Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Bauglir]

Semicolons can only separate indepenent clauses or, ironically, items in a list (when commas would create ambiguity, as when items in the list contain commas themselves). Colons can be used for the purpose, but so can commas. This is apparently the relevant concept.

EDIT: I am literally pulling all this info off Wikipedia, so grains of salt, although it does confirm my intuition.

[RedKing]

Neither of those are good options. The first looks like two unrelated thoughts, like "Putin is a one-horse country; oil and energy."

The second looks like it's specifically naming Bush and Kennedy as the strippers.



Look people, generations of scribes fought and died to bring you the Oxford comma. Every time you don't use it, a baby angel dies and goes to Hell. JUST USE IT.

[Bauglir]

The second looks like it's specifically naming Bush and Kennedy as the strippers.

Aye, that's his exact point - that if you wanted to name Bush and Kennedy as the strippers, that's what you'd do instead of using a comma. Unfortunately, English is not Pythonic - that is, there's often many right ways to do things.

[SirQuiamus]

I don't think anyone has mentioned that I'd you prefer, you can clarify a sentence like that while still thumbing your nose at the Oxford comma: just switch the words around: "Barack Obama invited Bush, Kennedy and the strippers."

Are you trying to say that the lead vocalist of Bush is a Kennedy, and the rest of the band members are strippers?

Or is there a fabulous glam rock group called "Kennedy and The Strippers" that I've never heard of?

[Shadowlord]

Ehhh?

[Flying Dice]

He's saying that that's still wrong. It's treating "Kennedy and the strippers" as a single unit in the vein of Johnny Thunders and The Heartbreakers. Though to be fair that's probably historically accurate.

Semicolons can only separate indepenent clauses or, ironically, items in a list (when commas would create ambiguity, as when items in the list contain commas themselves). Colons can be used for the purpose, but so can commas. This is apparently the relevant concept.

EDIT: I am literally pulling all this info off Wikipedia, so grains of salt, although it does confirm my intuition.

Thank you.

And yes, semicolons are used to separate independent but related clauses, and for dividing complex lists. IOW they're primarily for when you want to express two distinct but closely tied ideas in the same sentence rather than breaking up the thought. Here's examples:

"I assassinated Donald Trump; the jury gave me twenty-five to life." is another way of phrasing "I assassinated Donald Trump. The jury gave me twenty-five to life."

"Please go to the store and buy these things: apples, pears, and oranges; lean beef; milk, butter, and eggs; lettuce; and lemon juice, garlic, black pepper, and soy sauce."

[penguinofhonor]

Is there an example for the necessity of the Oxford comma that was not contrived specifically to justify its existence?

[Flying Dice]

Ah, so we should use grammatical constructions which can't even have their existence defended, justified, and materially supported?

Two birds, one stone, eh?

[penguinofhonor]

We should talk about language in terms of realistic uses, not examples that were composed to make a point about grammar. I could put together a video compilation of people being confused by the two meanings of "duck" but that doesn't mean we need a new word for the bird. It means there are confusing ways to use the word and people should avoid them to minimize understanding, which is what people do.

[IronyOwl]

Is there an example for the necessity of the Oxford comma that was not contrived specifically to justify its existence?

Would "We had Paul's friends, Kate and Mary over" work? I'm not sure what part of the examples given is too contrived to imply useful, more likely examples.

We should talk about language in terms of realistic uses, not examples that were composed to make a point about grammar. I could put together a video compilation of people being confused by the two meanings of "duck" but that doesn't mean we need a new word for the bird. It means there are confusing ways to use the word and people should avoid them to minimize understanding, which is what people do.

Using the comma is one way to do that, though. I can express any thoughts I like without any punctuation at all in a way that isnt confusing but that doesnt mean I should just because you say I can

[Bauglir]

Is there an example for the necessity of the Oxford comma that was not contrived specifically to justify its existence?

is there an example for the necessity of literally any comma at all that was not contrived specifically to justify its existence?

you're getting a bit truly scottish about this

[Flying Dice]

The Oxford comma is one of several quintessentially realistic-use-oriented grammar rules, given that it deals specifically with a linguistic construct which most primary-language English speakers use frequently. It's rather odd that you call multi-item lists "contrived"; any time you're discussing more than two distinct items/individuals/groups/&c. in the same clause you're probably doing so in a sentence which wants the Oxford comma.

we can of course speak and write without any punctuation as ironyowl suggested or capitalization or prpor spling wile convectioneering the genral gist of our points but its less clear and precise than the alternative its okay if u want to be lazy but dont try to excuse it as anything else

[penguinofhonor]

That actually confuses people with regularity, though. I've seen complaints on this forum about people having difficulty reading posts typed out like that. That use of the English language has observable negative effects in the world.

I have never, once in my life, even heard of a real situation where a lack of an Oxford comma confused someone. Lists are still functional with it - the meaning of "Go buy bread, eggs and cheese." is 100% clear. I'm sure someone has been confused by it somewhere, but it is a problem that seems to exclusively exist within debates about it.

[Bohandas]

Spoiler: Even better examples. (click to show/hide)

Those last two would make great movies.

[Tack]

I don't like the idea of avoiding writing particular lists because they may be ambiguous. I don't proof-read my day-to-day.
But Oxford commas look so weiird! They unnaturally stilt the sentence structure in my head.

Although, fun experiment, look at objects aroud the room and say "I see a _____, a ____" and see if you 'hear' an Oxford comma.
Strangely enough I did, much as they look distorted and unlovable on the page.