eg, e.g., or eg.

I'n not saying it's wrong, but I have never seen eg without the dots and I would never write it that way. As for U.S., I think that in many cases you do not see the dots any more.

@Ophelia

Love the visual! Glad I can contribute SOMEthing to this site!!!

It seems that in the US ex. has come to replace e.g.

Perhaps, but if so, I have not often seen it used.

I personally never use the comma after the "eg" -- also do not use periods as you notice. To me, commas should only be used where necessary for clarity, or to signal a natural pause in the text (ie where you would pause if reading or speaking out loud).

With periods and a comma: it is an abbreviation; it is a clause. Just because you see it in print doesn't make it right.

I agree with you in principle, eelc12, however it appears that what is right is being re-written as the english language evolves. I would much prefer to write e.g. as you have described above, however those above me disagree and so I must write [eg,] as per their instructions.

New words are added to dictionaries as they come into common usage, and new, shorter ways of writing things seem to be developing. It's almost a case of 'if prominent people use a previously wrong convention often enough, it will eventually become right'.

"The American convention is to use full stops (periods) at the end of almost all abbreviations and contractions. The British convention is to use full stops after abbreviations - eg, abbr., adj., co. - but not after contractions - eg, Dr, Mr, Mrs, St."
source: The Economist Style Guide (2005)
This is strange because I would say "e.g." is an abbreviation, but they use "eg" without full stops throughout the whole document.

I think it's clear that e.g. has to have full stops/periods. It is an abbreviation for exempli gratia and is technically an acronym, in which each of the first two letters is used. These are always presented either with full stops, capital letters or both. Thus, we do use US and could use u.s. if it was not a country name, but could not just write "us." As for putting one full stop at the end that is for abbreviations where the word is "cut," not acronyms so we use abbr. for abbreviation sand adj. for adjective, but could not use eg., unless the word was "egsample" (har har). As for using a comma after it, that should only be done in some cases, like my last sentence (see what I did?). At the beginning of a list, it is wrong. Why not follow logic rather than convention, or if you follow convention, follow all major style guides, which use e.g. I recently wrote a blog post on this issue at http://www.makeyourenglishwork.com/2012/05/17/eg-or-e-g/ if you're interested.

I would certainly use periods, looks clearer and otherwise you could end up with eg on your face.

sorry.

Hilarious! And informative. Thanks for the oatmeal link, GabbyGibby.

Make Your English Work: Great blog post, I agree with your logic. Seems that not everyone does though, hence the confusion many people experience when they see the variety of forms of this abbreviation used even in what purport to be formal documents.
Question: did you mean to write "f.e." rather than "f.r." in the example of the English form of e.g.?

After my doctoral thesis writing since my last post I have come to understand that when used in a sentence there should be a comma, but not when used in brackets.

For example:
A sentence, e.g., when to use a comma
A sentence (e.g. when not to use a comma)

That is how I have used it in my writing anyway.

"eg" is fine without full stops, as are other common abbreviations, especially capitalised ones, at least here in the UK.

However, maybe now we could reintroduce the "e.g." form. I think open punctuation was introduced because when using monospaced fonts (eg on typewriters and golfball printers) all those extra punctuation marks look horrible, add lots of visual clutter, and increase the chances of rivers forming in your text. Now, 30 years on, we all use proportionally-spaced fonts and the punctuation marks don't look /quite/ as bad...

Hmm I'm not sure which is most important to me - pedantically following the rules of the English language, or clean, uncluttered typography... I enjoy both :)

What about people using 'e.g.' followed by a list that ends with 'etc.' (e.g, '(e.g., grammarians, nitpickers, etc.)')? [(I had to try that, despite possible criticisms. :-)] Does not the use of 'etc.' indicate the writer's list is intended not as just a limited set of examples but a totality of possibilities, thus obviating the need for the 'e.g.'?

If it is at the beginning of a sentence, Can it be E.g. ?

I really love this site, and the design.

Hey Pain,

Have to comment on the website first. Just found it, haven't clicked around yet, except for closing the "proof reading popup". I quite like the simplicity for the task it's meant for and the hidden "obnoxious" quirks :)

Sorry for not reading all the comments or a couple of them first, but I reckon since it's "Latin" it is quite open to interpretation.

I can be a grammar confectionist at times, but when it's ambiguous, I myself tend to use the option with less characters. Most probably because of my graphic & web design history. Less characters, smaller file size...

