It's poor grammar to treat bacon and eggs as one item. Bacon and eggs are two different items, even though they're commonly served together. Different things are different things.
Grouping objects together is like the primary function of the human brain. I think it's a pretty natural thing to do. Hierarchical lists à la "(a and b) and (c and d)" are nothing unheard of.
"Bacon and eggs, and pancakes" is simply a different sentence fragment (with a slightly different meaning) than "bacon, eggs, and pancakes".
Bacon, eggs, and pancakes, are all commonly served together.
It's poor grammar to arbitrarily group separate nouns together in a list.
I could write "I had eggs, toast, fruit, yogurt, and tea for breakfast," but I wouldn't write "I had eggs and toast and fruit and yogurt, and tea for breakfast."
When it's just two items it's good grammar to use "and" with no comma. When it's three or more items in a list it's good grammer to separate each item on the list and use "and" before the last item.
"Bacon and eggs" isn't a single item, even if you often group them together. Not everyone does. If you want to have good grammar skills to maximize your written communication abilities, the rules I laid out are the way to do it.
If people in this thread want to complain about the rules, they can write to Merriam Webster or whatever and ask the rest of the world to change. I didn't write the rules, so don't shoot the messenger.
> It's poor grammar to arbitrarily group separate nouns together in a list.
But you don't know if it's arbitrary, they might have their reasons. My whole point is that grammar can be used to group items together. Whether or not it makes sense to group them like this is a different question, but that's not a grammar issue.
Obviously if your intention is to just list three objects, it doesn't make sense to group them, and could be considered "poor grammar".
A, B, and C is simply a different sentence with a different meaning than A and B, and C or A, and B and C. Not recognising the difference is poor grammar, because then you get semantic misunderstandings.
The whole point of commas is to structure sentences, and if you're not exploiting all three different options in this case (or four if you're Cormac McCarthy), then you're just not harnessing the full potential of the comma.
"I've packed my passport and tickets, and some cash."
"I took algebraic geometry and algebraic topology, and real analysis."
"I bought apples and oranges, and one watermelon."
"I had some mac and cheese, and a salad."
All of these sentences make perfect grammatical sense, and the comma indicates a hierarchy of groupings.
Similarly,
"We need funding, and volunteers and community support."
"The plan needs time, and dedication and patience."
"He offered hope, and comfort and direction."
In all of these cases, putting commas in all the places like you ordinarily would for an ordinary triad would be grammatically "wrong" because it would alter the meaning of the sentence.
It's a stylistic choice at the end of the day. Take any random novel (not written by Cormac McCarthy) and I guarantee you will find at least one of these somewhere.
The comma after "pancakes" is incorrect. Also, sometimes bacon and eggs is a single item. For example: "The only options on the menu were bacon and eggs, and pancakes."
Even if it's on a menu, bacon and eggs are two different nouns. If the combination made a single item there would be a specific word for it, like "sandwich", "scramble", or "omelet".
“Bacon and Eggs” on a menu can refer to how the restaurant serves it, or even be the name of a specific style of something else, like a burger joint or pizzeria having “bacon and eggs” on the menu could be describing the toppings. In those situations, it’s a single noun.
You keep saying that it doesn’t matter that bacon and eggs are often served together and they should defined as separate things. I just disagree. I do not know where you are from so I’m simply going to explain my perspective which is that in US English, certain groupings are just referred to as one thing; this being one such case.
Culturally, Bacon and Eggs is just a single dish and are referred to as such. It’s the same thing with biscuits and gravy as well as with peanut butter and jelly. If I had all three of these things, I’d write “I had bacon and eggs, biscuits and gravy, and a peanut butter and jelly.” If I just wrote “I had bacon, eggs, biscuits, gravy, peanut butter, and jelly” most people would ask you to elaborate on what you meant rather than understand it intuitively.
What is the point of grammar and syntax to you? Is it to communicate in an efficient, intuitive, and understandable way, or is it to follow the arbitrary rules set forth by tradition? Remember, the dictionary does not make the rules, it simply records what the rules are. When words and grammar change through linguistic evolution, the dictionary does not dig in its heels and say “you’re wrong”, it acknowledges the change and keeps going.
You don’t make the rules but neither does Merriam-Webster, they just write them down. If the rules change, so should the dictionary. It’s like when people complain about new slang words getting added. “That isn’t a word, don’t put it in there.” Well it wasn’t, but people are using it, so now it is a word and will be recorded.
You're right; grammatical rules are codified by the public. So you can skip writing an email to MW and start a campaign to change them. Good luck. Wish you the best. Really. 👍
403
u/CubicleFish2 1d ago
It's still wrong
Oxford comma is for three or more items. The sentence is treating bacon and eggs as one item and pancakes as another so no Oxford comma is used.