Why is there no comma in this sentence?

[Lakai]

Here is the sentence from this article:

Add in the fact that he is an actual team player wearing a Knicks uniform and it’s like spotting a unicorn playing point guard at Madison Square Garden.

Why is there no comma before the “and” in the middle? I thought you always had to put commas before coordinating conjunctions. Please help me overcome my ignorance.

[Rhythmdvl]

I believe it’s a style issue. The comma is permissive (and nice), but not mandatory.

[FasterThanMeerkats]

Commas often denote a pause for the reader, but there is no pause in the sentence in question; it’s supposed to be read in a continuous meter.

I’m sure an english major will come along and quote the correct Strunk & White passage shortly.

[panache45]

I would have added the comma, just because of the length of the sentence. But it’s not mandatory.

[Chronos]

All rules for the use of the comma boil down to one: Add a comma if it will improve the clarity of the sentence.

The sentence in the OP is perfectly clear already, even without the comma, so there’s no reason to include it.

[Rhythmdvl]

@Chronos

All rules for the use of the comma boil down to one: Add a comma if it will improve the clarity of the sentence.

The sentence in the OP is perfectly clear already, even without the comma, so there’s no reason to include it.

FTFY?
The sentence in the OP is perfectly clear already even without the comma so there’s no reason to include it.

[Bozuit]

Commas just don’t normally come before the word “and”, although they can.

@FasterThanMeerkats

Commas often denote a pause for the reader, but there is no pause in the sentence in question; it’s supposed to be read in a continuous meter.

I’m sure an english major will come along and quote the correct Strunk & White passage shortly.

Although they’re not supposed to technically correspond to any pauses in reading.

@Rhythmdvl

FTFY?
The sentence in the OP is perfectly clear already even without the comma so there’s no reason to include it.

I think the rules (or guidelines) go a bit further than that. The fact that “even without the comma” is kind of “extra information” - a part that can be removed without changing the meaning of sentence - means it gets commas around it.

[running_coach]

It fell out on the floor.

Here it is.

,

[Rhythmdvl]

@Bozuit

I think the rules (or guidelines) go a bit further than that. The fact that “even without the comma” is kind of “extra information” - a part that can be removed without changing the meaning of sentence - means it gets commas around it.

But … but The One Rule to Comma them All!
Actually, I need to hire a proofreader. Any freelancers in the audience think I’d get much traction in the Marketplace?

[Alley_Dweller]

The rule I was taught in school:
When there is a list of three or more item, separate by commas.
However, even in a list of three or more items, the comma before the conjunction is optional. American usage generally favors the comma before the conjunction, British does not.

Example:
*Sticks and stones won’t hurt me
Sticks, stones, and bullets won’t hurt Superman.
-or-
Sticks, stones and bullets won’t hurt Superman.

I went to the store and I picked up my dry cleaning.
I went to the store, I picked up my dry cleaning, and I visited the post office.
-or-
I went to the store, I picked up my dry cleaning and I visited the post office.*

[from_a_to_z]

A little farther down in the above-linked article, NYT writer David Carr has this stretch of tantalizing prose:

— the Fox Sports columnist Jason Whitlock tweeted a crude reference about Lin’s anatomy and the boxer Floyd Mayweather Jr. suggested that Lin was getting attention because of his ethnicity, not his accomplishments —

Would you add a comma? And if so, then where? My mind started racing after I read the first 18 words.

(I give thanks to my parents, Jeremy Lin and Floyd Mayweather Jr.)

[Rhythmdvl]

@Alley_Dweller

The rule I was taught in school:
When there is a list of three or more item, separate by commas.
However, even in a list of three or more items, the comma before the conjunction is optional. American usage generally favors the comma before the conjunction, British does not.

Example:
*Sticks and stones won’t hurt me
Sticks, stones, and bullets won’t hurt Superman.
-or-
Sticks, stones and bullets won’t hurt Superman.

I went to the store and I picked up my dry cleaning.
I went to the store, I picked up my dry cleaning, and I visited the post office.
-or-
I went to the store, I picked up my dry cleaning and I visited the post office.*

I would like to meet your parents and, perhaps, an author and a deity.

[pulykamell]

@Bozuit

Commas just don’t normally come before the word “and”, although they can.

