With back-to-school comes textbooks, worksheets and writing reports, language-arts classes go over the parts of speech, and English rules are reviewed over and over. Though this is one of my favorite subjects, I am always reminded of some of the more obscure or debated traditions in our language. My favorite of these debates is the serial comma – the Oxford comma.
English is a very unique language, with a long history ranging from its Germanic origins to our present day. Multiple languages have contributed to our modern vocabulary, words from bazaar to schadenfreude. Some word forms stand out as well. There are plural moose, not mooses, for example. Coming from such a hodgepodge of influences, many things can seem odd or ambiguous. Native English speakers can confuse those who have picked it up as a second language through further regional or vernacular uses.
The Oxford comma fits into these oddities very well. On the face of the issue, it seems like a very small one, but even the smallest variation of punctuation can profoundly alter the meaning of a sentence. So what is it? The Oxford comma is a rule of adding a comma onto the end of a list when you write “and” or another coordinating conjunction. The store sells vanilla, chocolate, and strawberry ice cream. That compares to the store sells vanilla, chocolate and strawberry ice cream.
It’s crazy to think that one comma could be a contentious language issue, but it can be interpreted in many ways, thus the debate about it. Some language experts say the Oxford comma is unneeded and clutters the language. Putting the “and” between words is sufficient, they would say. Others argue it’s vital for understanding and to separate each item in a list at the end of the sentence. If you take the sentence about ice cream without the Oxford comma, do you know whether the store sells chocolate ice cream and strawberry ice cream, or do they sell chocolate/strawberry ice cream?
But what do the experts say? Many journalistic guides argue against use of the Oxford comma. Academic guides argue for it. Maybe it’s more of an issue of flow and economy of space? I can certainly understand both sides’ opinions. Is extra space worth the implied benefits of extra clarity? And is literary flow worth making a sentence seem more complicated?
From my own experience in school, I’ve found the Oxford comma is something we’ve used a lot and is a general rule. There’s a mix of literary and report-style writing, and it helps with making sure people of varying interest in the subject make sense of it. Not needed, of course, in a newspaper or policy journal marketed to people with interest in a certain subject. With benefits on both sides, perhaps the debate is best left at the status quo. Maybe even check your own writing, whether you use the Oxford comma or not may surprise you.
All through my life, the English language has been a wonderful and interesting journey. Learning all of the rules, and sometimes learning of ones we use all along but never think about is always fun. Though minor, the Oxford comma showcases the major advantage and confusing factor of English, that it changes and evolves quickly. Old English from a thousand years ago is almost incomprehensible to the modern speaker. Perhaps someday the issue of the Oxford comma will be solved for new ones to pop up in its place. I certainly look forward to what we come up with next.
Connor Kockler is a Sauk Rapids-Rice High School student. He enjoys writing, politics and news, among other interests.
