the Oxford comma have provided in previous posts seem rather contrived. I would agree that an extra comma might clarify things in sentences that go so far as to include references to rhinoceri, pet detectives in Winnebagos and a purported news item on a marriage between Obama and Castro. In normal usage, however, most sentences listing a series are simpler and easier to understand.

As for Wendy's two examples,

According to her will, when Agnes Warwick passed away, she left the bulk of her estate to Thomas Warwick, Alice Johnson, Penelope Smythe and Frederick Warwick.

According to her will, when Agnes Warwick passed away, she left the bulk of her estate to Thomas Warwick, Alice Johnson, Penelope Smythe, and Frederick Warwick.

As a lawyer, I would say that Penelope and Frederick would be faced with having to share in a third of the estate only if the sentence read as follows: "According to her will, when Agnes Warwick passed away, she left the bulk of her estate to Thomas Warwick, Alice Johnson, and Penelope Smythe and Frederick Warwick." (Note that additional "and" before Penelope.)

The rule that has been drummed into my head is that the Oxford comma is usually unnecessary in the case of brief series such as the one used by the OP as an illustration: "I like ice cream, milk, cheese and yoghurt." I really don't think there is all that much confusion. (And if the OP liked cheese and yoghurt together, the sentence could have been written "I like ice cream, milk, and cheese and yoghurt smashed together into one big gooey mess.") The "and" has the same function as the comma.

Punctuation does provide rhythm to a sentence. If the sentence is brief and clear, adding a comma is like adding an unwanted beat.

 

[sam_gordon]

I am one of those few who responded "sometimes", and I agree with the AP Stylebook on this one. Simple series can usually do without a comma. Sometimes a comma may help.

If you will pardon me for saying this, most of the examples strong advocates of the Oxford comma have provided in previous posts seem rather contrived. I would agree that an extra comma might clarify things in sentences that go so far as to include references to rhinoceri, pet detectives in Winnebagos and a purported news item on a marriage between Obama and Castro. In normal usage, however, most sentences listing a series are simpler and easier to understand.

As for Wendy's two examples,


As a lawyer, I would say that Penelope and Frederick would be faced with having to share in a third of the estate only if the sentence read as follows: "According to her will, when Agnes Warwick passed away, she left the bulk of her estate to Thomas Warwick, Alice Johnson, and Penelope Smythe and Frederick Warwick." (Note that additional "and" before Penelope.)

The rule that has been drummed into my head is that the Oxford comma is usually unnecessary in the case of brief series such as the one used by the OP as an illustration: "I like ice cream, milk, cheese and yoghurt." I really don't think there is all that much confusion. (And if the OP liked cheese and yoghurt together, the sentence could have been written "I like ice cream, milk, and cheese and yoghurt smashed together into one big gooey mess.") The "and" has the same function as the comma.

Punctuation does provide rhythm to a sentence. If the sentence is brief and clear, adding a comma is like adding an unwanted beat.

Adding an unnecessary "and" is better?

 

[momto2girls]

Exactly! I was taught in HS to use it & (pretentious as it sounds) think that it looks "uneducated" to not use it.

I do too. I am always pointing out the lack of Oxford commas to my girls and showing them how the meaning is often less clear without it. I'm determined to keep the Oxford comma alive for the next generation.

 

[U2_rocks!]

Amanda found herself in the Winnebago with her ex-boyfriend, an herbalist and a pet detective.

Amanda found herself in the Winnebago with her ex-boyfriend, an herbalist, and a pet detective.

These are two VERY different sentences. One comma makes a world of difference and it would hugely impact your understanding of the text. The Oxford comma is necessary.

If you are used to writing without the Oxford comma you would write the above a little differently. If you wanted to say that the ex-boyfriend was an herbalist as well as a pet detective, you would write: "......with her ex-boyfriend, an herbalist and pet detective." i.e. you wouldn't use "a" again.

 

[JanaDee]

Exactly! I was taught in HS to use it & (pretentious as it sounds) think that it looks "uneducated" to not use it.

I was taught in high school and college (journalism/english major) to not use it and I think it looks uneducated to use it.

 

[cabanafrau]

The Oxford comma is a pet peeve of mine and I despise it whenever I see it.

 

[pogo791]

Adding an unnecessary "and" is better?

Which example are you referring to?

The "and" in the "I like ice cream, milk, cheese and yoghurt" is hardly unnecessary. I assume that you do not mean this example.

Methinks, therefore, you mean my suggestion for re-writing the example that deals with Agnes Warwick's will.

The two versions that were originally suggested were:

(1) "According to her will, when Agnes Warwick passed away, she left the bulk of her estate to Thomas Warwick, Alice Johnson, Penelope Smythe and Frederick Warwick."

(2) "According to her will, when Agnes Warwick passed away, she left the bulk of her estate to Thomas Warwick, Alice Johnson, Penelope Smythe, and Frederick Warwick."

Wendy had suggested that the first version implies that Penelope and Frederick would share one-third of the (bulk of the) estate. My point was that this seems a rather weak implication. Had a lawyer - Oxford trained or not - wanted to be clear in saying so (and most lawyers I know do want to be as clear as possible, sometimes going to extremes in doing so), s/he would have written,
(3) "According to her will, when Agnes Warwick passed away, she left the bulk of her estate to Thomas Warwick, Alice Johnson, and Penelope Smythe and Frederick Warwick."

