[78-L] Grammatically incorrect

[David Lennick]

Read any newspaper..writers and editors are comma happy. I find many stories 
with far too many commas inserted (and let's not get into the plural verbs that 
invariably follow "none" and other horrors).

I had a comma-happy idiot editing my liner notes at Intersound. They'd fax me 
the proofs but always too late. Tough bananas.

I also worked for a station whose program director would call you into his 
office any time you used the phrase "of course". "It implies that the listener 
is dumber than you are." Well of course he is, you jerk..otherwise he'd be the 
one on the radio!

dl

Charles Bihun wrote:
> That seems to be today's usage; the comma is optional.  You just need to be consistent, i.e., use it or not, but always the same way.
> 
> ChuckB
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: Taylor Bowie <bowiebks at isomedia.com>
> To: 78-L Mail List <78-l at klickitat.78online.com>
> Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 4:38:34 PM
> Subject: Re: [78-L] Grammatically incorrect
> 
> I don't have my copy handy,  but do I recall that Strunk and White says that 
> the second (last) comma in such a list is optional?
> 
> Taylor
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Cary Ginell" <soundthink at live.com>
> To: <78-l at klickitat.78online.com>
> Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 1:33 PM
> Subject: [78-L] Grammatically incorrect
> 
> 
>> Getting back to Mary Travers, I think that it's unfortunate that for all 
>> these years, "Peter, Paul and Mary" was incorrect. The Chicago Manual of 
>> Style indicates that it should have an extra comma: "Peter, Paul, and 
>> Mary."
>>
>>
>>
>> Cary Ginell