Why avoid
the Oxford comma?
By Adam Frick · Illustrated draftAre you thanking two people or three?
A note thanks the writer’s sister, the editor and the designer. Is the sister also the editor? Before arguing about a comma, I want to know how many people deserve the thanks. My preference is to put uncertain grouping into words and omit the routine serial comma. A prestigious name cannot tell your reader whom you meant.
See the supporting references.Count the people before choosing the punctuation.
Keep a straightforward list straightforward.
Constructed teaching exampleThe review examines cost, access and reliability.
Cost · Access · Reliability
Make three people unmistakable.
Constructed teaching exampleThe note thanks my sister, the editor and the designer.
The note thanks three people: my sister, a separate editor and a separate designer.
Show a different intended grouping.
Constructed teaching exampleMy sister + a separate editor + a separate designer
My sister, as editor + a separate designer
A publisher may reasonably ask for another convention.
I omit the routine serial comma, but I would follow a journal’s stated house style when submitting work. Oxford’s university guide differs from the house style of an Oxford journal, while MLA favours routine serial commas. That variation should puncture the idea that one mark certifies an educated writer. My practical objection is to unresolved grouping; the proposed rewrite must still identify the right people.
References and evidence
- University of Oxford’s punctuation guide ↩
- Oxford Review of Economic Policy house style ↩
- MLA’s American guidance ↩
Read the evidence and its limits.
The University of Oxford’s punctuation guide[1] generally omits the final comma while permitting the mark when the meaning requires clarification. In contrast to that university-wide practice, the Oxford Review of Economic Policy house style[2] requires the serial comma. These two Oxford sources show why the university name cannot settle the choice. Each guide prescribes a convention for a particular publishing context.
The MLA’s American guidance[3] advocates routine serial commas as a way to avoid ambiguity. That preference differs from Oxford’s university-wide default without making either practice a universal national rule. UK English does not categorically forbid the mark and US English does not reduce to one publisher’s convention. My criticism concerns competing house preferences being mistaken for a single measure of correctness or intelligence.