[Diary] Schedule

[dancefloorlandmine]

Right, looks like I'll be scoring the lyrics quiz on Thursday or Friday, which gives you a few days to have a go.

In the meantime, I'll try to get around to scanning the pics from the last Dead and Buried - hopefully before this one. And also working on a lyrics quiz on which people should be able to get reasonable scores (although there have been some surprising hits and misses on the one above).

Schedule
Tue - eve: At home. Doing washing up, revision,¹ and suchlike domestic tasks.
Wed - eve: MSc lecture and revision
Thu - eve: Going out for a drink with Kitty
Fri - eve: Quite possibly Dead and Buried
Sat - day: Board gaming, as arrange by thecesspit. All welcome - see his LJ for details.
Sat - eve: Party in East London
Sun - day: Recovering and garden pottering, with probably revision
Sun - eve: Clarets, anyone?
Mon - eve: Date - but need to sort details

So, looking like another full week again.

¹ With apologies to valkyriekaren for the use of the 'Oxford comma'

Comments

[valkyriekaren.livejournal.com]

Yes, but that only works if one item in the list is a plural, or is a compound joined with an 'and' (fish and chips, Hammersmith & City, raining cats and dogs). It's certainly no argument for ending every list that way!

[steer.livejournal.com]

Yes, I don't use such commas myself -- I just find the quote amusing and use it at every possible opportunity. [Though I think Ayn Rand would bully God horribly if they did get together.]

[sushidog.livejournal.com]

It's also quite important if your penultimate list member has a descriptor; "I studied French, theology, international politics, and economics" rather than "I studied French, theology, international politics and economics" (the latter could suggest that the economics studied were international).
Is there a sensible argument _against_ the Oxford comma, other than grounds of taste?

[flick.livejournal.com]

Is there a sensible argument _against_ the Oxford comma, other than grounds of taste?

"I went to dinner with Ann, Bob's mother, and Bob."

Is that two people or three?

[steer.livejournal.com]

Wow, like synchronicity man. That was spookily similar to my example.

[flick.livejournal.com]

Woah...

[stevek.livejournal.com]

All very noble, but I think you're missing the important questions here: what did you eat, was it nice and who paid? ;-)

[steer.livejournal.com]

Is there a sensible argument _against_ the Oxford comma, other than grounds of taste?

"I had lunch with Hester, a well-known netgoth, and Simon."

Did I have lunch with two people or three?

"I had lunch with Hester, a well-known netgoth and Simon."

I clearly had lunch with three people.

[sushidog.livejournal.com]

Hm; I would have said that the second version is just as unclear as the first, actually!

[steer.livejournal.com]

The second version could not grammatically be two people because the subordinate phrase "a well-known netgoth" would need commas at either end to be two people. So if you assume that the writer is grammatical then it is unambiguous. The first version is ambiguous even if you assume that the author is grammatical (but is allowing the Oxford commar).

So I guess it IS ambiguous, but only if you assume that the author has poor gramamar.

[sushidog.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I guess so; the answer would perhaps be the change the order of the list! :-)

[flick.livejournal.com]

If there are two people, "a well known net-goth" is a parenthetical clause. As such, it should be enclosed in either brackets or commas. The lack of a second comma int he second example means that it is *not* a parenthetical clause, and therefore that there are three people.