Yes, they do. Traditionally, when you’re joining two independent clauses with a coordinating conjunction, you put the comma in before the coordinating conjunction.

See here, for instance:

The seven coordinating conjunctions used as connecting words at the beginning of an independent clause are and, but, for, or, nor, so, and yet. When the second independent clause in a sentence begins with a coordinating conjunction, a comma is needed before the coordinating conjunction:

Jim studied in the Sweet Shop for his chemistry quiz, but it was hard to concentrate because of the noise.

If the second clause is dependent, then no comma is used. For example:

Jim went to the store and picked up some candy.

Yes, it’s a style consideration, but the major style guides I’ve worked with (Associated Press and Chicago Manual of Style) would both recommend a comma in the OP’s case. From memory, the exceptions they have is if either clause is very short.

So, for the OP, I would definitely punctuate with a comma.

[pulykamell]

Here is the relevant site from the AP (which the New York Times style guide should be similar to):

WIHT CONJUNCTIONS: When a conjunction such as and, but or for links two clauses that could stand alone as separate sentences, use a comma before the conjunction in most cases: She was glad she had looked, for a man was approaching the house.

As a rule of thumb, use a comma if the subject of each clause is expressly stated:We are visiting Washington, and we also plan a side trip to Williamsburg. We visited Washington, and our senator greeted us personally. But no comma when the subject of the two clauses is the same and is not repeated in the second: We are visiting Washington and plan to see the White House.

The comma may be dropped if two clauses with expressly stated subjects are short. In general, however, favor use of a comma unless a particular literary effect is desired or if it would distort the sense of a sentence.

I personally like the use of the comma in the OP, as it does make the sentence slightly easier to parse, and because I fully expect commas before coordinating conjunctions joining two independent clauses.

[Laggard]

I hate the idea of a comma in that sentence. It’s not a “eats shoots and leaves” situation as it is perfectly clear what is meant.

[pulykamell]

@Laggard

I hate the idea of a comma in that sentence. It’s not a “eats shoots and leaves” situation as it is perfectly clear what is meant.

See, for me, it looks a bit long and unwieldy without the comma. Add to that the fact that almost every publication I’ve ever read would have me expecting a comma there, and I have a slight mental hiccup when I don’t see the comma before the conjunction. There are plenty of times we use commas where there is no ambiguity. Hell, I’d argue that most uses of the comma are unnecessary in terms of clarifying what is meant. They’re there usually to help us visually parse a sentence.

I personally don’t care either way, as long as there is consistency.

[Lakai]

@Laggard

I hate the idea of a comma in that sentence. It’s not a “eats shoots and leaves” situation as it is perfectly clear what is meant.

Isn’t it usually clear what is meant in situations where “and” comes before an independent clause? I think the comma is there for pacing rather than for clarity. When you see the comma before a coordinating conjunction, your mind will expect an independent clause to follow. When you don’t see the comma your mind will expect a dependent clause, which is more closely related to the preceding sentence than an independent clause.

[pulykamell]

@Lakai

Isn’t it usually clear what is meant in situations where “and” comes before an independent clause? I think the comma is there for pacing rather than for clarity. When you see the comma before a coordinating conjunction, your mind will expect an independent clause to follow. When you don’t see the comma your mind will expect a dependent clause, which is more closely related to the preceding sentence than an independent clause.

See, that’s the issue for me. I’m so used to this convention that when I don’t see it, like in your example sentence in the OP, my brain is expecting that which follows “and” to either connect to “team player” or “uniform.” So there was a little mental hiccup when it turned out there actually was an independent clause following, with a new subject and everything.

It’s a minor point, and I was able to figure it out, but adding the comma just increases readability for me. I used to also be one of those people who did not use the Oxford comma (being raised on AP Style), but I’ve found that adding that comma also improves readability, so I’ve switched to always using the Oxford comma.

[Lakai]

@pulykamell

It’s a minor point, and I was able to figure it out, but adding the comma just increases readability for me. I used to also be one of those people who did not use the Oxford comma (being raised on AP Style), but I’ve found that adding that comma also improves readability, so I’ve switched to always using the Oxford comma.

Here is another reason.

[Rhythmdvl]

@Lakai

Here is another reason.

Heh, see also: post 12.

Seriously people. Are there any professional freelance proofreaders on the Board?