Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

comma before 'and' vs. no comma before 'and'

  • I bought bread, milk, and egg.

    Votes: 27 37.0%
  • I bought bread, milk and egg.

    Votes: 28 38.4%
  • BOTH

    Votes: 18 24.7%

  • Total voters
    73
  • Poll closed .
where I grew up, you would never say either of those.....never mind whether you used a comma or not, you would say "i bought bread, milk and an egg" or you would say "I bought bread, milk, and eggs"........you would never say "I bought bread, milk and egg" :D

where is the OP from anyway?
 
where I grew up, you would never say either of those.....never mind whether you used a comma or not, you would say "i bought bread, milk and an egg" or you would say "I bought bread, milk, and eggs"........you would never say "I bought bread, milk and egg" :D

where is the OP from anyway?


r.j.s. has already pointed out my mistakes. Maybe I should correct them.
 
Both are correct and as Vampire Weekend sing: "Who gives a f*ck about an Oxford comma?"
 
I mostly don't use a comma, but it kind of depends on the cadence I think my typing should be read with (I know, preposition).

If I think the reading should be calmer and slower I add a comma...
 
I find out what the professor wants and do what they say. Adding a comma or taking one away isn't going to shorten my life so I leave it up to whoever I am typing something for to figure out.
 
Both are correct.

Generally, you use no comma in a simple series, such as the one you provided. You always use a comma in more complex series, such as: I got up this morning, took a shower, ate breakfast, and went to work.

But I thought you used the Oxford Comma in a simple series if there were more than 3 items in the series?

So if the OP's post said "I bought bread, milk, eggs, and juice" then I'd recognise the Oxford Comma.

I never use it anyway. I was taught that you "NEVER" use a comma before "and" and no one ever introduced the Oxford Comma into future grammar classes. To me it looks awkward and entirely wrong, whatever the context (and yes I have seen contexts when it's used to reduce ambiguity, to me it still looks wrong. My English teacher really hammered things home :eek:)
 
But I thought you used the Oxford Comma in a simple series if there were more than 3 items in the series?

So if the OP's post said "I bought bread, milk, eggs, and juice" then I'd recognise the Oxford Comma.

My rules say no with a simple series, and the length doesn't matter. You do use it with a more complex series.
 
I always use the serial comma. Because it better matches how a sentence would be said aloud, and because it looks better.
 
There are cases where addition of the comma introduces ambiguity that would not be there otherwise.

"I took Kathy, my dog, and a picnic lunch to the beach."

Is Kathy somebody else, or is the dog's name Kathy?

"I took Kathy, my dog and a picnic lunch to the beach."

No ambiguity here.
 
Really? They're equally ambiguous to me. :eek:


OK, I'm back on the pro-comma side. I like how there's a pause, just like how you'd say it if you spoke aloud. Or perhaps I'm just bi-curious at the moment.
 
According to the Harbrace College Handbook:

Commas separate items in a series (including coordinate adjectives). Consisting of three or more items, a series is a succession of parallel elements. The punctuation of a series depend on its form:
The air was raw, dank, and gray. [a, b, and c - a preferred comma before and]​

The air was raw, dank and gray. [a, b and c - an acceptable omission of the comma before and when there is no danger of misreading]​

Personally, I always use the comma before the conjunction in a series. My english professors were pretty adamant that the comma be used and so when i see it omitted it looks wrong to me.
 
Our publication's style guide does not include the use of a serial comma in a list of items (three or more).

We'd write:

The boat was full of food, fuel, water and other provisions.

It really depends on who you write or work for.

Strunk and White:

red, white, and blue

or

gold, silver, or copper
 
I believe the 'modern' style guides omit the comma; whereas, the older guides (the ones those of us who are over 40 learnt from) require the comma. I guess it's just another example of how the English language is devolving into Kindergarten English.
 
I do it both ways.

There are cases where addition of the comma introduces ambiguity that would not be there otherwise.

"I took Kathy, my dog, and a picnic lunch to the beach."

Is Kathy somebody else, or is the dog's name Kathy?

"I took Kathy, my dog and a picnic lunch to the beach."

No ambiguity here.
I would probably change to this:

"I took Kathy and my dog to the beach were we enjoyed a picnic lunch."

Otherwise, it can be confusing as you illustrated.
 
I prefer, use, and recommend the comma.

My reason? You pause when you say the sentence out loud, and the comma represents the pause.

QFT.

Also, not putting the comma at the end seems to imply that the last two items are somehow more related than the first one and the second one. I don't like that.
 
I was taught to put the comma in before and when listing items.

There are cases where addition of the comma introduces ambiguity that would not be there otherwise.

"I took Kathy, my dog, and a picnic lunch to the beach."

Is Kathy somebody else, or is the dog's name Kathy?

"I took Kathy, my dog and a picnic lunch to the beach."

No ambiguity here.

I would just rearrange the words to this:

"I took Kathy, a picnic lunch, and my dog to the beach."
 
Really? They're equally ambiguous to me. :eek:

Omission of the comma would be unquestionably wrong if the dog's name were Kathy.

"I took Kathy and my dog to the beach were we enjoyed a picnic lunch."

Otherwise, it can be confusing as you illustrated.

Only you've now written additional facts into the sentence, which hypothetically might have been followed by, "we never reached that beach, however, having been abducted by mutant space ants along the way."

Whether the sentence could be constructed in some other way is really sort of beside the point, though. It wasn't meant as a problem to be solved, but as an example of the rule in question. Rewriting it so that it isn't an example is a viable alternative in practice, but doesn't really help with the topic at hand.

I guess it's just another example of how the English language is devolving into Kindergarten English.

It is a known phenomenon that use of the comma in written English has undergone a centuries-long decline that continues today. This is not a new trend in infantilizing English. If you read something written a hundred or two years ago you'll see commas everywhere, in places you'd never think to stick them.
 
I believe the 'modern' style guides omit the comma; whereas, the older guides (the ones those of us who are over 40 learnt from) require the comma. I guess it's just another example of how the English language is devolving into Kindergarten English.

in german the comma before "und" is long gone so actually this is more a case of english re-approaching it's germanic roots ;)

(and yeah the comma was super annoying to learn when just a few years before you hard learned _not_ to make a comma when you learned german in school
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.