Why I Dislike the Oxford Comma

The reason I dislike the Oxford comma is that it is unnecessary. Yes, it is often argued that the Oxford comma helps clear up possibly confusing or ambiguous phrases. That is fine, but is it necessary to use the comma to do that? Or are there other ways? I contend that there are other ways that are more clear and decisive.

One example is that an Oxford comma will clear up whether a phrase is a non-restrictive clause with two parts connected by a conjunction or it is the last two items in a list of three. For example if you were to write: I went to the store with my brother, a friend and fellow classmate.

It is unclear whether you are going to the store with your brother or with your brother and two other people. Is your brother a friend and classmate? In this case what comes after the comma is not the continuation of a list but a non-restrictive clause further describing your brother. Or, did you go to the store with your brother and two other people, a friend and classmate?

In the first case, you can easily add a couple of words to the sentence to clear up the possible confusion: I went to the store with my brother, who is a friend and fellow classmate. Or you can always use a colon to introduce the additional information about your brother. That would look like the next sentence. I went to the store with my brother: a friend and fellow classmate. These are very easy ways to clean up the meaning without having to add a comma.

In the second case, you shouldn't have to add anything. If we stick to the rule that there should not be a comma before the conjunction, it is clear what the meaning is. The conjunction connects the last two items in the list and a second connector, a comma, is not necessary. If you really want to make it clear, you can rephrase like this:  I went to the store with my brother as well as a friend and a fellow classmate. We can also rearrange the items in the list to make it clear:  I went to the store with a friend, a fellow classmate and my brother. In fact, if an Oxford comma was added to the last version of the sentence it would open the possibility of another misunderstanding. The following could mean that you are simply explaining that the friend is also a classmate: I went to the store with a friend, a fellow classmate, and my brother. Putting two commas around something is one way to signal that it is a non-restrictive clause. In these cases, using the Oxford comma can create just as much confusion as it is supposed to avoid.

There is another reason I resist adding a comma to connect items in a list when there is already a conjunction there. I do it because the comma followed by a conjunction is a convenient way to signal that you are connecting more than just items in a list. The comma with conjunction combination is used to connect two independent clauses; it signals the shift from one set of subjects and predicates to another. You should know when you see a comma and conjunction that you are moving from one independent clause to the next. This is a very useful thing to signal when writing with longer and complex sentences that try to express more complex ideas and the relationships between them. 

A second common reason given for the necessity of the Oxford comma is to help clarify complex lists or lists with items that contain a conjunction. I understand that lists can get complex and confusing sometimes, but we already have a punctuation mark that is supposed to be used in those cases: the semicolon. While the comma has many different uses (at least 5 different categories of use), the semicolon has three, maybe four. One of them is specifically to reduce confusion in complex lists.

The following may be confusing: I packed my lunch box with an apple, some yogurt and a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. Or it may be phrased like this: I packed an apple, a peanut butter and jelly sandwich and some yogurt for lunch. In my opinion the best way this can be clarified is by using a semicolon: I packed an apple; a peanut butter and jelly sandwich; and some yogurt for lunch. I know people will say that that looks intimidating, but it is only so because we have never done a good job teaching people what semicolons are for. I think this is exactly the kind of thing they are for, and they should be used in this situation instead of dragging the comma in to play yet another role.

To me, the Oxford comma is like using a screwdriver to pry things open or cut things when we have a wedge, crowbar, chisel and small saw in the tool box already. It may work well enough, but that is not what the comma was really made for and there are other things made just to do those things already. We should teach and encourage people to recognize and use the right tools, not expand the use of one that is already overused.

There are options to clearing up possible confusion and ambiguity without the use of the Oxford comma. We can add words to the sentence to clarify the meaning. We can use a colon or semicolon to clarify the meaning. We can re-arrange the sentence to make it clear. I see no reason why we need to add another use to the comma, which is already used in so many different ways.