THE SERIAL COMMA—So Much Over So Little

by Joyce Gram, writer and editor

Who would have thought that the serial comma, quietly bringing clarity to a list or series in a sentence, would be the subject of passionate argument, much ink in grammar texts, and, yes, even surveys?

The serial comma, also called the Oxford or Harvard comma, is that innocuous squiggle before the final and or or in sentences such as “The flag is red, white, and blue” and “I want no ifs, ands, or buts.” It is optional—but be careful where you say that. Lynne Truss writes in Eats, Shoots & Leaves, “There are people who embrace the Oxford comma and people who don’t, and I’ll just say this: never get between these people when drink has been taken.”

The purpose of the serial comma is to prevent ambiguity, especially where the last element in the series consists of a pair joined by and, as in “We ate soup, salad, and macaroni and cheese.” Omitting the comma in the sentence “The flag is red, white and blue” might not cause much ambiguity, but what about “He went to the store to buy milk, butter and eggs”? Is there a product on the shelf called “butter-and-eggs”? Maybe somewhere. Garner’s Modern American Usage says that the argument whether to include the serial comma is “easily answered in favor of inclusion because omitting the final comma may cause ambiguities, whereas including it never will.”

The authors of an authoritative-looking website set out to trace the origin of the “Wrong Rule,” taught by so many English teachers, that says the final comma in a series should be omitted. In the course of their research, they found that “except for journalists, all American authorities say to use the final serial comma.”¹ Newspapers and magazines omit it to save space. My own research has yielded the same result, and I am an unapologetic proponent of the serial comma. Interestingly, Truss does not use it and says, “My own feeling is that one shouldn’t be too rigid about the Oxford comma.” Whether you choose to use it or not in your writing, all readers and editors of your work will agree: be consistent!

As to that survey I mentioned, it is being conducted by the West Coast Editor, newsletter of the Editors’ Association of Canada, B.C. Branch, and asks members, are you for it or against it? Results in March 2008. I’ll let you know.

¹http://www.protrainco.com/essays/serial-comma.htm

© Joyce Gram, 2008. All right reserved
Contact Joyce Gram for all your editing needs: gramkend@shaw.ca

PUNCTUATION POINTS....

BEACON FLASH # 24 - November 2007

Flash readers quickly responded to my request for topics with a bucketful of ideas. Thanks to everyone who sent in their questions. All of them will be covered, either in a Beacon Flash, the quarterly Beacon e-newsletter, or here over the next few months. (To sign up for Beacon Flashes and the quarterly e-newsletter, please visit www.beaconlit.com/newsletter.htm)

I had to get my expert editor, Joyce Gram, to tackle the first topic.

KJ wrote:

I often enter writing contests and get frustrated by the criticism I sometimes receive—all about punctuation! I have been used all my life to using “normal” punctuation, equal to that presented in Eats, Shoots & Leaves. But I keep seeing novels using single quotation marks instead of the traditional double marks for dialogue. And I was taught to use an exclamation mark when a voice was raised or a yell took place or I wanted to make something dramatic. Now, they tell me that the exclamation marks slowed down the story and ruined the endings (I have had that three times now from the same judge). Is it a hang-up of the particular judge, or is the current punctuation changing?

Writer and editor, Joyce Gram (gramkend@shaw.ca) responds:

Dear KJ,

Sorry you are disappointed by the criticism of judges, but I hope that won’t discourage you from continuing to enter contests.

There are two lessons here (at least). First, writing is an art, not a science, and, while there are conventions, nothing is carved in stone. Second, a reader’s response to a piece of writing, including the punctuation in it, is largely a matter of taste. What I like, you may detest.

You will never go wrong if you pay attention to your punctuation and are careful to follow convention most of the time. When in doubt (and sometimes when not in doubt but for good measure), consult a style book. I recommend Strunk and White’s The Elements of Style (4^th edition), The Chicago Manual of Style (15^th edition), and, of course, Truss’s Eats, Shoots & Leaves. When you choose to defy convention, make sure you have a good reason. Try the conventional punctuation first. Does it work? Might it be better? Never let your burst of cleverness get in the way of your writing.

As for that three-time judge, well, perhaps he or she read one too many exclamation marks and said, “That’s it! No more! The next person to use one gets the axe!”

Regarding quotation marks in novels, Joyce tells us that Garner of Garner's Modern American Usage says:

"In marking quotations, writers and editors of AmE and BrE have developed different conventions for quotation marks (or "inverted commas," as the British call them). In AmE, double quotation marks are used for a first quotation; single marks for a quotation within a quotation; double again for a further quotation inside that; etc. In BrE, the practice is exactly the reverse at each step."

Chicago says (11.33):

"Quoted words, phrases, and sentences run into the text are enclosed in double quotation marks. Single quotation marks enclose quotations within quotations; double marks, quotations within these; and so on....The practice in other English-speaking countries is often the reverse; single marks are used first, then double, and so on."

Couldn't be clearer.

(Ed: Joyce never fails to amaze me--now we all know.)

(c) Joyce Gram 2007. All rights reserved.

EDITING FOR EVERYONE

BUY YOURSELF A GOOD DICTIONARY!

by Joyce Gram, the ultimate editor for writers
(Reprinted with kind permission of the author)

A year ago, I threw out all my dictionaries—a rash act for an editor. I had just attended an editing course, where the instructor had impressed upon us that our most important—indeed indispensable—reference was an up-to-date, good quality dictionary. Mine were so old they lacked not only current word usage, but also any words to do with computers or the Internet.

I bought myself one of the best, the latest Canadian Oxford. And, because I work for writers planning to publish in the United States, I bought the latest Webster’s New World Dictionary and Thesaurus. My Webster still looks new, but in a year, my Canadian Oxford is looking decidedly used.

Why do I recommend all writers invest in a good dictionary? Because in it you will find a gold mine of information on meaning, usage, idioms, word choice, synonyms, grammar, spelling, punctuation, style, to say nothing of biographical, historical, geographical, and statistical tidbits of all kinds. I could read it for hours!

But, really now, there is no excuse not to own one—and use it. Nothing will kill your chances of publication faster than mistakes you could have corrected by quick reference to a good dictionary. I laughed the day I came across a Q & A on The Chicago Manual of Style Online entitled “You Could Look It Up.” Chicago posts a fresh Q & A every month, and they can’t help pulling out a few questions for special treatment, like this one:

“Q. Is it ‘cell phone’ or ‘cel phone’? I am working on a crash deadline, and would appreciate a quick response. Thank you so much!

A. Any writer who has deadlines should also have a dictionary. I always swear I’m not going to look up words for people, but it’s like being a mom and picking up socks—something just makes me do it. It’s ‘cell phone.’ Please buy a dictionary—and pick up your socks.”

'Nuf said.

(c) Joyce Gram 2007

Contact Joyce for all your editing needs at gramkend@shaw.ca