My Microsoft account at work made me re-think this because it is pushing me to add more commas that I usually do.

I’m of two minds here. On one hand, punctuation is for clarity. If a sentence is clear without additional hyphens or commas, you could argue that they are not needed. For example:

I want ice cream too. (Acceptable in informal writing.)

I want ice cream, too. (Expected in formal writing.)

I want to eat, mom. (Always a good idea.) I want to eat mom. (Or the police could be involved.)

Or with hyphens when putting two adjectives before a noun, as with: “a well-known author” or “a high-speed chase.” With both of these, leaving out the hyphen would not change the meaning or cause confusion.

However, with “high-school students” vs “high school students” the police could get involved again over omitting the hyphen.

I tend toward leaving it out unless it improves clarity or changes meaning.

Now for the Oxford comma. Have we all seen the memes?

However you feel about strippers, is would probably be less confusing if “the strippers, Kennedy, and Stalin” suddenly arrived, than it would be if “the strippers, Kennedy and Stalin” arrived.

Not using the Oxford comma can make the phrase ambiguous, but when it doesn’t become ambiguous, as with, “Get me the carrots, potatoes and celery”, we can really leave it out without problems.

I go back and forth on these. Even the most careful writers and editors can fail to see the ambiguity in their phrases, so choosing to always include the punctuation is a good way to go. Then again, if you feel confident and want to remove the clutter, I can respect that too. If you have a style guide you must follow, do that, if not, then stay consistent with whatever you choose.

Thoughts? Or more fun examples are welcome.

  • gaydarless
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 year ago

    I much prefer using the Oxford comma because it does eliminate ambiguity in most cases. It also feels more natural to read a list that includes one. Without the final comma, I don’t have the reminder to pause in my reading cadence, and I often find it a bit jarring. It doesn’t impede understanding, for me, except where the phrasing is already ambiguous. It’s just mildly uncomfortable.

    • zeus ⁧ ⁧ ∽↯∼@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      i’m generally pro oxford comma, but i do want to point out it’s not a “free” reduction of ambiguity - it can sometimes cause a list look like a set of parenthetical commas. bad example, but i can’t think of anything better: “the flowers came in teal, a shade of blue, and orange”. do I think teal is a shade of blue? or a separate member of the list?

      (not that “the flowers came in teal, a shade of blue and orange” is any better in this instance

      • gaydarless
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        I see what you’re saying. Putting my editorial hat on, I’d typically recommend restructuring a sentence like the one in your example. It’s ambiguous regardless of punctuation.

        • zeus ⁧ ⁧ ∽↯∼@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          yeah, in general i’d say you’re right. but in cases where it’s not possible (such as transcribing speech) it’s a plausible issue

          • corsicanguppy
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            the flowers came in teal, [as well as] a shade of blue, and orange.

      • Gleddified
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        My second most overused punctuation (after commas) is parentheses.

        The flowers came in teal (a shade of blue) and orange.

        • zeus ⁧ ⁧ ∽↯∼@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          that doesn’t prevent a list looking like it’s parenthetical, even when it’s not though

          or, for that matter, ambiguity between talking to someone and about someone:

          Mark:

          Who’s coming to the party?

          Stephen:

          Mary, Mark, and Joanna.

          is stephen patronisingly addressing mark, or talking about another mark that i know?

          • corsicanguppy
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            If Stephen was addressing Mark, that second comma would be a semi-colon.

            • zeus ⁧ ⁧ ∽↯∼@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              really? i always feel like i overuse semicolons, and i’m not sure i’d put one there

              Mary, Mark, and Joanna

              Mary, Mark; and Joanna

              Mary; and Joanna

              only the first looks correct at first glance to me