0

Considering that I do not want to switch the positions of the italicized nouns in this sentence: "Taken as examples are the Limboagan effect, and hysteria." Will it be correct to use the oxford comma to isolate the noun with the definite article to the other noun with zero article?

8
  • 2
    If you have a list of two things, it's not an Oxford comma. – Peter Shor Jan 31 at 13:25
  • Wrong site, but the comma does help give you what you want. – Yosef Baskin Jan 31 at 15:02
  • A comma before and in 'Look at Jack and Jill' would be rare and only used to show a pause for deliberation. With longer first members, a comma is permissible to aid parsing. '[T]he Limboagan effect' is probably borderline, but a comma here doesn't seem unreasonable even though the register is formal. It's not obligatory, on the other hand. // As Peter says, 'Oxford commas' only become an option/issue when the list contains 3 or more members. – Edwin Ashworth Jan 31 at 15:54
  • No comma. You can mix articled and zero-articled items in a list of two (as signaled by your use of the plural examples are). No one will read and [the] hysteria. – Tinfoil Hat Jan 31 at 18:12
  • @Tinfoil Hat: I think he's worried about people reading it "the Limboagan effect and the Limboagan hysteria." – Peter Shor Jan 31 at 22:59

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.