As written English gets lazier and lazier, I have been witnessing the demise of one of my favorite punctuation marks—no, not the em dash—the comma.
Direct-Address Commas
One
of the comma usages that I miss the most is the direct-address comma.
The direct-address comma is the one that you put next to
someone's name or term of address when you are speaking directly to
them. Sometimes the comma goes before the name, sometimes after, and
sometimes both, but it always serves to separate the recipient of the
sentence from the content. Some classic examples? "Hello, Clarice."
"Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn."
I
notice the absence of this special type of comma almost every day in my
emails, which begin with greetings like "Hi Valerie..." I've learned to
accept and even adopt that particular non-usage because a
direct-address comma in a 2-word sentence seems like overkill (You still
know exactly what I mean if I write "Hello Clarice"), but there are
plenty of times when a direct-address comma is still right and proper
and downright required. As people are fond of putting on T-shirts, commas save lives.
Oxford Commas
Another
kind of comma that clarifies meanings, yet is frequently disregarded,
is the Oxford comma. If you haven't heard the debate about the Oxford
comma, you've either been living under a rock, living in a house but
without internet, or you have no interest in grammar. But if by some
stroke of luck you do have internet and you are interested in grammar and you have not heard the debate about the Oxford comma, here's how it goes.
In a list of 3 or more items, every item must be followed by a comma. The final item is preceded by the word "and,"
which is in turn preceded by a comma. For example, "My outfit today is
blue, white, and orange." That last comma is the Oxford comma. It is
considered indispensable by some style guides, and unnecessary by others
(notably the Associated Press, which rules most journalistic
publications). Many people who do not adhere to any particular style
guide nonetheless have very heated opinions over whether to use the
Oxford comma (also known as the serial comma, though I like to give it
its capitalized name, because that in turn gives it an air of
refinement).
As
you might guess, I myself am firmly in the pro-comma camp, as I believe
it serves a valuable role in helping the reader quickly determine where a
sentence is going. The serial comma is a visual clue that the next word
you are going to read is another item in the list, rather than
something that should be grouped with the item before it. For example,
"The company has three branches: finance, research, and development." In
this sentence, the Oxford comma lets you know that development is the
third and final branch, and not just part of the frequently combined
"Research and Development."
Take a
gander at this sentence, lacking the serial comma: "The company has
three branches: finance, research and development and marketing." What a
slew of 'and's! And which is the combined branch? Research and
Development? Or Development and Marketing?
In most cases, the context usually clues you in to the
meaning, with or without a comma, but that little punctuation mark just
helps makes comprehension occur that much faster. And sometimes it's
downright necessary!
In conclusion
I
don't make the rules; in fact, sometimes I purposely break them (If you
don't believe me, check out the doozy of a sentence in my second
paragraph about Oxford commas, beginning with "but if by some
stroke...", which is short no less than three commas by the dictates of a
more traditional grammar—I chose to leave out the commas so it would
read in one breathless rush), but there are times when inserting a comma
is just the right thing to do. Sure, if you want to go around writing
your sentences just a little faster at the expense of clarity, I won't
yell at you, but I'll definitely judge you.
1 comments:
My comma comment is, why can't we have a Harvard comma 'cause... 'merica.
Or a Blücher comma. reaching...
Dad