GatewayRedbirds.com

AdmiralKird wrote:
The only debate should be how large Heyzeus' pony signature should be for creating a three page discussion on this ludicrious argument.

Would you like it larger? I'm pretty sure it could be larger.

Speaking of headlines, years ago (I mean YEARS ago), the Danville (IL) Commercial-News ran the headline "Man With Railroading in His Blood Dies."

Obviously it was pretty small-scale.

cards2468 wrote:

MrCrowesGarden wrote:

G. Keenan wrote:

Richie Allen wrote:Not Oxford comma related but I thought of this discussion and the importance of punctuation when I saw this headline.

"At Last" Singer Etta James Dies

Oh man. That's terrible, but also hilarious.

Am I missing something? The way Richie has it linked is correct, isn't it?

It reads like the writer is saying "At last, singer Etta James dies." Like we've all been waiting for it to happen.

That's how it would read if it had the comma. But it doesn't. I get the humor in it, but with correct punctuation, it wasn't a problem.

MrCrowesGarden wrote:That's how it would read if it had the comma. But it doesn't. I get the humor in it, but with correct punctuation, it wasn't a problem.

I'm reading it that way as well.

Wouldn't the correct punctuation be:

"At Last" singer, Etta James, dies

If it was called the All-American Comma nobody would have a problem with it.

I wasn't pointing out a mistake, just a dumb choice for a headline and one that could be misinterpreted.

Adrian Wapcaplet wrote:It's the comma before the "and" in a series of three things. For example: periods, commas, and other punctuation. Pujols, Edmonds, and Rolen.

Some people try to argue that it's unnecessary because you pause before the "and" anyway. But it's simply not true that you pause every time you see an "and." When people see "Green Eggs and Ham" they don't read it as "Green Eggs, and Ham."

This is, oddly enough, something I'm passionate about.

You have to put a comma there?

jim wrote:

Adrian Wapcaplet wrote:It's the comma before the "and" in a series of three things. For example: periods, commas, and other punctuation. Pujols, Edmonds, and Rolen.

Some people try to argue that it's unnecessary because you pause before the "and" anyway. But it's simply not true that you pause every time you see an "and." When people see "Green Eggs and Ham" they don't read it as "Green Eggs, and Ham."

This is, oddly enough, something I'm passionate about.

You have to put a comma there?

The cartoon explains the necessity of the comma:

jim wrote:

Adrian Wapcaplet wrote:It's the comma before the "and" in a series of three things. For example: periods, commas, and other punctuation. Pujols, Edmonds, and Rolen.

Some people try to argue that it's unnecessary because you pause before the "and" anyway. But it's simply not true that you pause every time you see an "and." When people see "Green Eggs and Ham" they don't read it as "Green Eggs, and Ham."

This is, oddly enough, something I'm passionate about.

You have to put a comma there?

Only if you care about communicating clearly with the reader. Granted, it might not look necessary in a sentence like "The members of MV3 were Pujols, Edmonds, and Rolen." because you can see the end of the sentence and it's obvious that "Edmonds and Rolen" are not a single entity. But I encourage people to get in the habit of always using the serial comma because in longer, more complex sentences, using it will definitely prevent your meaning from being misconstrued.