This HTML5 document contains 13 embedded RDF statements represented using HTML+Microdata notation.

The embedded RDF content will be recognized by any processor of HTML5 Microdata.

Subject Item

n2:

rdfs:label

Oxford Comma Oxford comma

rdfs:comment

The Oxford Comma is a tool of the NeoCons. They want you to have to use an extra keystroke every time you type a list, despite it being totally meaningless and illogical. The time that you take typing or writing that extra character, the NeoCons steal a little bit more of your money, and further their agenda. Oxford comma (also known as the "serial comma" or "Harvard comma") is the name given to the optional final comma in a series. In the phrase "ham, egg, and chips" it's the comma between "egg" and "and". Entirely optional - correct punctuation neither demands nor requires it. And like everything that is optional, it has its adherents and its detractors, and, of course, there is also the vast majority of English speakers who don't care one way or another. 1. * 2. 1. * Case for the Oxford comma

dcterms:subject

n4: n6: n9: n13: n14:

n7:wikiPageUsesTemplate

n8:

n11:wikiPageUsesTemplate

n12:

n5:abstract

Oxford comma (also known as the "serial comma" or "Harvard comma") is the name given to the optional final comma in a series. In the phrase "ham, egg, and chips" it's the comma between "egg" and "and". Entirely optional - correct punctuation neither demands nor requires it. And like everything that is optional, it has its adherents and its detractors, and, of course, there is also the vast majority of English speakers who don't care one way or another. This essay examines why the Oxford comma or was invented, then refutes the arguments of those who religiously use it, and recommends that any writer who understands what he writes has no need to make its use mandatory. 1. * 2. 1. * Case for the Oxford comma The main argument, that of the Oxford comma's adherents, is that using a comma just before the final "and" or "or" of a series in some cases eliminates ambiguity. This is true, and should be so obvious that we need not delay ourselves with examples. But then lists can be difficult to write, particularly long ones. It is easy to confuse the reader, so a careful writer will always take special care with them. Indeed, some writers use semi-colons instead of commas, or, more frequently, a mixture of semi-colons and commas, so that more convoluted ideas can be expressed. Others may use dashes or even rewrite the list as a set of numbered points. The classic example given by adherents of the Oxford comma is to ask the reader to note the ambiguity in the sentence "I would like to thank my parents, Ayn Rand and God". They then favour the sentence "I would like to thank my parents, Ayn Rand, and God" and point out that the writer professes no exceptional parentage in the latter. (Of course, it probably helps to be American and to know who Ayn Rand is to fully appreciate the joke.) But it is true, ambiguity (in this case not true ambiguity, but instead unintentional hilarity) is avoided by careful use of the comma. The adherents then go on to say that because the Oxford comma sometimes eliminates ambiguity it ought always be used. It's a case of consistency. And what's wrong with that? It's neat, and using Oxford commas in all lists necessarily means that unintentional meanings do not slip in and detract the reader. The Oxford Comma is a tool of the NeoCons. They want you to have to use an extra keystroke every time you type a list, despite it being totally meaningless and illogical. The time that you take typing or writing that extra character, the NeoCons steal a little bit more of your money, and further their agenda.