You know it, and you love it or hate it—it’s the last comma in a simple series, the one before “and,” “but,” or “or.” (Or, the one before “and,” but” or “or.”) It even has aliases: the Harvard comma, or the Oxford comma. As mentioned here on numerous occasions, many people are more passionate about the “serial comma” than about politics or religion.
It’s misplaced passion.
Simply put, whether to use that final comma is a matter of style—not one of grammar, education or national honor. It’s a choice, not a mandate, the way the need to match the tenses of subjects and verbs is a mandate.
CJR, for example, uses it. Most news publications do not, but many magazines do, even news magazines. So CJR has simply decided to identify itself more closely with magazines than with news publications, at least stylistically. A publication is not more or less accurate or credible because it decides to use—or forgo—that little curlicue.
Now that you’re good and mad, let’s look at this a little more closely.
People who argue that the “serial comma” is necessary for clarity usually use examples like this one: “My favorite sandwiches are pastrami, peanut butter and jelly and cream cheese.” Because the verb is plural, it’s clear that there are at least two favorite sandwiches. But because there are two “ands,” it’s unclear whether the favorites include “pastrami, peanut butter(,) and jelly,” “peanut butter and jelly,” “jelly and cream cheese,” or “peanut butter and jelly and cream cheese.” Any series that allows that kind of confusion is, by definition, not a simple one.
Instead, the recommendation to omit the “serial comma” is intended only when no ambiguity would result from it. Here’s how The Associated Press Stylebook puts it:
Use commas to separate elements in a series, but do not put a comma before the conjunction in a simple series: The flag is red, white and blue. He would nominate Tom, Dick or Harry. Put a comma before the concluding conjunction in a series, however, if an integral element of the series requires a conjunction: I had orange juice, toast, and ham and eggs for breakfast. Use a comma also before the concluding conjunction in a complex series of phrases: The main points to consider are whether the athletes are skillful enough to compete, whether they have the stamina to endure the training, and whether they have the proper mental attitude.
Complaints about the lack of the final comma often arise when a sentence that needs it doesn’t have it, as in the sandwich example above. But many readers also complain that it’s missing from a simple series, too, though they can rarely give any reason to use it beyond grammar rules or hobgoblinish consistency.
Usage authorities have been split for years, with a majority favoring the “serial comma.” (Fowler was agnostic but leaning toward omitting it; Strunk and White favored it.) But if no ambiguity would result, why mandate it? Especially if there’s no universal agreement about the “rules.”
In the case of the “serial comma,” common sense—and house style, if it exists—should trump the “rules.” In a simple series, when no one would be confused by the lack of a final comma, use the “serial comma”—or not—as your style manual prefers, or as you prefer if there is no style manual. But if there’s any chance of ambiguity, use it.
Now, about peace in the Middle East …





Now that you've figured that out, how about guidelines on whether or not to include sentence punctuations within quotations.
Option 1: Say "yes," "no," or "maybe."
Option 2: Say "yes", "no", or "maybe".
US style uses Option 1, though UK publications seem to prefer Option 2. Since the punctuation is not part of what is being directly quoted, why does it get jammed into the direct quotations?
Posted by Kevin on Mon 13 Apr 2009 at 11:47 AM
Optioin 1 is correct, as far as I was taught. The only punctuation that properly goes inside quote marks is a period or comma.
What I never know is when to use a semicolon instead of a comma in a long series...
Posted by msmolly on Mon 13 Apr 2009 at 06:03 PM
A semicolon can work as a super-comma when there is more than one series, and when you work for a smaller newspaper.
"Color selections can include red, white and blue; yellow, green and black; or white, orange and purple."
That is so clunky, though. Bullet points often work better.
