If you’re looking for a grammatical convention that is guaranteed to spark an unnecessarily outraged debate, look no further than the Oxford comma [Editor’s note: I don’t know that I’d call it unnecessary].
You see, the Oxford comma isn’t just any old comma – it’s the comma that maintains lexical order and keeps things readable, proponents believe. It guarantees a capital O, for God’s sake. There are two arguments at the opposing kernels of the debate – but before you decide which side it is, how it’s used, and why it tends to upset people on both sides of the grammatical divide. (However, if you read carefully you can determine which camp Lifehacker falls into).
What is the oxford comma?
It sounds so chic, like it was handcrafted in an Ivy League grammar factory. The Oxford comma, also known as the serial comma or series comma, is the comma before the final conjunction (usually one and / or) in a list of three or more elements.
Or as Oxford University (who else?) appropriately worked out:
When writing a list, of course, include commas to separate each item. However, an Oxford comma is if you also put a comma in front of the “and” [Final Item]”.
G / O Media can receive a commission
Here is an example of the Oxford comma in the wild:
He enjoyed drinking soda, reading comics, and driving his razor scooter.
Without the Oxford comma, this sentence would read:
He enjoyed drinking soda, reading comics, and driving his razor scooter.
Ok, just enough. But why do some of its proponents become hysterical when it is not used? And in what contexts is it traditionally ignored?
When is the Oxford comma used? (And when should it be?)
Newspapers typically omit the Oxford comma, but reservations are maintained where inclusion is necessary for clarity. In the old days – when Print newspapers didn’t die– –Newsprint limited real estate provided, meaning even a tiny, perhaps unnecessary, comma could spread a story on the sidelines.
But aside from this specific, esoteric fact, there are no really clear rules that dictate when to use it. Rather, it’s basically a preference, with American English preferring it a little more often than our British counterparts. Many publications do not strictly enforce the use of the Oxford comma and only mandate its use if absolutely necessary for clarity.
Here are some examples of how it can be used effectively, courtesy of Oxford University:
They sent gifts to their sons Kate and Sophie.
Without the comma in front of the last conjunction, you will be forgiven that “your sons” are called Kate and Sophie.
Please get me bread and cheese, orange juice and lemonade and my throat candies.
As the university notes, “the sentence without the Oxford comma becomes harder to read because there are already other conjunctions that group pairs of things that go together as individual items on a list.”
All of this seems fair, but what about sentences that don’t necessarily need a closing, clarifying comma? Cue the debates (and just handshakes).
Why is there a debate?
Basically there are purists who believe that the Oxford comma should be ubiquitous in all grammatical contexts, and there are other people who think such a strict use is excessive.
Indeed, one of the main arguments against the Oxford comma is that it would be better to rephrase certain sentences to remove the ambiguity that the lack of a comma sometimes inadvertently creates.
To illustrate, here is an example Grammerly: The phrase “I love my parents, Lady Gaga and Humpty Dumpty” is certainly preferable to “I love my parents, Lady Gaga and Humpty Dumpty”. But it could be restructured to say, “I love Lady Gaga, Humpty Dumpty and my parents.” The latter example is far less confusing and shatters any possibility that Lady Gaga and Humpty Dumpty could raise a child together without over-seasoning the dish with punctuation, so to speak.
Anyway, the Oxford comma definitely has its use, although sometimes it is redundant. After all, it’s only a comma, so there’s no real need Write a paper to support their use in all contexts.
