Misplaced Pages

Google "sister named Ann" — 277 hits. "Sister ann" gives about 24,700. Far more sisters named Ann. But I still like your example. ☺ By the way, please don't break up my comments, even with blue highlighting. Besides thwarting the admittedly limited Wiki markup, interspersed comments work well in dialogs, but not when three or more parties are involved, especially on a discussion page that new people may be trying to follow months or even years from now. — Jeff Q 14:56, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Removal of added section

I removed the following:

But the ambiguity of whether "a cow" was a parenthetic expression or a separate member of a list would also arise in speech, unless the speaker used careful intonation. Special punctuation can be used to mimic the necessary careful intonations. For one meaning:

They went to Oregon with Betty; a cow; and a piano.

For the other, one of:

They went to Oregon with Betty (a cow) and a piano.

They went to Oregon with Betty – a cow – and a piano.

Consider: "They went to Oregon with Betty, a housekeeper, and a maidservant."

Reasons as follows:

1. Commas aren't used in speech, and this article is about commas. Disambiguation by intonation is interesting, but doesn't belong in an article about punctuation.
2. The recommended use of semicolons, so far as I can tell, is non-standard.
3. The example sentence at the end essentially repeats the Betty-cow-piano example.

--NathanHawking 20:55, 2004 Nov 16 (UTC)

I rethought the contributors point about the last sentence and the disambiguation examples, and extracted that to create a final section, showing alternatives to serial commas. --NathanHawking 21:26, 2004 Nov 16 (UTC)

Inaccurate

All of the commas in a series, not just the optional one before the conjunction, are serial commas. The one just before the conjunction is an Oxford comma. Shorne 15:20, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Perhaps this is one of those cases where usage has triumphed over logic in language. The vast majority of references use "the serial comma" to refer only to the last comma:

"This last comma—the one between the word "and" and the preceding word—is often called the serial comma or the Oxford comma." (deleted reference as it's causing a problem for the spam filter)

"When you are writing about a series of things, the serial comma is necessary before the final 'and.'"

"I stoutly defend the use of the serial comma..."

"Without the serial comma, the example could have numerous meanings." (reference causing problem for spam filter: deleted)

"Serial Comma (also known as the Oxford or Harvard Comma): Even without the final (serial) comma, the sentence is grammatically correct." (spam filter: reference deleted)

In a half-dozen articles I found one exception:

"Except for journalists, all American authorities say to use the final serial comma:" (spam filter: reference deleted)

I don't know if that's enough to justify rewriting the introduction. If you can cite a few more references which chew this bone, though, perhaps clarification would be in order. --NathanHawking 23:18, 2004 Nov 19 (UTC)

Page move

Shorne's right. Oxford comma is the proper name for the last comma in the list - not serial comma. We should move the article to "Oxford comma". jguk 21:29, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I don't care what the page is called, assuming proper redirects, but please don't be prescriptive about what is the "proper" name. Misplaced Pages should merely accurately describe the existing usage(s). —Steven G. Johnson 22:33, Nov 26, 2004 (UTC)

I see someone has been bold and moved this page to Oxford comma despite no consensus on the preference of "Oxford comma" over "serial comma". I see also that the first paragraph was rephrased to fit the new title. However, the entire remainder of the article uses "serial comma" to mean the Oxford comma. I agree that "serial comma" is ambiguous, as it is occasionally (and more logically) used in sense of "one in a series of commas in a list", but this does not justify ignoring its normal and accepted use in the other sense. At the very least, the text should reflect the dual use of the term and be consistent in how it discusses the article subject. We can't ignore the preponderance of the "last comma" use in a variety of style guides, just because the English language doesn't conform to prescriptive logic. Frankly, I'd prefer to move this article back to Serial comma. If the bold editor(s) would prefer this not be done, I urge them to fix the current mess. — Jeff Q 08:18, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

No evidence at all has been provided to support the claim that the term Oxford comma is somehow more proper, nothing to counter the evidence provided by NathanHawking. To add to this evidence: The Cambridge Guide to English Usage has a redirect to "comma section 3 for serial comma but no redirect for the term Oxford comma. The article comma calls it "(the so called serial comma or series comma) and from that point onward calls it the serial comma. The term Oxford comma does not appear in the article at all. (Does Cambridge hate Oxford that badly?) However in both the Burchfield and the Allen Fowler, in the article comma, this comma is identified as "the so-called 'Oxford comma')" once and not other special name is there given, neither serial comma or series comma. But the quotation marks placed around Oxford comma here suggests an attempt to disavow that is an official or proper name for this comma usage. In the Buchfield Fowler the term appears twice, both times within single quotation marks. This is the only place where I have found Oxford comma given primary usage. For many technical terms there is no single proper name, only competing descriptive names. In such cases, the more common one is preferred in Misplaced Pages.

