The Definitive Guide to the Oxford Comma Debate Explained
Written on
Understanding the Oxford Comma Debate
If you hold an opinion about the Oxford comma, ensure it’s an educated one. The debate over this punctuation mark dates back to the establishment of The University of Oxford in the 12th century, which occurred three centuries prior to the comma's invention.
With 25 years spent drafting and reviewing SEC filings, I have learned firsthand the stakes involved when companies err in these public documents, facing potential legal ramifications. As a result, legal professionals like myself dedicate extensive hours verifying every sentence to ensure clarity in corporate disclosures, which has imparted a significant understanding of the Oxford comma's relevance.
Here's a straightforward guideline that you can adopt: If you’re a corporate lawyer engaged in drafting SEC disclosure documents, it’s imperative to use the Oxford comma to avoid the risk of legal malpractice.
What’s the Controversy Surrounding the Oxford Comma?
Simply stated, the Oxford comma is the final comma in a list of three or more items, and its inclusion is hotly debated. Detractors argue that its use alters the aesthetic of the sentence and writing style. Those outside the legal profession often fret over the perceived unnecessary ink wasted on sentences where the comma might be omitted.
"Think of the children!" they lament.
Photo by Raphael Schaller on Unsplash
Is There a Real Distinction in Usage?
The significance of the Oxford comma extends beyond mere stylistic choice. It serves a crucial function, influencing the meaning of sentences dramatically.
When ambiguity arises, judges apply straightforward interpretative rules: Including the comma indicates that you are listing three or more distinct items, while omitting it suggests that the last two items exemplify the preceding one.
What If I'm Not a Corporate Lawyer?
If you’re not in the legal field, consider this: you can still convey an air of importance by consistently employing the Oxford comma.
Should anyone challenge your usage, adopt a confident demeanor and outline at least two reasons for your choice. First, using the Oxford comma eliminates potential ambiguity, which alone is sufficient justification for many. If further persuasion is needed, explain that in most scenarios, you are indeed listing distinct items rather than providing examples.
While the omission of a comma may not expose you to millions in legal liabilities, can you really afford to take any chances?
Be well.
PS — I’d like to acknowledge several authors whose insightful articles on the Oxford comma have appeared on Medium over the past decade. Although they may not have resolved the debate as I have, their contributions are commendable: Rick Mueller, Alex Gabriel, Mike Epifani, Stella J. McKenna, and many others.
Chapter 2: The Legal Implications of the Oxford Comma
The video title is "The most expensive comma of all time," which explores the financial consequences stemming from the omission or inclusion of the Oxford comma in legal contexts.