And

[NotWise]

I was taught that when a sentence includes a list, as in

Her eyes traced his broad shoulders, his thick arms, his big hands, and his narrow hips.

That the "and" in the last list item was required. Is that still a thing?

In context, and in several other contexts lately, I've wanted to omit that "and."

 

[Bramblethorn]

I was taught that when a sentence includes a list, as in



That the "and" in the last list item was required. Is that still a thing?

In context, and in several other contexts lately, I've wanted to omit that "and."

I think it's still required at the formal end of things, but commonly omitted in less-formal media like much of fiction writing. Pretty sure I've omitted the "and" in stories here when it flowed better without, and nobody's ever complained about it.

A famous example:

"It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to Heaven, we were all going direct the other way—in short, the period was so far like the present period, that some of its noisiest authorities insisted on its being received, for good or for evil, in the superlative degree of comparison only."

 

[Rustyoznail]

I was taught that when a sentence includes a list, as in

"Her eyes traced his broad shoulders, his thick arms, his big hands, and his narrow hips."

That the "and" in the last list item was required. Is that still a thing?

In context, and in several other contexts lately, I've wanted to omit that "and."

And I normally stay away from grammar and sentence discussions, as I have no idea what an Oxford comma is, when I should use an adverb, or any of those other details.

(side note - Grammarly is insisting the last two commas in the above sentence should be removed. No, they shouldn't.)

The "and" would normally stay, but I'd write it as "Her eyes traced his broad shoulders, his thick arms, his big hands, his narrow hips..." to give the impression that there was more she was interested in.

Devotees of the Chicago Style Manual will probably disagree.

 

[ElectricBlue]

I'll usually keep it, more to keep the beat of the sentence than from any sense of officialdom.

Your example, to my ear, concludes the list with the final "and" - without it, there's an implied continuation that's gone missing, it seems incomplete.

 

[SamScribble]

I was taught that when a sentence includes a list, as in

That the "and" in the last list item was required. Is that still a thing?

In context, and in several other contexts lately, I've wanted to omit that "and."

When you are writing fiction, say what you want to say in the way that you want to say it. Just so long as what you write is clear, that's all that really matters. Grammarly's opinion is just Grammarly's opinion.

 

[KeithD]

I was taught that when a sentence includes a list, as in



That the "and" in the last list item was required. Is that still a thing?

In context, and in several other contexts lately, I've wanted to omit that "and."

No, in fiction, it's not absolutely required. The "and" can be omitted occasionally to achieve a "tumbling" effect. Occasionally. Just like incomplete sentences and sentence fragments can be used occasionally for highlighting effect. Occasionally.

 

[Trionyx]

Speaking of ‘ands’

If one writes ‘x and y’ there is no comma.
If one writes ‘x, y and z’ there is comma but not right before the ‘and.’
Likewise, with four items the correct form is ‘w, x, y and z.’
Why, oh why do people insist on putting a comma before the ‘and’ when there is a long list? You don’t put a comma before the ‘and’ if there are two items and you shouldn’t if there are more than two items.

In the grand scheme of things I realize this is a minor issue. I was just curious.

 

[mynameisben]

It is purely a stylistic choice, as far as I'm concerned. AND no grammarian will ever change my mind.


Ben

 

[KeithD]

If one writes ‘x and y’ there is no comma.
If one writes ‘x, y and z’ there is comma but not right before the ‘and.’
Likewise, with four items the correct form is ‘w, x, y and z.’
Why, oh why do people insist on putting a comma before the ‘and’ when there is a long list? You don’t put a comma before the ‘and’ if there are two items and you shouldn’t if there are more than two items.

In the grand scheme of things I realize this is a minor issue. I was just curious.

We've just had that "discussion." And, yes, American publishing still uses the serial comma as the standard--for reader clarity (without the author deciding what the reader finds to be clear).

 

[Bramblethorn]

If one writes ‘x and y’ there is no comma.
If one writes ‘x, y and z’ there is comma but not right before the ‘and.’
Likewise, with four items the correct form is ‘w, x, y and z.’

Says who?

There are two different conventions about this. Most US and some British style guides require the serial comma ("w, x, y, and z", aka Oxford or Harvard comma). A few US style guides and most British ones go the other way. On a site like Literotica that doesn't enforce a specific style guide, either is correct. Your preferred style is fine, but that doesn't mean people who use the comma are wrong here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_comma
https://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2011/04/using-serial-commas.html

Why, oh why do people insist on putting a comma before the ‘and’ when there is a long list?