If an older usage can be documented, then the information should be added to the article and a note added to the lead paragraph indicating the contemporary usage derives from older usage in which the term applied to any comma in a list. I have found cases of the phrase final serial comma, but this might mean either the last of a number of serial commas or the last comma which is the special serial comma. Jallan 20:05, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Being bold is what Misplaced Pages's about. I wish more people were bolder:) I haven't had time to research this thoroughly, but "Oxford comma" is by far the more interesting way to refer to it. I must say, however, that looking at an internet search of it, I was surprised at the pure venom expressed by those supporting its use against those who do not adopt it. As Burchfield, quite correctly, reports, both using the Oxford comma and not using the Oxford comma are accepted usage now (although Burchfield does note his personal preference of using the Oxford comma). jguk 23:36, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

PS I wouldn't mind Oxford, they give degrees to anyone these days :)

Being bold is good, but it does not release one either from being accurate or from the consequences of one's boldness. And there are now three separate issues being discussed in this section titled Inaccurate:

1. The article title change to Oxford comma, based on logic but not on typical practice.
2. The failure to update more than the introductory paragraph of the article to accomodate the change.
3. The actual use or avoidance of the "Oxford comma".

The second has been resolved. The third is irrelevant to this discussion. Let's please focus on the specific "Oxford comma" vs. "serial comma" issue here.

As far as that goes, whether "Oxford comma" is a more "interesting" label is hardly relevant. The important thing is to label it accurately. From that point of view, both "Oxford" and "Harvard" are more logical, but the evidence cited thus far strongly suggests these latter terms are not the most common practice. However, most of that evidence appears to be coming from folks who prefer "serial comma", which makes sense but could be considered selective research. Can someone quote any unequivocating authoritative source for favoring either "Oxford comma" or "Harvard comma"? If not, this article should be returned to its former title. — Jeff Q 02:01, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Burchfield prefers the term in Fowler. Also, this google test shows just under a 2:1 preference for "Oxford comma". jguk 07:15, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Searching outside of just UK sites (where one would expect a higher bias toward the Oxford phrasing) shows a preference for serial comma, however (5,810:5,500). The Concise OED redirects the reader to serial comma from Oxford comma, as well. --Xanzzibar 08:14, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Looks like your search showed no clear usage preference (even though one would expect an American bias as there are disproportionately more American websites). jguk 08:33, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Burchfield's a bit attainted by his use of the phrase "so-called 'Oxford comma'", according to Jallan. On the other hand, websites can be useful for rough ideas, but are hardly authoritative, even when the evidence strongly supports one side. (And I share jguk's suspicion about American bias in overall website content.) Surely there are other British style guides that can shed more light on this debate, on way or another? I'd dig 'em up myself, but my local libraries (not surprisingly, in Virginia) have little in the way of British materials. — Jeff Q 14:56, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)

In making my preceding comment, I overlooked Xanzzibar's explicit search of UK sites. Unless jguk wishes to make the argument that most UK websites are run by expatriate Americans, even a slight favoring of "serial comma" over the homegrown "Oxford comma" significantly undermines the argument for the latter. But I maintain that printed British style guides' recommendations would be more meaningful. — Jeff Q 07:33, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

No, no. I searched Google at large, which showed the 5% preference for "serial" over "Oxford." Maurreen's search is even more revealing, though. And, as I mentioned above, the OED uses "serial comma" as its main entry, not "Oxford comma," which I think says something.

To get a truly scientific answer about what is most common would probably take more effort than the question is worth. But here's more Google searches:

1. Using all three words ("comma", "oxford", and "serial") gives 5,290 hits.
2. Using "comma", "oxford", and "-serial" gives 116,000 hits.
3. Using "comma", "serial", and "-oxford" gives 202,000 hits.

Further, the expression "serial comma" can be more easily understood by anyone unfamiliar with the expression "Oxford comma" than the reverse. Maurreen 08:00, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

POV

Changing the article from "Serial comma" to "Oxford comma" is POV. I'm adding the tag. Maurreen 06:05, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

But what a wonderful article name is "Oxford comma", and to have it tagged makes it all the more intriguing! Thincat 16:50, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Ho-hum. I find the term "serial comma" to be highly mis-leading as a term for the description of what this article about; "ante-posterior comma" would be significantly better. Naming it "serial comma" is, indeed, IMO, somewhat POV in and of itself.

