21–30 of 69 posts
There are so many times the Oxford comma prevents ambiguity. I have yet to see a counterexample. Commas separate list entries, don't change it for the last one.
Wikipedia has an interesting example where it's still ambiguous: They went to Oregon with Betty, a maid, and a cook. It's not clear whether Betty is the maid. But tbh removing the comma doesn't help either. Personally if I wanted to indicate that Betty was the maid I would put "a maid" between brackets or hyphens.
There are so many times the Oxford comma prevents ambiguity. I have yet to see a counterexample. Commas separate list entries, don't change it for the last one.
Wikipedia has an interesting example where it's still ambiguous: They went to Oregon with Betty, a maid, and a cook. It's not clear whether Betty is the maid. But tbh removing the comma doesn't help either. Personally if I wanted to indicate that Betty was the maid I would put "a maid" between brackets or hyphens.
They went to Oregon with Betty [a maid], and a cook.There are so many times the Oxford comma prevents ambiguity. I have yet to see a counterexample. Commas separate list entries, don't change it for the last one.
Only tangentially related (but hey, it's HN) - I'm so happy about the support/requirements for trailing commas in the modern language syntax: x = [ 123, 456, 789, ]; It makes editing such a list so much easier. Also, the commit diffs are cleaner (you don't need to add comma to the last element when appending a new one).
It's so useful as a delimiter and anti-ambiguity machine, that you don't even need spaces for it to work! See CSV or Japanese.
There are so many times the Oxford comma prevents ambiguity. I have yet to see a counterexample. Commas separate list entries, don't change it for the last one.
Wikipedia has an interesting example where it's still ambiguous: They went to Oregon with Betty, a maid, and a cook. It's not clear whether Betty is the maid. But tbh removing the comma doesn't help either. Personally if I wanted to indicate that Betty was the maid I would put "a maid" between brackets or hyphens.
“a maid, and cook.”
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"I'd like to thank my mother, Ayn Rand, and God" is the usual example. Yes, you can reorder the list to remove the ambiguity, but sometimes the order of the list matters. The serial comma should be used when necessary to remove ambiguity, and not used when it introduces ambiguity. Rewrite the sentence when necessary. Worth noting that this is the Oxford University Press's own style rule!
I always heard this one... We invited the strippers, JFK, and Stalin to the party. [three groups invited - strippers, a president, and a premier] We invited the strippers, JFK and Stalin to the party. [the president and premier are strippers] Very different visual conjured by those two sentences.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I always heard this one... We invited the strippers, JFK, and Stalin to the party. [three groups invited - strippers, a president, and a premier] We invited the strippers, JFK and Stalin to the party. [the president and premier are strippers] Very different visual conjured by those two sentences.
I'd prefer: We invited the strippers, JFK and Stalin, to the party [two strippers, named JFK and Stalin] if the goal is to minimize ambiguity.
There are so many times the Oxford comma prevents ambiguity. I have yet to see a counterexample. Commas separate list entries, don't change it for the last one.
Wikipedia has an interesting example where it's still ambiguous: They went to Oregon with Betty, a maid, and a cook. It's not clear whether Betty is the maid. But tbh removing the comma doesn't help either. Personally if I wanted to indicate that Betty was the maid I would put "a maid" between brackets or hyphens.
They went to Oregon with Betty who was a maid and a cook.
They went to Oregon with Betty, the maid, and the cook.There are so many times the Oxford comma prevents ambiguity. I have yet to see a counterexample. Commas separate list entries, don't change it for the last one.
Only tangentially related (but hey, it's HN) - I'm so happy about the support/requirements for trailing commas in the modern language syntax: x = [ 123, 456, 789, ]; It makes editing such a list so much easier. Also, the commit diffs are cleaner (you don't need to add comma to the last element when appending a new one).
x = [ 123
, 456
, 789
]Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wikipedia has an interesting example where it's still ambiguous: They went to Oregon with Betty, a maid, and a cook. It's not clear whether Betty is the maid. But tbh removing the comma doesn't help either. Personally if I wanted to indicate that Betty was the maid I would put "a maid" between brackets or hyphens.
This sounds like a case where we should just change the syntax. If Betty is the maid it should be written: They went to Oregon with Betty [a maid], and a cook.
((That (is (the (most natural) syntax))) and ((all (of us)) (should (switch (to it))))).
There is a book "Eats Shoots and Leaves" that gets at the importance of knowing when (and when not) do deploy the punctuation: https://www.amazon.com/Eats-Shoots-Leaves-Tolerance-Punctuat... ? I also enjoy how meaning of a whole sentence can be inverted by a bit of punctuation: a. "A woman without her man is nothing." b. "A woman: without her, man is nothing."
Works on contingency
No money down
Always the best example for missing punctuation!