In many cases: because they're following a style guide that requires it.

In other cases: because it often reduces ambiguity in constructions like "I would like to thank my parents, God, and Ayn Rand".

 

[NotWise]

If one writes ‘x and y’ there is no comma.
If one writes ‘x, y and z’ there is comma but not right before the ‘and.’
Likewise, with four items the correct form is ‘w, x, y and z.’
Why, oh why do people insist on putting a comma before the ‘and’ when there is a long list? You don’t put a comma before the ‘and’ if there are two items and you shouldn’t if there are more than two items.

In the grand scheme of things I realize this is a minor issue. I was just curious.

The comma before the "and" in a list of three or more items is the serial comma, Oxford comma, or Harvard comma.

If you read up on it, you'll find examples cited that are ambiguous when the comma is omitted. Hence, general advice is that it should be used.

 

[SamScribble]

I noticed earlier that just up the road they are repainting the pub sign. I noticed that they are measuring carefully to get exactly the right spacing between Pig and And and And and Whistle. (I thought that you secretly might want to know this.)

 

[PBAnnie]

If one writes ‘x and y’ there is no comma.
If one writes ‘x, y and z’ there is comma but not right before the ‘and.’
Likewise, with four items the correct form is ‘w, x, y and z.’
Why, oh why do people insist on putting a comma before the ‘and’ when there is a long list? You don’t put a comma before the ‘and’ if there are two items and you shouldn’t if there are more than two items.

In the grand scheme of things I realize this is a minor issue. I was just curious.

FYI...

https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/946/427/5a4.jpg

 

[NotWise]

No, in fiction, it's not absolutely required. The "and" can be omitted occasionally to achieve a "tumbling" effect. Occasionally. Just like incomplete sentences and sentence fragments can be used occasionally for highlighting effect. Occasionally.

Thanks. The "tumbling" effect is what I'm after.

 

[PBAnnie]

I noticed earlier that just up the road they are repainting the pub sign. I noticed that they are measuring carefully to get exactly the right spacing between Pig and And and And and Whistle. (I thought that you secretly might want to know this.)

Thanks, I was very happy to read that.

Also...

Wouldn't the sentence "I want to put a hyphen between the words Fish and and and and and Chips in my 'Fish and Chips' sign" have been clearer if quotation marks had been placed before Fish, and between Fish and and, and and and and, and and and and, and and and and, and and and and, and and and Chips, as well as after Chips?

 

[NotWise]

IOver the centuries, the great composers knew "The Rules" but did what they wanted anyway. Great music theorists analyzed this music and discovered trends and tendencies. Then small-minded music theorists and musicologists came along and codified these observations into "The Rules." Then some composers with no imagination or genius wrote music according to "The Rules," music which is largely forgotten, for good reason.

So you don't like Brahms, but he isn't forgotten.

 

[WinsomeWeb]

In that particular case I wouldn't use 'and' because it throws off the rhythm. Those are three and four syllable phrases that all start with the same word, and then you throw 'and' in at the end, and suddenly it doesn't sound right.

his/broad/shoul/ders, his/thick/arms, his/big/hands, and/his/narr/ow/hips.

An alternative I might consider (if the word 'and' was important) is a repetition of the word 'and' itself.

his broad shoulders and his thick arms and his big hands and his narrow hips.

(As an aside, I would also change 'narrow' to 'thin' or something else that's one syllable because I think it flows better if the last phrase matches the syllables of the preceding two phrases. I don't mind saying this because I don't think you're actually asking for advice on how to write this one specific phrase, but I just thought I would note that as a further demonstration of my point--that I would focus more on a rhythm that feels right to me than following what's technically right.)

In my mind, the first example (omitting 'and') sounds more reserved and the second example (repeating 'and') is more breathless, which is something that might be worth playing with in the greater context of a full work. Those are the kinds of things that I like to focus on more than grammar when writing fiction, because while grammar is important it is ultimately only a tool, and sometimes it has to bend or break to accommodate meaning and intent and feeling.

