Nick, thanks for this interesting link. I’m not sure I’m convinced by all Norris’ comma opinions, but she does explain them very clearly. I’ll be adding her
new book to my “to read” list.
The New Yorker goes behind a paywall after a short period, right? So anyone who is interested better head over to this link sooner, rather than later.
Beth
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Nick Carbone
Sent: Sunday, April 12, 2015 8:19 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Grammar dispute in a big-time corporate lawsuit
Mary Norris, copy editor for the New Yorker, has a post in her blog on the Oxford comma and using it for clarity at The New Yorker. The post begins with how she came to the magazine and rose to be chief copy editor then goes on to discuss the magazines us
of the Oxford comma:
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/02/23/holy-writ
[log in to unmask]
http://ncarbone.blogspot.com
The courts were wrong, the only purpose to the oxford comma is to disambiguate. Without it, there is ambiguity, but not with it. Check the judges background in grammar. They should
appeal on that basis.
Phil Bralich