top of page
Writer's pictureSierra Sedge

The Oxford Comma Doesn't Save Lives (But It Makes Them Easier)

Perhaps you’ve seen one of the many memes floating around on the internet about commas saving lives, such as the difference between “Let’s eat grandma!” and “Let’s eat, grandma!” Although the Oxford comma (also known as the Harvard or serial comma) is not necessary to save lives, it can certainly make lives easier by preventing awkward fumbles in the English language. Still, its use is a heated point of contention among editors and other punctuation connoisseurs: is it really necessary in every instance, or are its promoters just trying to uphold (or even mandate) an outdated, restrictive, and superfluous writing crutch? Well, yes and no. 

First, let’s define the Oxford comma. Quite simply, in a list of three or more elements, this final comma is placed before the conjunction. For example, it’s the last comma in this sentence, before the conjunction and: “We ate roast beef, mashed potatoes, and buttercup squash.” When the last two elements in a list may be misinterpreted as one, the Oxford comma is essential. In all other cases, the final comma is optional. Easy, right? 

Not quite. For those who don’t subscribe to using the Oxford comma in every instance, life gets a bit trickier. How can we know when we are likely to be misunderstood? How can we see our own grammatical blind spots? The truth is that we can’t in every instance. So I believe that the safest way to improve written communication is to use the Oxford comma every time. I’m certainly not a part of the camp that wants to force its use on everyone. Each person has the right to choose to live on the perilous edge between clarity and confusion without the Oxford comma. But for those of us looking for a shortcut past the minutia of comma usage, this handy punctuation mark is a gift. If a rule is beneficial, I see no reason to throw it away.

So, exactly how old is the Oxford comma? The date of its inception is debated, but it seems to have been first introduced in print (though not in name) in 1905 by F.H. Collins in his Authors’ and Printers’ Dictionary for Oxford University Press. It’s still required by Oxford University Press (though not by the university’s style guide). However, while American style guides almost exclusively prefer the Oxford comma, in most instances, British and Canadian style guides prefer to do without it—following, for example, the Associated Press or the Canadian Press. Still, many non-American writers follow writing guides such as the Chicago Manual of Style and the American Psychological Association’s style guide, both of which require the Oxford comma. 

Let’s look at an example from a popular meme about the importance of comma usage:

  • With the Oxford comma: We invited the rhinoceri, Washington, and Lincoln.

This is an interesting choice of guests, chosen from some of the most formidable in both the animal and human kingdoms.

  • Without the Oxford comma: We invited the rhinoceri, Washington and Lincoln.

Considering that Washington and Lincoln are no longer with us to attend this gathering, the more probable meaning is this one: that two rhinoceri have been named after Washington and Lincoln. 

Clearly, in the rare circumstance where someone might invite a couple of rhinoceri to the same party as two former US presidents, the Oxford comma would be absolutely essential. But I admit that this over-the-top example doesn’t really give solid evidence for the necessity of the Oxford comma. 

More compelling may be an extreme case when the lack of an Oxford comma in a legal document led to a ten million dollar lawsuit in Maine. Albeit, most writers do not spend their days composing legal documents, and so, many outside of the legal profession desire the freedom to leave out a comma or two that may be deemed unnecessary. Magazine publishers also tend to look down upon the final comma because punctuation takes up precious space on the page. Thankfully, whether for creative or practical reasons, these groups already have the freedom to renounce the Oxford comma (unless, of course, they’re required to follow one of the few style guides that enforce it). 

But ultimately, if the Oxford comma is used in every instance, there’s no chance of overlooking one where it’s essential. From this perspective, contrary to being pointless and restrictive, the Oxford comma is freeing: once it’s ingrained in your everyday usage, that means one less potential problem to be aware of during the writing and editing processes. As The Oxford Style Manual (2002) reasons, “Given that the final comma is sometimes necessary to prevent ambiguity, it is logical to impose it uniformly, so as to obviate the need to pause and gauge each enumeration on the likelihood of its being misunderstood – especially since that likelihood is often more obvious to the reader than the writer.” At the end of the day, I like to think of consistently using the Oxford comma not as intellectual laziness (as some claim), but as intellectual conservation: the conservation of energies that could be better spent in improving your writing in other areas. And a benefit to writers is a benefit to their readers.

8 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Comments


bottom of page