 

[RichardWark]

I recommend "The Writer's Art" by James Kilpatrick. The guy personally had issues - supported segregation, was somewhere to the right of Attila the Hun - and the book is just a little out of date, but his writing skills are top-notch and his presentation of what a writer should do in a given situation is instructive and entertaining as Hell. Easily the best book about writing style I have ever read.

 

[HordHolm]

What percentage of the general public has actually read War and Peace..?

I've read it. I wanted to die by the time I was two thirds of the way through, but I carried on...

But to your main point - yes, for creative writing (and presumably composing), it is perfectly acceptable to break the rules. When writing to the tax office, on the other hand, adopting Joyceian punctuation might not be appreciated

 

[NotWise]

How on earth could you suppose I don't like Brahms? In fact, I'm working on learning his Op. 118 piano pieces. Yes, he was a logical composer, firmly grounded in "The Rules" of composing, but he was hardly a pedant.

In fact, Brahms is a good example of my point. Brahms used The Rules, but he wasn't "ruled" by them. His music was expressive of him as a man, showing his personality and thought processes in a completely unique way. And he didn't give a shit what people thought about him.

In his day and shortly thereafter, he was also a polarizing composer. People tended to love or hate his music, with not too many opinions in between. Just read G. B. Shaw's reviews of Brahms. Even today, his music doesn't have a wide appeal to the public. Many regard it as too "intellectual" and high-brow.

Some composers (and writers, even writers of erotica) have been more concerned with being "correct" than expressive. The towering giants of literature (and all the arts) have stood the test of time, but one must admit that their appeal is not very widespread. What percentage of the general public has actually read War and Peace or Les Miserables? How many people have actually listened to Beethoven's Hammerklavier Sonata?

I listen to a classical music station, and if I don't hear the intro to a piece, and don't recognize it, then I try to guess what it is: period, nationality, and then composer. I usually get Brahams wrong, because his music sounds like it was written 50 years earlier than it was.

I have a friend who's read War and Peace over and over. I got through a chapter, I think. I expect I have heard the Hammerklavier Sonata. Speaking of music that doesn't belong to its time, have you listened to his Grosse Fuge?

 

[Zeb_Carter]

And my Grammarly insists on that final comma all the time.

I do use Then instead of And sometimes and Grammarly wants to me to put the and in anyway.

For me Then does the same thing as And.

Billy looked up at Jenny, then Jenny got off of him.

Here's how Grammarly always want the sentence.

Billy looked up at Jenny and then Jenny got off of him.

Or should the first be...

Billy looked up at Jenny; then Jenny got off of him.

I'm like Ben, I probably know enough about Grammar to get myself in trouble, not out of it.

 

[NotWise]

Billy looked up at Jenny, then Jenny got off of him.

Here's how Grammarly always want the sentence.

Billy looked up at Jenny and then Jenny got off of him.

Or should the first be...

Billy looked up at Jenny; then Jenny got off of him.

I'm like Ben, I probably know enough about Grammar to get myself in trouble, not out of it.

In the first case, you're using "then" as a conjunction, which it isn't. I've read the argument that the construction should be acceptable because the "and" that should precede "then" is implied.

My knee jerk is to write it with ", then", then I go back and take the comma out or rewrite the sentence.

The second example, which you say Grammarly wants, seems wrong to me. "then Jenny got off of him." is an independent clause, so the "and" should be preceded by a comma.

I think the third form, with the semicolon, is correct. I wouldn't use a semicolon in that case, but I think it's correct.

 

[SamScribble]

I’ve read both War and Peace and Les Miserables several times each. Couldn’t make it through Ulysses, though.

I try to read Ulysses every year or so. But I've never managed to get into War and Peace. Just as well we have a choice.

 

[Trionyx]

FYI...

https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/946/427/5a4.jpg

Without the comma could also be written “We invited the strippers: JFK and Stalin” if you wanted to covey the two characters as drawn in the bottom sketch.

Then the top drawing could be written, “the strippers, JFK and Stalin.”

 

[NotWise]

Without the comma could also be written “We invited the strippers: JFK and Stalin” if you wanted to covey the two characters as drawn in the bottom sketch.

The point of the comparison was to show the difference that a single comma can make. You can insert a colon, but that's irrelevant.

Then the top drawing could be written, “the strippers, JFK and Stalin.”

That just gives you the sentence in the bottom drawing, which was not the intended meaning. The strippers were not JFK and Stalin.