“I don’t see how you can write anything of value if you don’t offend someone.“
― Marvin Harris (1927–2001), American Anthropologist
We are such suckers for controversy. Is it our frustration at the lack of control over others’ freedom of thought that comes bubbling to the surface whenever we hear something that doesn’t fit into our own personal black-and-white idea of the world? Why do we have such intense feelings about often arbitrary ideas? Is it that someone else’s opinion somehow offends our sense of self? I’m at a loss to explain it, but I do know that the so-called Oxford comma is one such debate that gets the blood boiling!
The serial comma, often referred to as the Oxford comma or the Harvard comma because of its inclusion in these two respected style guides, is the comma that falls before the and or or in a list or series of items. A wonderful blog post for The Economist entitled “Oxford comma, still with us” does a wonderful job of explaining the debate and offering up an opinion, using this common example:
red, white and blue à no Oxford comma
red, white, and blue à Oxford comma
According to Wikipedia (which shows an excellent list of the preferences of some major publishers and presses in this ongoing war):
“… This practice is controversial and is known as the serial comma or Oxford comma, because it is part of the house style of Oxford University Press.” It is used less often in British English, but some British style guides require it, including the Oxford University Press style manual. Some, including Fowler’s Modern English Usage, use it only where necessary to avoid ambiguity.
Proponents of the Oxford comma use the ambiguity argument with zeal, often citing examples of compound nouns where the omission of the comma creates a hiccup in the reader’s experience:
My usual breakfast is coffee, bacon and eggs and toast. Incorrect
My usual breakfast is coffee, bacon and eggs, and toast. Oxford comma
The serial comma, they say, clarifies the compound noun bacon and eggs and avoid a strange-looking list with too many ands. But what other options do we have? There are lots!
My usual breakfast is coffee, bacon, eggs and toast. No Oxford comma
My usual breakfast is coffee, bacon, eggs, and toast. Oxford comma
My usual breakfast is bacon and eggs, coffee and toast. No Oxford comma
My usual breakfast is bacon and eggs, coffee, and toast. Oxford comma
All are correct, punctuationally (I know this is not a word – yet), but the debate rages over which one is more correct. Hmm…?
The comma is intended to provide clarity and avoid confusion, not create more of it! We should always have our readers at the forefront of our mind, and it is certainly preferable that our intended meaning is clear. And I agree, in many cases the Oxford comma does a good job of this. Take the following sentence, for example:
We invited the strippers, JFK and Stalin.*
In this case, we have two strippers named JFK and Stalin. If we inserted the serial comma, we would understand that we invited strippers, plus JFK, plus Stalin. (Either way, it sounds like some party!) But the serial comma does little to clear up the ambiguity in the following instance:
We invited the stripper, JFK, and Stalin.
Are there three invitees or is it just Stalin and a stripper named JFK? In this case, the ambiguity remains and the only solution would be a rewrite. So this comma that people say clarifies the meaning of everything can be just as guilty of causing ambiguity!
What’s worse, strict use of the rule lends itself to the misuse of the comma in other situations.
The judge called a recess, and the jury left the courtroom to deliberate. Correct
The jury deliberated for an hour, and returned to the courtroom to read their decision. Incorrect
The first sentence is a compound sentence, where two subjects are joined by a comma and the coordinating conjunction and. The second sentence is a simple sentence with a compound predicate (two verbs being used by the same subject), and the comma before the and is incorrect. Unfortunately, a comma is often mistakenly placed here for the simple reason that we have been trained to insert a comma before every and, partially thanks to the confusion surrounding the serial comma.
How is your blood pressure so far? Lynne Truss, the author of Eats, Shoots and Leaves, offers this advice: “There are people who embrace the Oxford comma and those who don’t, and I’ll just say this: never get between these people when drink has been taken.”
So where do I stand? Well, it’s true that I have never liked the insertion of the comma where the meaning is obvious and clear. To me, that extra comma is a waste of space (much like the double space after a period). What is wrong with “red, white and blue”? I don’t believe adding a comma after white makes it any more understandable, but rather, enforcing an Oxford comma here shows a lack of flexibility regarding content and gives rise to unnecessary rigidity. It makes writers and editors slaves to rules and their exceptions instead of using punctuation as a tool for communication. Not to mention that it shows a lack of respect for the intelligence of your readers.
So, it would seem that I prefer to have a choice! I am not a lover of the Oxford comma, but neither am I a hater, especially when it makes sense to use it. I prefer to use my comma sense. *groan*
And it turns out, I’m not alone. While the University of Oxford Press demands the use of their Oxford comma, the University’s Public Affairs Directorate has decided on their own style guide:
Um, hold on. Where’s their Oxford comma?
Look at that. They choose to use it where it makes the most sense to do so, and they seem to trust in their readers to be discerning enough to know their intended meaning. Thank you.
So while the war rages on, I’ll quietly choose to live by the wise words of the American band Vampire Weekend**: “Who gives a f@#k about an Oxford Comma?”
*Check out his fantastic Infogram showing the Oxford comma in use!
**Vampire Weekend reportedly wrote this song after learning of a Columbia University Facebook group called Students for the Preservation of the Oxford Comma. See the video here.
G, RL. “Oxford comma, still with us” in The Economist online, June 30, 2011 http://www.economist.com/blogs/johnson/2011/06/commas
Truss, Lynne. Eats, Shoots and Leaves (Gotham Books, 2006)
University of Oxford Press, House Style Guide online http://global.oup.com/uk/academic/authors/AuthorGuidelinesMain/HouseStyle/#lev4
University of Oxford Public Affairs Directorate, Style Guide online