jayjoy
Est. Contributor
- Messages
- 25
- Role
- Diaper Lover
Just like the title says. Any sentence whose interpretation is somewhat ambiguous without the Oxford comma could be rewritten to avoid confusion altogether.
Schwanensee said:I'm no native English speaker, but a sentence without it just seems...not quite as pretty to me. Of course, in my language we use a whole lot more commata in general than English does, but I feel like the use of the Oxford comma makes a sentence more readable. No idea how to explain this any further though...I'm no linguist
A panda bear walks into a bar and orders a sandwich. The waiter brings him the sandwich. The panda bear eats it, pulls out a pistol, kills the waiter, and gets up and starts to walk out. The bartender yells for him to stop. The panda bear asks, “What do you want?” The bartender replies, “First you come in here, order food, kill my waiter, then try to go without paying for your food.”
The panda bear turns around and says, “Hey! I’m a Panda. Look it up!” The bartender goes into the back room and looks up panda bear in the encyclopedia, which read: “Panda: a bear-like marsupial originating in Asian regions. Known largely for it’s stark black and white coloring. Eats shoots and leaves.”
michaelmc said:Typical American butchery of the English language YOU say your way of Spelling is best and correct yet the term "English" says it all if its spelt for example "colour" in England" then that is correct ,not "color" as is used in America! there are many examples i could use.Dont make it worse!
tiny said:There's no single right way to use language. It's up to you whether you follow formal English grammar or use the Oxford comma. The most important thing is that you're unambiguous. Secondly, it's good to be consistent in the way that you use grammar.
You must have heard of the book "Eats, Shoots and Leaves" based on the joke showing the occasional need for the Oxford comma in removing ambiguity?
Consider the difference in possible meanings between:
"Eats shoots and leaves," and
"Eats, shoots and leaves."
jayjoy said:That's a very amusing anecdote! I'm not familiar with the book, to be honest. Have you read it yourself? Would you recommend it?
jayjoy said:I very much so agree with your points regarding the importance of clarity and consistency.
jayjoy said:I know my initial post came off as very one-sided; as I said earlier in this reply, I have trouble understanding tone when I don't have a person's face and voice to follow, or a novel's worth of text to establish overall tone. That being said, I am aware that, especially with my newness to this forum, my tone was not clear. This topic is a bit of a joke to me; I know so many people who will violently defend the Oxford comma. I don't care either way; I find the fewer commas to be a more attractive look, but as long as I understand the sentence, it doesn't bother me. What does bother me, however, is when people posit that the Oxford comma is a necessity, because I simply believe that to be a false statement.
AnalogRTO said:"Let's eat, Grandma!"
versus
"Let's eat Grandma!"
AnalogRTO said:"Let's eat, Grandma!"
versus
"Let's eat Grandma!"
tiny said:I'd spend ages re-writing sentences to avoid split-infinitives or ending a sentence with a preposition, or... whatever.
And then I figured out that none of it really matters! You simply can't pick a set of grammar rules and apply them with absolute rigidity, unless you sacrifice readability and/or ambiguity. Pick a handful of books and you will see grammar being used in different ways, according to different styles and preferences.
My brain still sets of huge clanging bells when I see the grocers' apostrophe, or "less" being used incorrectly instead of "fewer" being used on expensive signage or official documents, but I've learnt to take a more relaxed approach to the whole thing and play a bit more fast and loose with grammar!
tiny said:Not at all! I mean... I've never seen a pub fight erupt over the use of a comma! :biggrin: I think you're safe.
dogboy said:Or as P. D. Q. Bach wrote and sang, "Throw the yule log on, throw the yule log on. Throw the yule log, on Uncle John." And that's why you need commas and in the right place.
Cottontail said:I always miss Oxford commas when people don't use them. That said, there are a hundred or so other crimes against the English language that I'd rank above this one--here on ADISC alone! I mean, we've got members who write (and presumably say) stuff like "should of" instead of "should've" or "should have." *cringe* How did you graduate from elementary school?! And then there are those who were apparently taught that "and me" is always wrong... Sigh...
dogboy said:Or as P. D. Q. Bach wrote and sang, "Throw the yule log on, throw the yule log on. Throw the yule log, on Uncle John." And that's why you need commas and in the right place.
Semantically, you're probably right. However, rewriting can change more than just word order - it can also change emphasis, implications, and rhetorical impact.jayjoy said:Any sentence whose interpretation is somewhat ambiguous without the Oxford comma could be rewritten to avoid confusion altogether.
jayjoy said:Just like the title says. Any sentence whose interpretation is somewhat ambiguous without the Oxford comma could be rewritten to avoid confusion altogether.
jayjoy said:The Oxford comma is a waste of ink. Change my mind.
Makubird said:I don't think we are seeing the real problems here.
The inverted question mark and exclamation mark at the beginning of a sentence in Spanish: Now that's a waste of ink !
Cottontail said:I always miss Oxford commas when people don't use them. That said, there are a hundred or so other crimes against the English language that I'd rank above this one--here on ADISC alone! I mean, we've got members who write (and presumably say) stuff like "should of" instead of "should've" or "should have." *cringe* How did you graduate from elementary school?! And then there are those who were apparently taught that "and me" is always wrong... Sigh...
jayjoy said:It's interesting to me that you say that! I hadn't considered the perspective of somebody who hadn't been raised with English as a first language. I kind of get what you mean, but it's the other way to me - I prefer the 'look' of a sentence that doesn't use the Oxford comma. I also understand that sometimes the Oxford comma might make things more readable... But I hold fast to my opinion that simply rewriting the sentence would also make it more readable.
I think I remember you saying in another post that your first language is German? I've studied German off and on in school (I might take a couple college classes as well next semester) because a lot of my family lives in Germany. It's funny, though - I've never put all that much thought into how commas are used in the German language. I'll definitely be thinking of that next time I practice my German.