5 ms·
The Oxford Comma – Why and Why Not (2024)
- EuanReid 7mo agoThere are so many times the Oxford comma prevents ambiguity. I have yet to see a counterexample. Commas separate list entries, don't change it for the last one.
- t0mek 7mo agoOnly tangentially related (but hey, it's HN) - I'm so happy about the support/requirements for trailing commas in the modern language syntax: x = [ 123, 456, 789, ]; It makes editing such a list so much easier. Also, the commit diffs are cleaner (you don't need to add comma to the last element when appending a new one).
- Izkata 7mo agoMy very first programming language doesn't use commas: x: [ 123 456 789 ]
- echohack5 7mo agoThe oxford comma debate is so annoying because it clearly has nothing but advantages. Removing commas from a delimited list does nothing to resolve ambiguity, whether lexicographically or syntactically. It's so useful as a delimiter and anti-ambiguity machine, that you don't even need spaces for it to work! See CSV or Japanese.
- mmooss 7mo ago> The oxford comma debate is so annoying because it clearly has nothing but advantages. .. if you care only about data communication and have no sense of beauty, aesthetics, rhythm or personality in writing.
- black_knight 7mo agoI like this: x = [ 123 , 456 , 789 ]
- tommy_axle 7mo agoNah, prepending will lead to a messier diff than the parent example.
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- stephencanon 7mo ago"I'd like to thank my mother, Ayn Rand, and God" is the usual example. Yes, you can reorder the list to remove the ambiguity, but sometimes the order of the list matters. The serial comma should be used when necessary to remove ambiguity, and not used when it introduces ambiguity. Rewrite the sentence when necessary. Worth noting that this is the Oxford University Press's own style rule!
- alistairSH 7mo agoI always heard this one... We invited the strippers, JFK, and Stalin to the party. [three groups invited - strippers, a president, and a premier] We invited the strippers, JFK and Stalin to the party. [the president and premier are strippers] Very different visual conjured by those two sentences.
- PaulDavisThe1st 7mo agoI'd prefer: We invited the strippers, JFK and Stalin, to the party [two strippers, named JFK and Stalin] if the goal is to minimize ambiguity.
- al_borland 7mo agoI can see it being tiresome to read text where the author is continuously interjecting clarification with brackets.
- PaulDavisThe1st 7mo agoThe square-bracket clarifications here are meta-text designed to absolutely clarify the intended reading of the preceding text, so that the reader can contrast their understanding with the intended one. There is no suggestion that one would do this in "regular" text.
- comprev 7mo ago"John helped his uncle, Jack off a horse" "John helped his uncle Jack off a horse" Two very different outcomes...
- n4r9 7mo agoWikipedia has an interesting example where it's still ambiguous: They went to Oregon with Betty, a maid, and a cook. It's not clear whether Betty is the maid. But tbh removing the comma doesn't help either. Personally if I wanted to indicate that Betty was the maid I would put "a maid" between brackets or hyphens.
- GoodJokes 7mo ago[dead]
- dheera 7mo agoThis sounds like a case where we should just change the syntax. If Betty is the maid it should be written: They went to Oregon with Betty [a maid], and a cook.
- dullcrisp 7mo ago(They (went (to Oregon) (with ((Betty (a maid)) and (a cook))))). ((That (is (the (most natural) syntax))) and ((all (of us)) (should (switch (to it))))).
- thom 7mo agoMany years ago working on natural language to SQL, when we had ambiguities this is how we’d clarify things with the user (albeit with the minimal amount of brackets necessary).
- readthenotes1 7mo agoIt looks like you might have learned how to diagram a sentence as a youth
- yellowapple 7mo agoIt seems you're speaking with a Lisp :P
- 1659447091 7mo agoThis is how I was taught. Use ( ) or -- -- here and the Oxford comma for list of 3 or more. I get lazy with adding the comma before the "and" in list, and without fail I hear my grandmother/father/teachers pointing out how wrong I am for doing so. Same for my use of semicolons followed by "and" or "but". I never realized the Oxford comma was even something up for debate.
- ajdude 7mo agoMy heroes are my parents, Superman and Wonder Woman!
- rationalist 7mo agoIf Superman and Wonder Woman were the parents, wouldn't a dash or colon be more appropriate than a comma?
- bennettnate5 7mo agoIt's common in English writing to interject additional details in on a noun by using a phrase separated with commas. I've personally found Oxford commas can in certain cases make it unclear whether you're interjecting or not, like so: Alice, the cook of the house and the guest were very chatty that evening. Alice, the cook of the house, and the guest were very chatty that evening. In the second, is Alice the cook of the house or not? This is the ambiguity of Oxford commas.
