Message from discussion Oxford commas
Received: by 10.66.88.231 with SMTP id bj7mr4331203pab.45.1350402712603;
Tue, 16 Oct 2012 08:51:52 -0700 (PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 10:51:51 -0500
Subject: Re: Oxford commas
References: <email@example.com> <kpOes.firstname.lastname@example.org> <wdednVg3lujdGOHNnZ2dnUVZ_vqdnZ2d@vex.net> <vO9fs.304541$EC1.email@example.com>
From: m...@vex.net (Mark Brader)
X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test76 (Apr 2, 2001)
Originator: m...@vex.net (Mark Brader)
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 10:51:51 -0500
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
> > > I tend to take a pragmatic attitude to the so-called "Oxford comma"; I
> > > generally omit it, but will insert one if it's needed to aid clarity or
> > > avoid ambiguity. I don't see why there has to be a hard-and-fast rule.
> > I think a pragmatic attitude on this requires having a "hard-and-fast
> > rule".
> Why? Here's an example where I wouldn't use the "Oxford comma":
(Could we call it the serial comma, please? "Oxford comma" makes it
sound as if nobody else uses it.)
> Today I bought an apple, an orange and a banana.
If I hadn't been forced to read large amounts of other material that
was punctuated in that evil way, I'd be inclined to want to figure out
why "an orange and a banana" was being placed in apposition to "an apple".
Mark Brader | "On a word boundary, Luke, don't just hack at it...
Toronto | The bytesaber is the ceremonial weapon of the Red-Eye
m...@vex.net | Knight. It is used to trim offensive lines of code.
| Handwaving won't get you anywhere. Attune yourself
| with the Source." -- Tarr / Hastings / Raymond
My text in this article is in the public domain.