Single Space or Double Space
-
Scott, in regards to your Oxford comma point, I counter with this:
http://diply.com/trendyjoe/oxford-comma-why-everyone-should-use-it/47666 -
@ajstringham said:
Scott, in regards to your Oxford comma point, I counter with this:
http://diply.com/trendyjoe/oxford-comma-why-everyone-should-use-it/47666That guy doesn't understand how it is used and is the example of why you should not use it - because it makes you look like you don't understand grammar. Which is exactly what he didn't understand.
Oxfords are not optional, like he thinks, they are necessary at certain times but not normally. They should be used when required (yes, there are times where they are required) and not at times when they are not. It's that simple.
Any other use looks at best sloppy and at worst as if English isn't a first language.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@ajstringham said:
Scott, in regards to your Oxford comma point, I counter with this:
http://diply.com/trendyjoe/oxford-comma-why-everyone-should-use-it/47666That guy doesn't understand how it is used and is the example of why you should not use it - because it makes you look like you don't understand grammar. Which is exactly what he didn't understand.
Oxfords are not optional, like he thinks, they are necessary at certain times but not normally. They should be used when required (yes, there are times where they are required) and not at times when they are not. It's that simple.
Any other use looks at best sloppy and at worst as if English isn't a first language.
I completely disagree. However, I can see there is no reasoning on this matter.
-
@ajstringham said:
I completely disagree. However, I can see there is no reasoning on this matter.
What is the logic FOR using the Oxford Comma? The article that you supplied is obviously incorrect, just read what he wrote. He doesn't understand how commas and "and" works and doesn't know the basics that he's discussing. So clearly that's not a viable reference.
It is well known that there are times when an Oxford comma is necessary, in which case you must use it. And there are times when it is clearly redundant and it has long been accepted not to use it.
Why do you feel that there is a positive use to a redundant comma? If you have a good reason, share it. If not, your article, I feel, proves my point. Looking like that guy makes you look either sloppy or confused - not things that you want your writing style to say about you.
-
Oxford (or serial) commas also follow the general styles for educated writing: Oxford comma highlights that you use American writing style (seen as uneducated in most of the world) and the non-Oxford traditional style aligns you with Britain and the Queen's English (seen as educated throughout most of the world.) For the same reasons that British spelling is beneficial when you want to stand out in a positive way, so is avoiding the Oxford comma.
The reality is, both forms are necessary as there are cases where both are the only way to be clear when writing. There are many times when either will work. Neither can ever be an "always."
-
Dear pedants, is there such thing as an Oxford semi-colon?
Is this sentence correct:
Five resellers and implementation experts were invited to bid for both Sage and NAV. These were: Acora; Fraser Price Consulting; DMC Software Solutions; Paradise Computing and Probitas Enterprise Solutionsor should I phrase it differently? I didn't want to use commas when listing company names, because company names sometimes include commas. Should there be a semi-colon after Paradise Computing?
-
@Carnival-Boy I see your logic, but I'm not clear if a semi-colon can be used that way. You've ventured into the territory of a rule that I am not familiar with. I think that a better option, but maybe not correct, is to put the company names into quotes, rather than changing commas to semi-colons.
-
If using semi-colons, at least in this instance, I would keep the "Oxford" semi-colon because the semi-colons add a little bit of uncertainty on their own.
-
Here is a pictorial guide on use of a semicolon: http://theoatmeal.com/comics/semicolon
http://s3.amazonaws.com/theoatmeal-img/comics/semicolon/header.png
-
I am a single spacer now, but I used to be a double spacer. Does that help?
-
@NetworkNerdWifey said:
I am a single spacer now, but I used to be a double spacer. Does that help?
I researched this matter once, and the double-spacing thing is from the old typewriter days, and some people carried it over into the digital age. You can use either single or double and neither one is considered incorrect or unprofessional. However, single space is the standard, and has been for awhile.
-
I'm still used to doing two spaces after a period, since that is how I learned. Most sites automatically strip it out when I post though.
-
@Nic said:
I'm still used to doing two spaces after a period, since that is how I learned. Most sites automatically strip it out when I post though.
Yup.
-
Was just typing an etc. in the middle of a sentence and realized that without single spacing between words and double spacing at the end of a sentence that you cannot tell when etc. is mid sentence or at the end of a sentence!
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Was just typing an etc. in the middle of a sentence and realized that without single spacing between words and double spacing at the end of a sentence that you cannot tell when etc. is mid sentence or at the end of a sentence!
Context.
-
@thanksaj said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Was just typing an etc. in the middle of a sentence and realized that without single spacing between words and double spacing at the end of a sentence that you cannot tell when etc. is mid sentence or at the end of a sentence!
Context.
That's a nice thought but that is not how punctuation works and it is very hard to determine context in many cases. One major case is that grammar checkers can't figure out what is going on. There should be no need for context and under traditional style rules no context was needed. The need for context at all is caused by an oversight by overzealous people who think that changing grammar rules simply for the sake of change and not because of style or logic is a good idea.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@thanksaj said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Was just typing an etc. in the middle of a sentence and realized that without single spacing between words and double spacing at the end of a sentence that you cannot tell when etc. is mid sentence or at the end of a sentence!
Context.
That's a nice thought but that is not how punctuation works and it is very hard to determine context in many cases. One major case is that grammar checkers can't figure out what is going on. There should be no need for context and under traditional style rules no context was needed. The need for context at all is caused by an oversight by overzealous people who think that changing grammar rules simply for the sake of change and not because of style or logic is a good idea.
Pretty sure context works.
-
@thanksaj said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@thanksaj said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Was just typing an etc. in the middle of a sentence and realized that without single spacing between words and double spacing at the end of a sentence that you cannot tell when etc. is mid sentence or at the end of a sentence!
Context.
That's a nice thought but that is not how punctuation works and it is very hard to determine context in many cases. One major case is that grammar checkers can't figure out what is going on. There should be no need for context and under traditional style rules no context was needed. The need for context at all is caused by an oversight by overzealous people who think that changing grammar rules simply for the sake of change and not because of style or logic is a good idea.
Pretty sure context works.
That's not the point. Scott's point - I think - is that the rules were never officially changed. Short of laziness why aren't you putting two spaces at the end of a sentence? Why, perhaps it's because you never took typing class, or you had a horrible teacher who didn't mandate the 'rules' to double space.
-
@thanksaj said:
Pretty sure context works.
"Pretty sure" doesn't cut it either in grammar nor does it authorize sloppiness.
-
@Dashrender said:
@thanksaj said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@thanksaj said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Was just typing an etc. in the middle of a sentence and realized that without single spacing between words and double spacing at the end of a sentence that you cannot tell when etc. is mid sentence or at the end of a sentence!
Context.
That's a nice thought but that is not how punctuation works and it is very hard to determine context in many cases. One major case is that grammar checkers can't figure out what is going on. There should be no need for context and under traditional style rules no context was needed. The need for context at all is caused by an oversight by overzealous people who think that changing grammar rules simply for the sake of change and not because of style or logic is a good idea.
Pretty sure context works.
That's not the point. Scott's point - I think - is that the rules were never officially changed. Short of laziness why aren't you putting two spaces at the end of a sentence? Why, perhaps it's because you never took typing class, or you had a horrible teacher who didn't mandate the 'rules' to double space.
I did take a typing class. I was taught single space. Double-spacing is from the typewriter era, which I was not a part of. Single-spacing is the standard.