Posted by nancy on Tue 14 Apr 2009 at 10:48 PM
Stylistic options are o.k.. However, I would venture to say that the main reason people in education do not like ambiguity is due to the grammar portion on college-entrance exams. What the majority of students will need to know is what the almost-omnipotent, money-making machine, the "CollegeBoard," will consider the correct answer for SAT tests. Could we get a clear answer from THAT organization
Posted by MizR on Fri 17 Apr 2009 at 07:54 PM
I use the serial comma because the nuns who taught me said it was the only correct way. They did not allow "optional." And there is no higher authority than the nuns.
Posted by larry on Fri 17 Apr 2009 at 07:56 PM
what is this, copy editing 1.1?
consistency in usage is helpful to the reader because it relieves her of having to figure it all out on her own. Newspapers have long forgone the series comma, academic and other, more 'permanent' sorts of writing have chosen to use it. Journalism seems to prefer a breezier looking, more easily composited (in the old days) page.
I like to use it because it does relieve ambiguity a la 'peanut butter and jelly and' and to use it sometimes and not others is to draw unnecessary attention to its use.
The British seem to prefer a less punc heavy style, often leaving out commas where normal US users (and their teachers) would blench at the absence.
while we are at possibly inconsequential or possibly useful copy editing rules, MizR should reconsider writing that 'the main reason is... due to...'
Up next. To split or not to split infinitives?
Posted by brooklyn on Sat 18 Apr 2009 at 07:47 AM
CJR and AP don't get it. The serial comma should always be used for two, sometimes four reasons:
1. There's a pause at the place of the serial comma (every time).
2. Grammatically, it must be there.
3. To avoid ambiguity, so you're not forcing the reader to guess at what you're saying.
4. For consistency. Consistency, as the publishing world knows, or should know, is of almost ultimate importance (next to readability).
It's just common sense--use it. If your style guide says don't use it, change your style guide.
Posted by Craig on Mon 20 Apr 2009 at 11:03 AM
This appears to take a firm stance in the debate (see subhead), but actually tiptoes away from the front line. The argument, as I've known it, has been whether to use the serial comma. Period. The pros say it's needed for clarity; the cons say it isn't. This piece says, no, it's not needed - except when it is. Indeed, when there's no ambiguity, we can choose whatever style tickles our fancy.
Posted by Andy Schotz on Mon 20 Apr 2009 at 11:19 PM
Of course, it's not a rule but a matter of style. We all know that. But what is the rationale for not using the serial comma? Laziness? The love of ambiguity? Space? Glee in tweaking those who love the serial comma? There is no practical rationale. Even those who oppose the serial comma always, albeit grudgingly, admit its usefulness for clarity and consistency. So why fight it? Why invoke the style only when it suits one? Where is the reasoning? Surrender. You have nothing to lose but a letter space.
Posted by Paul Kocak on Tue 21 Apr 2009 at 11:59 PM
Well put, Paul Kocak. Furthermore, those who shun the serial comma except in cases of ambiguity usually are the last to acknowledge the ambiguity in their own work.
Posted by Dolce on Sun 26 Apr 2009 at 09:06 PM
I'm a big fan of "no serial commas," but your example of “My favorite sandwiches are pastrami, peanut butter and jelly and cream cheese” is not a simple series. The serial comma after "peanut butter and jelly" is needed because that element creates a compound. A simple series would be "My favorite sandwiches are pastrami, peanut butter and cream cheese."
And the real favorite argument for the serial comma is the classic book dedication: "To my parents, Ayn Rand and God."
One supposed reason for not using the serial comma in journalism is that the style stems from the days of handset type, when it was easier and faster not to use anything non-essential, or that not using it saves space, nominal though the amount of saved space might be.
Posted by Ruth E. Thaler-Carter on Tue 28 Apr 2009 at 10:45 AM
I invite the loyal legions of serial-comma lovers to enlist in fighting the good fight by becoming a Serial Comma Commando (I know, I know, I took liberties by omitting a hyphen). Find out more at laughorism.com.
Posted by Paul Kocak on Mon 4 May 2009 at 09:52 PM