The Oxford comma, both friend and foe

[Phyrebrat]

O really...?

​

Yes, and don’t call me O

 

[Phyrebrat]

Is this classed as a vocative comma;

This is the world we live in now
This is the world we live in, now.

I’d write the latter but does it qualify as a vocative or something else?

At school I was taught French grammar but never English despite going to a Bournemouth Grammar School for Boys. Irony.

 

[Ursa major]

Regarding the grammar, I don't know -- so my apologies for responding -- but the comma** in the second example would suggest to me that the "now" was being stressed, perhaps in a way that hints at regret... which then further suggests*** that the first example might even be accompanied by an unspoken, "so get over it."


** - If the comma was replaced by an ellipsis, it would (again in my opinion) be doing more than just suggesting regret.

*** - Without the second example being there, the first example's meaning would be far more ambiguous (in my opinion).


(Glad to have been of "help".... )

 

[Phyrebrat]

Regarding the grammar, I don't know -- so my apologies for responding -- but the comma** in the second example would suggest to me that the "now" was being stressed, perhaps in a way that hints at regret... which then further suggests*** that the first example might even be accompanied by an unspoken, "so get over it."


** - If the comma was replaced by an ellipsis, it would (again in my opinion) be doing more than just suggesting regret.

*** - Without the second example being there, the first example's meaning would be far more ambiguous (in my opinion).


(Glad to have been of "help".... )

That’s kind of how I feel about it, altho without the ‘so get over it bit’.

Our language grammar rules must’ve been devised by some Lovecraftian deity.

 

[HareBrain]

I’d write the latter but does it qualify as a vocative or something else?

I'd say not, or not according to my recently (last few minutes) acquired understanding of "vocative", which means to address the audience directly.

Your second example, with the comma, I would read as having a pause before "now". This stresses the "now" and almost puts it in italics. That's not how I would normally speak it, or write it, but it depends what effect you want.

ETA: the most common example of the vocative comma is in e.g. "As you know, Bob". You always put a comma before the name of someone the writer (or speaker in dialogue) is addressing directly, even if there isn't a pause there in speech. Otherwise, in almost all cases, only use a comma where you would put a pause when reading aloud. How long a pause qualifies for a comma? That's where authors differ. Some use it only for quite long pauses, so their writing has hardly any commas at all; some for shorter ones. The thing, I think, is to be consistent so the reader can tune into the style.

 

[Swank]

Is there a special Christopher Walken comma, for when you put pauses in unexpected places?

 

[Phyrebrat]

Is there a special Christopher Walken comma, for when you put pauses in unexpected places?

Oh yes, that's called the Shatner comma, though.

 

[paranoid marvin]

Regarding the grammar, I don't know -- so my apologies for responding -- but the comma** in the second example would suggest to me that the "now" was being stressed, perhaps in a way that hints at regret... which then further suggests*** that the first example might even be accompanied by an unspoken, "so get over it."


** - If the comma was replaced by an ellipsis, it would (again in my opinion) be doing more than just suggesting regret.

*** - Without the second example being there, the first example's meaning would be far more ambiguous (in my opinion).


(Glad to have been of "help".... )

I would say that if you wanted to indicate a feeling of regret, there are better ways than the second example given. For me it reads perfectly fine without the comma, which only serves to muddy the waters of a perfectly comprehensible sentence.

 

[KGeo777]

I have, a fear, that, I, may, actually, use, the comma, more than, absolutely, necessary.

 

[Wayne Mack]

Is this classed as a vocative comma;

This is the world we live in now
This is the world we live in, now.

I’d write the latter but does it qualify as a vocative or something else?

At school I was taught French grammar but never English despite going to a Bournemouth Grammar School for Boys. Irony.