James F. (talk) 16:18, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Since the comma is actually termed "Oxford comma", and the common alternative names are also mentioned in the article, are there any objections to removing the POV notice? jguk 20:04, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

No objections. All of the names appear pretty well known. We just have to pick one. Oxford is as good as any other. DJ Clayworth 20:13, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I object. Let's wait and see if anyone else does also. I also disagree that all the terms are well known. Maurreen 21:23, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

And what is the justification for renaming the article? Maurreen 21:59, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I also object. Jguk's assertion implies that "Oxford comma" is the official name, and the others mere alternatives. Despite repeated requests for proof of such a claim, he has failed to provide compelling evidence. Others have provided substantive evidence that "serial comma", under which this article was originally titled, is the better-known name. So far, there is more reason to change it back than either to keep it or to remove the POV tag. — Jeff Q 08:49, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Jeff Q, I never said it was an official - as with most names of things, there's nothing official about it:) I did say it was actually called the Oxford comma, which it is. It is also actually called Harvard comma and serial comma by some, as the article notes. I'm not sure what this has got to do with a POV tag though. We don't usually put POV tags on something because they are named using the most common British term, rather than the most common American one. Kind regards, jguk 09:26, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Jguk, of course you didn't use the word "official". You merely implied a preference for "Oxford" by using the word "actually" for it and using the term "alternative" for the other names. This is your subtle and rather effective way to press an argument that you have lost repeatedly and yet refuse to give up. Another element of your argument strategy is to make it sound like your oppponents are pressing an American usage over British, as you have once again just done. It is not a British vs. American issue; it is a question of how the term is best known by a majority of English references of all dialects. No one has yet provided a substantive case that most (or even very many) references, British or American (or Canadian, for that matter), prefer the term "Oxford comma" over "serial comma". So far, we've had one respectable citation which itself qualified the term as "so-called 'Oxford comma'", and one very obscure citation. This was countered by numerous citations for "serial comma". (Unfortunately, much of this research has been posted in other discussion pages. However, I'm willing to collect it and summarize it here, if only someone would do a better job on the "Oxford" side of the issue. I'd do it myself, but I haven't found any evidence yet, and I'm probably at a disadvantage because my sources are more American than British.) I'm not saying the jury's in; I'm just saying that the "Oxford comma" proponents have failed thus far to make their case by citations, and are relying on a vocal minority opinion and an abundance of energy to sustain this unproven assertion. If you can prove your point, I'll happily support you. — Jeff Q 21:40, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The POV tag says only that the neutrality is disputed. If any person disputes it, then it is disputed. If any person wants the tag to stay, it should stay.

Articles are supposed to be named using the most common name overall. The evidence given at least so far indicates that "serial comma" is the most common name.

We don't usually change the names of articles to make them "more interesting", either. Maurreen 14:33, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

See Talk:Yoghurt. jguk 15:19, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I read it. What is your point? Maurreen 15:46, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The point there was that you were misunderstanding Misplaced Pages policy (which isn't as simple as articles being titled using the most commonly-used term). But going back to my original question on whether the NPOV tag can be removed (which seems to have rekindled this dormant debate), the NPOV tag reads "The neutrality of this article is disputed. Please see its talk page." As I understand it, that notice is untrue. It is where the article should be located that is disputed. That's got nothing to do with the neutrality of the article itself. Kind regards, jguk 21:55, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I will clarify: I dispute that the article is neutral. To clarify further: It represents your point of view of what is "proper" and "more interesting". Maurreen 05:30, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I found this page after looking up serial comma. In case it helps, a Google search returns 6,580 for "serial comma," 876 for "Oxford comma," and 429 for "Harvard comma". That's fairly conclusive. If the person who created this article had originally called it Oxford comma, there would be an argument for leaving it as that, but it was started as Serial comma, so there has to be an argument in favor of changing it. Reading through this page, I see no argument, just assertion. In addition, most people who know the term "Oxford comma" will know that it's usually called "serial comma," but users of "serial comma" may never have heard of "Oxford comma." I agree that the page should be changed back to its original title. Slim 13:18, Dec 20, 2004 (UTC)

On the contrary. Why would most people who know the term Oxford comma be aware of the more confusing term of serial comma (which sounds as though it refers to all the commas in a series, though it does not)? Anyway, Misplaced Pages is about encouraging people to read more articles, and Oxford comma (which is the form supported by Fowlers; OUP; Eats, Shoots and Leaves and others) is the sexier name. More people would follow a link to Oxford comma. Let's follow the "obey no rules" rule of Misplaced Pages:) The name "Oxford comma" is interesting - even a band is named after it . Comments above show it's more interesting - as do many other sites on the internet. Let's go for the fun, interesting version - grammar doesn't have to be dull. :) jguk 19:59, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)