[deleted]
The Oxford Comma – Why and Why Not (2024)
41–50 of 69 posts
Re: The Oxford Comma – Why and Why Not (2024)
#42There 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.
As written it is perfectly clear that Betty is neither the maid nor the cook, neither of whom the author bothered to name in this sentence. If that wasn't the author's intention they should grammar better.
Re: The Oxford Comma – Why and Why Not (2024)
#43Earlier 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.
If Betty was the maid and the cook, I would write... They went to Oregon with Betty who was a maid and a cook. If it was three people, I would write... They went to Oregon with Betty, the maid, and the cook.
The maid implies there was just one. Who travels with their only maid? Who will keep the manor lights on?
Re: The Oxford Comma – Why and Why Not (2024)
#44There 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.
[deleted]
Re: The Oxford Comma – Why and Why Not (2024)
#45I banned the Oxford comma in all writing within my individual business. In fact, I released an entire 100K+ word narrative game without using Oxford commas (I consider it a bug if I left any behind).
I use it religiously just for shits, and giggles.
The Oxford Comma is not used with just two items. This is just improper grammar.
I mean you do you but don't call this the Oxford Comma.
Re: The Oxford Comma – Why and Why Not (2024)
#46Earlier 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.
As written it is perfectly clear that Betty is neither the maid nor the cook, neither of whom the author bothered to name in this sentence. If that wasn't the author's intention they should grammar better.
[deleted]
Re: The Oxford Comma – Why and Why Not (2024)
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I can see it being tiresome to read text where the author is continuously interjecting clarification with brackets.
The square-bracket clarifications here are meta-text designed to absolutely clarify the intended reading of the preceding text, so that the reader can contrast their understanding with the intended one.
There is no suggestion that one would do this in "regular" text.
Re: The Oxford Comma – Why and Why Not (2024)
#48It is important to use the Oxford Comma because it is commonly accepted, fits with tradition, and is just correct.
.. and in your example, unnecessary. Or maybe I missed the joke.
It is necessary because of Tradition.
I reject the validity of other traditions. Also: repent and join my religion.
Re: The Oxford Comma – Why and Why Not (2024)
#49There 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.
It's common in English writing to interject additional details in on a noun by using a phrase separated with commas. I've personally found Oxford commas can in certain cases make it unclear whether you're interjecting or not, like so:
Alice, the cook of the house and the guest were very chatty that evening.
Alice, the cook of the house, and the guest were very chatty that evening.
In the second, is Alice the cook of the house or not? This is the ambiguity of Oxford commas.
Re: The Oxford Comma – Why and Why Not (2024)
#50There 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.
Or just switch the order if Betty is the maid and you don't want to provide additional context:
``` They went to Oregon with a cook and Betty, a maid. ```