I don't think this is an example of a vocative comma. From a quick search, it appears that a vocative comma is used when someone is directly or indirectly named in a sentence. This, Phyrebrat, is a vocative comma. What is the Vocative Comma? Definition, Examples in the Vocative Case - Writing Explained

In the example, "This is the world we live in, now," the comma before now appears to be an elliptical comma. This is described as showing a pause or an implied omission. Comma before or after “now”: The Definitive Guide.

 

[paranoid marvin]

I don't think this is an example of a vocative comma. From a quick search, it appears that a vocative comma is used when someone is directly or indirectly named in a sentence. This, Phyrebrat, is a vocative comma. What is the Vocative Comma? Definition, Examples in the Vocative Case - Writing Explained

In the example, "This is the world we live in, now," the comma before now appears to be an elliptical comma. This is described as showing a pause or an implied omission. Comma before or after “now”: The Definitive Guide.

Tbh I thought it was a comma used after the last thing in a list of 3 or more things. So:

"I'd like to thank my family, Stephen King, and JK Rowling."

Rather than:

"I'd like to thank my family, Stephen King and JK Rowling."

And that this is done to provide clarity and avoid confsion.

The thing is we get through every day life speaking without the need of commas, and rarely find our words misinterpreted.

The same could be said of written sentences. Yes, taken independantly out of context they could appear silly or confusing, but they are only part of a greater whole. In the same way that that piece of jigsaw could seem to be a dragons' eye, when in fact it's actually the hubcap of a motorcar.

And in a similar way to pieces in a jigsaw puzzle, a sentence in only a fraction of a story. The chances are that if you're reading a story, you know exactly what the author meant, with or without the use of an additional comma.

So in the example given above, whilst it may sound funny and (possibly) confusing on its own - do I mean that JK Rowling and Stephen King are my parents or not? - taken in context to the story being read, and applying a dash of common sense, there really oughtn't to be any need for the clarification of superfluous punctuation.

 

[HareBrain]

Tbh I thought it was a comma used after the last thing in a list of 3 or more things. So:

That's the Oxford comma, as illustrated in the first post.

 

[paranoid marvin]

That's the Oxford comma, as illustrated in the first post.

Sorry yes, I should have Wayne's post more thoroughly.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

The same could be said of written sentences. Yes, taken independantly out of context they could appear silly or confusing, but they are only part of a greater whole.

Even so, confusion does sometimes occur, and in a written contract or other legal document that lack of clarity has been known to cause big (as in expensive) trouble for one party.

 

[paranoid marvin]

Even so, confusion does sometimes occur, and in a written contract or other legal document that lack of clarity has been known to cause big (as in expensive) trouble for one party.

Yes, I agree. I really meant only in relation to fiction, and then only in relation to the Oxford comma.

I just think that there are already enough grammatical 'rules' to follow without unnecessarily creating the need for more.

 

[Ursa major]

I would say that if you wanted to indicate a feeling of regret, there are better ways than the second example given. For me it reads perfectly fine without the comma, which only serves to muddy the waters of a perfectly comprehensible sentence.

I wouldn't disagree... but the point I was making was that punctuation can not only change the meaning of a sentence, but can do so in a way that might not be obvious to its writer, but might be to some of those reading it.

 

[BAYLOR]

I just use commas .

 

[KiraAnn]

Is this classed as a vocative comma;

This is the world we live in now
This is the world we live in, now.

I’d write the latter but does it qualify as a vocative or something else?

At school I was taught French grammar but never English despite going to a Bournemouth Grammar School for Boys. Irony.

I don't know whether those are both vocative commas, but the second example sounds like an incomplete sentence. As if some other thought should follow the "now".

 

[THX1138]

I have been finding lately that I tend to overuse and more often, misuse commas in my writings to the point that my writings tend to sound overdramatic. In the past few days, I have started to speak my writings out loud as if I was having a conversation as opposed to staged dialog. If has made a big difference in how I am using commas now.

 

[Steve Harrison]

Oxford commas are optional, so I don't know why they get more publicity than commas from elsewhere.