Oxford comma dilemma

[HotCrossBunplease]

I have started working on a new project and have a colleague whose job it is to manage internal communications. She is lovely and very experienced.

I am the “figurehead” of the project in that all internal messaging says to contact me, and I am responsible for setting the overall tone and content, so I write a first draft and then pass to her for comments.

She has just come back with suggested amendments to our first big announcement and she has sprinkled Oxford commas all over the place. I can’t stand them. Two instances are new lists that she has added, based on wording that I had used in a different sentence structure. A third is a list that was in my original draft, to which she has just added the OC. As you can imagine, the third one rankles the most!

I really want to point out that my original was not wrong and that OCs are a matter of personal style. I could pull rank and make her remove them but that would make me an arsehole and set our working relationship off on the wrong foot. My sentence was this:

“Training will be provided in English, French and Portuguese.”

which has now become

“..English, French, and Portuguese”

The ones she has added are:

“Their enthusiasm, insights, and feedback have been invaluable”

and

“considering the broader impact of [project] on our clients, our practice, and the way we do business.”

I know that OCs are not wrong. I also know that not a single reader will care (apart from one friend of mine in the company who knows about my visceral objection to OCs and will find it hilarious).

Not sure what I even want from this post. A bit of solidarity maybe?

It does have a place in British English.
It can be usefully used to avoid ambiguity, but that’s not an issue here.

-ize endings are fine if you are using American English. If you are not they are misspellings.

Not true.

‑ize endings have been used in the UK since the 15th century and remain the preferred spelling of the Oxford English Dictionary.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_spelling

It’s hard to say. In some respects it’s no different to not liking celery, or the colour orange for interiors. I think partly because I prefer uncluttered visuals, and also because I was very firmly taught at school that there was no comma before the “and” in a list, and only learned later that there was an alternative viewpoint. Like being raised in a certain religion 😀, you can respect other ones but it would feel too odd to practise them.

Strictly speaking, it isn't an Oxford comma if it is used as a matter of choice to avoid ambiguity or favourably alter the rhythm of a sentence. It is only an Oxford comma if it is used out of adherence to a fixed rule.

Ah, you'll get used to it 😜

Yes sorry, I meant in the manner OP has illustrated.

There's also this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_comma

I like the quote from Lynn Truss: "There are people who embrace the Oxford comma, and people who don't, and I'll just say this: never get between these people when drink has been taken." 😁

I don’t really understand what you mean.
Could you expand on that a bit more please?

@Terracottateapot , 'Fleetwood Mac, Simon and Garfunkel, and The Carpenters.' is not an Oxford comma because Simon and Garfunkel is treated as one item in the list.
'Fleetwood Mac, Paul Simon, Art Garfunkel, and The Carpenters.' is an Oxford comma.

The two in bullet points would be:

• Fleetwood Mac
• Simon and Garfunkel
• The Carpenters

• Fleetwood Mac
• Paul Simon
• Art Garfunkel
• The Carpenters

In the Oxford comma example the last comma doesn't alter the meaning.

When we refer to an "Oxford" (or serial) comma, it means the systematic use of a comma before the last "and/or" in a list. It's a style convention that's applied consistently.

If you're not following that recipe, and just put them where you want to, then that's just called... well, "using a comma" IYSWIM 😊

@Terracottateapot ,

The Oxford comma, also called the serial comma, is the final comma placed before the conjunction (usually "and" or "or") in a list of three or more items. For example: "I would like to thank my parents, Oprah Winfrey, and God." Here, the comma before "and God" clarifies that the speaker is thanking three separate entities, avoiding misinterpretation that could arise without it.

But I don’t need to. It is always a choice, so I will choose not to use it whenever I have control. The current situation has arisen because I do not have full control.

I have rewritten passages in order to avoid the need for an Oxford comma.

We all get this. However, it is not only called an Oxford Comma when used in this way.

It is also called an Oxford comma when it appears in a list where there is no ambiguity, such as “Training in English, French, and Portuguese”.

OCs are the very definition of superfluous to requirement and a stylistic folly. If I was the 'voice' of my organisation, I would make my preference really clear from the start.

Thank you.
Yes, I understand that.
I thought the comma after Simon and Garfunkel and before The Carpenters (where The Carpenters was the last band listed) was an Oxford comma too though.
You’re saying that’s wrong?

Of course it is. That's what it said in my post.
The Oxford comma, also called the serial comma, is the final comma placed before the conjunction (usually "and" or "or") in a list of three or more items.

I’ve lost track of the point you are trying to make.

I think they are wrong unless it is American English.

They are used in AI all the time & I delete them.

But I moved on from the religion I was raised in when I realised it was riddled with inconsistencies.
In the context of an organisation, having a style guide which recommends consistently using the Oxford comma seems to me to be more logical and robust than leaving it to the stylistic whim of each individual writer.

You corrected something that was correct.

I'm with @Beachtastic . You use Oxford commas consistently in a piece of prose. This minimizes ambiguity because there's a clear way to distinguish meanings of phrases like "flavours are strawberry, chocolate, banana, and pistachio", and "flavours are strawberry, chocolate, banana and pistachio". Rarely useful outside academese or legalese. But I can't see why you would conclude AI has been used. Anyone who has written using Hart's Guide or the Oxford manual of style, including for Oxford publications, will be likely to use the Oxford comma (and the -ize ending).

The obvious way to resolve this is to have a conversation with this person, and say, I see you use this. I don't. It will save a lot of work if we do the same thing. As a huge favour to me, since I have an irrational hatred for it, could you drop it?

Better an honest conversation that acknowledges this is a normal style choice than needless and perhaps groundless accusations about AI. You know there is nothing wrong with those sentences but you have a preference - so just own the preference. I'm sure she'll be fine (or we will await her post here!)

I could easily have been your colleague - I use Oxford commas after years working with the OUP. But if someone said, let's not, I wouldn't. No drama.

Nope, still don’t follow.

Our style guide is silent on Oxford commas.