WARNING: At times, I get quite preachy about the Oxford comma. As I said on Facebook, I'm rather passionately attached to the little curleque. Some might even call it a love affair. A series without the final comma has a weird look of incompleteness about it that puts me off. My attention is caught by the missing comma, rather than the thought the writer expresses. That's to say nothing of the lack of clarity that can result from the missing mark.
Thanks to Ann for the wall post on Facebook from The Grammar Police.
I'm with you! It seems a mess not using them (If only in interpretation!).
ReplyDeleteYou are a bulwark against the barbarians, my dear. I will fight by your side.
ReplyDeleteCiss B and Paul, thank you. Soldiers all against the invasion of the barbarian hordes!
ReplyDeleteheheheh, eheh, heh!
ReplyDeleteActually, we were taught it was optional--barbarian that I am. But I do agree!
--it's margaret
My dear margaret, if you wish me to pay attention to what you're saying, use the comma. ;-)
ReplyDeletefear of rejection gets my attention (well, sometimes it does, depends).
ReplyDeleteI will comply. Promise.
Leonardo, Ricardo, Lenny, Leo, Len, and Leonard
Len, worry not. My motto is: Hate the writing without the Oxford comma; love the writer. You know what I mean. ;-)
ReplyDeleteFowler refers to it as the "serial comma". Fowler (at least the second edition; I haven't read and cannot vouch for the third) is the grammarian's Bible.
ReplyDeleteThe serial comma is essential to clear writing.
(And by all means check out his entry on the plural of "octopus".)
Octopodes, yet.
ReplyDeletePaul (A.), I won't argue with you about the final authority on grammar and English usage. We both agree on the Oxford (or serial) comma, which is what's important.
ReplyDeleteI don't think I could bring myself to use octopi, except ironically, but I gather the plural is octopuses. Is there an online version of Fowler's? I couldn't find it, if there is.
IIRC, I was taught to use it.
ReplyDeleteThen learned it was optional.
I thought my writing looked much better WITHOUT it.
I still do.
I think it looks anal (make of that what you will).
I don't think I've told this tale here, so here goes. It's too long, but the context is sort of unfamiliar to people who don't spend time in the finance biz.
ReplyDeleteSo, years ago, the company my buddies and I had started was ready to sell its stock to the general public. This process involves massive disclosure of info about the company, with the risk of being massively sued if anything is askew; so the writing of the prospectus is an elaborate ritual with a review process that would turn a scientific journal editor purple, and a product written in a ritual prose style that wards off the Liability Demons. Oh, and that's mainly done by the underwriters and lawyers, but we took an active part because we had silly ideas about being responsible for stuff we were liable for.
Well, the lead guy for the lead underwiter (lead as in leader, not as in lead pipe) did not do serial commas. When material was added to the draft document, it was properly reduced to a consistent style, no matter who wrote it, and it went into review in that form; it was then nit-picked to death, word by word, by a trained team. Plus us.
And here's the thing: the ritual language involves many, many lists of things, some with three items and some with lots more. And the items in the lists are commonly a bit complex themselves, not just a word or two. In fact, an item might contain some explanatory or expository matter that could include a list.
Nested lists. Without serial commas. Failure. Over and over as the document developed, my colleague the CEO and I (two good programmers skilled at reviewing the logic of programs) would spot ambiguities in a list of lists, or sometimes plain nonsense; and in most cases the cure was to delineate the lists more precisely, using serial commas.
By the time it was over, nearly all the fancy lists employed serial commas, inserted case by case with due discussion of each one. We avoided gloating over this; after all, the success of the offering overruled any other consideration. I mean, we avoided public gloating.
Serial commas rule!
PS: The offering worked, and we were never sued over it.
The innkeeper pointed out that the spaces between George and and and and and Dragon were not of equal width".
ReplyDeleteThanks, Porlock. Yours is both a cautionary tale and a success story on the necessity of the serial comma.
ReplyDeleteLapin, ???
Refers to a sign for a pub called the "George and Dragon". "George" and "and", and "and" and "Dragon".
ReplyDeleteWhat I love is that, because of the Internet, there's a perception that making your grammar up as you go is the rule, and, if you correct someone, you are a grammar Nazi.
ReplyDeleteRather, I should say:
ur a gramer natzee
There's a reason cash register have pictures instead of words and numbers, these days.
cash registers
ReplyDeleteI hate this human body and its limitations!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
it r a movilitey natzee
You're right about cash registers needing pictures. And few of the young people know how to make change, so the register tells them the amount of change.
ReplyDeleteBut sometimes I confuse them. Say I make a purchase that costs $11.43. I will hand the clerk a $20 bill, a $1 bill and .43, and they will look at me in bafflement. I say, 'My change is $10,' and they still look baffled and unbelieving. Then I say, 'Punch into your register $21.43.' And lo! The register tells them to give me $10 in change, and they are fine with that.