Thus, I added the "and" simply to make the reverse point that you seem to be making - the "and" isn't used to replace the Oxford comma but to clarify that the drafter had intended that the last two in the series were to be seen on par with one another.

(Had I written that sentence, I probably would have written that good ol' Agnes, bless her soul, had left a third of her estate to Tom, a third to Alice, and a third to be shared by Pen and Fred.)

 

[U2_rocks!]

If I had written that sentence I would have listed Penelope and Frederick first if I wanted them to be together, then listed the others - that way there's no doubt. i.e. I would have switched the order to prevent the ambiguity.

 

[dawnhaze]

I use it, but I feel like debating it is silly, since most instances of clarity confusion can be resolved by applying a bit of basic logic to the context. Only in the most complex examples is it really "necessary" for understanding.

For me, it's like the pronunciation of gif - I don't care what other people say, because I can figure out what they mean.

 

[MrsDuck]

Yay from me!

 

[AustinTink]

I was taught in high school and college (journalism/english major) to not use it and I think it looks uneducated to use it.

Apparently, we are in the minority even though we studied (at great length) the written word. Everyone else thinks Journalism students, English/Communications professors and newspaper writers appear uneducated.

 

[sam_gordon]

Apparently, we are in the minority even though we studied (at great length) the written word. Everyone else thinks Journalism students, English/Communications professors and newspaper writers appear uneducated.

For the record, I studied Journalism and I use the Oxford comma.

If you use the comma, can the sentence be misconstrued?
If you don't use the comma, can the sentence be misconstrued?

 

[olwyngdh]

I was taught in high school and college (journalism/english major) to not use it and I think it looks uneducated to use it.

I have an MA in English and I think it looks uneducated not to use it. From what I vaguely remember from a historical linguistics class, it was first dropped in journalistic print because of the extra piece of type needed to set the press (time, money and layout considerations). Typesetting is also the reason for a large number of abbreviations that are in common use.

 

[PigletsPal2]

I posed this question to DD#2, a textbook editor (K-12) and freelance writer. She said she uses the Oxford comma in her textbook editing but does not (usually) use it in her own writing. Go figure!

BTW, I'm with a pp who said she used two spaces after a period. I was taught that way in HS a hundred years ago, and it's a hard habit to break. The only time I don't use it is when I'm posting a tweet and I need to conserve my characters.

Queen Colleen

 

[A_Princess'_Daddy]

I have always used the Oxford comma. The only people I have met who argue against its use are journalists, generally because the AP style guide advises against it, but I don't spend a lot of time with journalists so it rarely comes up. When I think about it, however, it rarely comes up in any conversation, but this is at least the second time I've seen a thread about it on the Dis...

 

[pogo791]

May I throw in links to two British commentators (commatators!)? (Neither one eats, shoots and leaves. ) Both argue that there is no rule regarding the Oxford comma. Use the Oxford comma if it clarifies the sentence. Don't use it if it does not.

Harry Mount has written extensively on British and American usage ( http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/culture/harrymount/100054519/let’s-put-a-full-stop-to the-oxford-comma/ ) I like the examples he provides:

quote
There are, admittedly, times when an Oxford comma makes better sense. “I’d like to thank my parents, Elvis, and Marilyn Monroe” is less confusing than “I’d like to thank my parents, Elvis and Marilyn Monroe.”

But then again, the Oxford comma can be more confusing, too. “I’d like to thank my father, Elvis, and Marilyn Monroe” causes more trouble than “I’d like to thank my father, Elvis and Marilyn Monroe.”
unquote

The other British source is the "Johnson" blog in The Economist magazine
( http://www.economist.com/blogs/johnson/2012/06/commas ). He points out that there are comma rules, and comma conventions. Rules should be followed. The "Oxford comma" is a convention.

Bottom line: If you prefer the Oxford comma, use it. If you do not, don't. But don't say that the other side is uneducated or has no sense of style.

 

[JanaDee]

Apparently, we are in the minority even though we studied (at great length) the written word. Everyone else thinks Journalism students, English/Communications professors and newspaper writers appear uneducated.

That's fine, I'm not the least bit worried about it. My world will continue to go 'round.

 

[kaytieeldr]

I learned not to use it, despite growing uo just a few miles from Harvard. I've trained myself to use it because it makes sentences make sense.

But it isn't a rule at all.

I never use it and almost cringe when I see one, though I understand it isn't incorrect.

Interesting to note that in some languages, Italian for one, it's considered grammatically incorrect.

Fair enough. I won't use it if I ever write in Italian, or any other foreign language.

...But then again, the Oxford comma can be more confusing, too. “I’d like to thank my father, Elvis, and Marilyn Monroe” causes more trouble than “I’d like to thank my father, Elvis and Marilyn Monroe.”
unquote

Wouldn't, in this instance, the proper format be to either not use a comma after Elvis, or to use not the Oxford comma but the more common "extra information-separating" one?

 

[deedeetoo]

I always use it and have been taught that it is needed.

That said, I am apparently the only one on this board who is unfamiliar with the term "oxford comma". I just don't remember ever hearing that name before. I opened this thread to find out what people were talking about.