- function_seven 7mo agoIf you’re one to omit the Oxford comma in your writing, then how do I resolve the ambiguity in your first example?
- tzs 7mo ago> There are so many times the Oxford comma prevents ambiguity. I have yet to see a counterexample. In every counterexample that I have seen the ambiguity involves an appositive phrase set off by commas which is lurking nearby in the sentence. Commas are the most common way to set off an appositive phrases but most sources say that em dashes and parenthesis are also acceptable. This means you can use a simple rule and not have to worry about ambiguous lists: (1) always use the Oxford comma, and (2) if you need to set off an appositive phrase for an item in the list set it off with em dashes or parenthesis.
- semiversus 7mo agoYou mean "Why, and Why Not"
- happytoexplain 7mo agoSpoilers: There is no "why not" in the article (aside from "tradition").
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- exacube 7mo agoobligatory oxford comma: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_i1xk07o4g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_i1xk07o4g
- leemelone 7mo agoIt is important to use the Oxford Comma because it is commonly accepted, fits with tradition, and is just correct.
- PaulDavisThe1st 7mo ago.. and in your example, unnecessary. Or maybe I missed the joke.
- bluGill 7mo agoIt is necessary because of Tradition. I reject the validity of other traditions. Also: repent and join my religion.
- voxaai 7mo ago[dead]
- smitty1e 7mo agoThere is a book "Eats Shoots and Leaves" that gets at the importance of knowing when (and when not) do deploy the punctuation: https://www.amazon.com/Eats-Shoots-Leaves-Tolerance-Punctuation/dp/1592402038/ref=sr_1_1 https://www.amazon.com/Eats-Shoots-Leaves-Tolerance-Punctuat...? I also enjoy how meaning of a whole sentence can be inverted by a bit of punctuation: a. "A woman without her man is nothing." b. "A woman: without her, man is nothing."
- joosters 7mo agoLionel Hutz Works on contingency No money down Always the best example for missing punctuation!
- mjuarez 7mo agoobligatory xkcd: https://xkcd.com/2995/ https://xkcd.com/2995/
- gxd 7mo agoI banned the Oxford comma in all writing within my individual business. In fact, I released an entire 100K+ word narrative game without using Oxford commas (I consider it a bug if I left any behind).
- card_zero 7mo agoI use it religiously just for shits, and giggles.
- culi 7mo agoThe Oxford Comma is not used with just two items. This is just improper grammar. I mean you do you but don't call this the Oxford Comma.
- Rendello 7mo agoYou could make it a compile error like Zig (previously) did with tabs!
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- hilbert42 7mo agoI give up. How can we ever expect the subtleties of the Oxford comma—or perhaps whether a question mark should end a rhetorical question—to be widely understood when something as simple as use of the apostrophe is widely misunderstood? If so many consider the apostrophe so complex and confusing to the extent some grammarians are now advocating we abandon its possessive form then for the life of me I cannot see how we can expect more complex rules such as the I before E, except after C with its many exceptions ever to be understood by everyone. Both the greengrocer's apostrophe (pl: DVDs not DVD's) and the possessive form of the apostrophe are about the simplest notions one can learn in English. Yes, these rules have nuisances but I'm not referring to them but only their most common simplest forms. (By that I'd exclude unusual forms such as whether it's best to use 'greengrocer's apostrophe' or 'greengrocers' apostrophe' or that it doesn't matter. Or whether three 'Ss' should be used when using the apostrophe such as Kiss's Building — the name brazenly embellished in the frieze on a building near me.) My marks in English at school were rarely ever much above pass grade but even I had no difficulty in understanding the possessive apostrophe. In primary school we were taught this simplest of rules by just asking "who owns it?" then drop in the apostrophe immediately thereafter. Q: Who owns the bat? If only one boy owns it then the answer is "It's the boy's bat." If multiple boys own it then "It's the boys' bat." I cannot think of any rule much simpler than this, same with the greengrocer's apostrophe where just adding an 's' sans any apostrophe is similarly straightforward. It seems to me that teachers of English ought to actually learn to teach as they did when I was a kid. It's clear to me we need to bring the population up speed on the basics before venturing into esoterica, for all but the cognoscenti the Oxford comma can wait.
- neuracerebra-AI 7mo agoOxford Comma ride or die. Give me a break. It is clearly the only way to do it. I will never understand these people.
- orev 7mo agoWhen commas are used as part of a list of items, I treat them as if they’re bullet points written on a single line. For example, if you have items in a bullet list, but don’t want to use up all that vertical space, join the list into a single line and replace the bullets with commas. Or if the items are more complex, use a semicolon as the separator.