You article is rubbish. No-one with any intelligence will use eg or e.g
Don't ask me to proof-read my document anfd then give a "genius" comment

I have heard that 'eg' is being used more often on websites, as it allows screen readers to pronounce it as 'e g' rather than 'e dot g dot' or 'e [sentence pause] g [sentence pause]'. Perhaps that is infiltrating other uses.

I have used eg and ie for a long time. Why waste space or time?
We don't write p.c. for a personal computer, l.e.d. of light emitting diode, etc. (yes, not e.t.c.). I also a agree with Peter X, we say e g, not e dot g dot. I am involved in writing Australian technical Standard, and always drive for efficiency and simplicity.

Just come across this site as I was taken to task for NOT including stops in eg and wanted to definitively know what's the formal line on this.
[Waaah! EeeeK! Your website wouldn't allow me to write eg. It wanted e.g. !! A subtle ploy to MAKE me do it?]
I have not used stops in dates and abbreviations in years. I agree that it looks cleaner without; the time for old-fashioned flowery style has gone. Even official documents are no longer in this style so we do we need to be? Language, spoken and written evolves. As for saving time: does it? I don't think in this day of fast keyboards that it does but it just looks simpler – and that does it for me.

English is full of idiomatic exceptions - forget about rules (that mostly don't exist).
We are participating in International (simplified) English (aka Globish) so let's make it simpler for the majority non-natives (native English speakers are minority ;)
I prefer Eg. or Eg: list,...
I also prioritise international words/symbols, so never use one, two, etc, when it's international (inc. maths) 1 so visually easy.

Is English alows international words & sybols (accented letters), then why not use shortcuts as '&' for 'and', etc?
When it comes to choice of 10s of synomyms, I prefer international (Latin) & regarding pronounciation also more phonetic versions, eg: Da(h)ta, not D(ei)t(ei), if you stick to bot A pronounced consitenlty...
Have fun & add Esperanto for much more simplification & universal communication with the future Robots (billions of them).

Did I tell you that based on Esperanto I avoid articles a/an as obsolete or even ambiguous? If I used them, let me know :)

RE commas after e.g. and i.e. and Bonelady's style guide table - note that these style guides fairly clearly indicate that the use of a comma or not is another US/UK difference; all the pro-commas are US, the one no-comma is UK. I.e. both are (or either style is) correct unless US proofreaders and publishers hegemonically insist that the correct is 'the' correct style!

Personally, I always use the first two options. They seem to me the most correct and logical. On the other hand, all options are correct and you can use more attractive ones for you. When I used https://ca.edubirdie.com/write-my-thesis to successfully write my thesis, I managed to use all the options in one paragraph. I discovered this when I gave the text for proofreading and editing. This is not considered a mistake, but a large number of such words makes your text cluttered. Therefore, be careful with such words.

The Times and Economist style guides have now jettisoned points (eg and ie instead of e.g. and i.e.), but it looked so horrible, retrograde and barbaric that I went online and discovered this discussion. As with the appalling newspaper abolition of italics for books, works of art, etc., this "unilateral" change is symptomatic of the way IT has steamrollered many of the fundamental facilitators of advanced written communication out of existence. Points indicate an abbreviation and preclude semantic/graphic "interference" with "egg", as well as hinting at the Latin phrase which was once a subtle sign of a proper education. The Times these days, sad to say, is but a pale reflection of its former glory in journalistic and literary terms (it leapt onto the feminist/woke bandwagon decades ago), and its slickly written but ultimately dissatisfying style guide simply reflects the intellectual abyss at the heart of a vanished pillar of Western civilisation. Quo vadis? Back to mankind's early days of scratching crude signs on clay and sticks. Next thing to go will be capital letters, I fear.

I’m glad to see other people have also dropped the periods to show abbreviations. For example, I now just write etc without the . And in my address I use Dr for Drive. No dot. My name is S Ball. The reason I came here is because I thought the rule was (ie, xxxxx) and (e.g. xxxxx) Whether it’s changed or not, aren’t these the original rules? Btw, I know the difference between ie and eg.

Thank you!
Stacie Ball
Word Nerd
Houston, TX

PS My sister and I are both fanatical about English usage, and seem to have both been born editors! Coincidence or could it be heredity? My three kids are all the same way. They never had to be taught how to spell, for example. In Kindergarten, their classmates would hound them for spelling help, to the point that their teachers had to make a new classroom rule to keep it under control. I really feel like great spellers are just born with that gift, while some of the most gifted people I know have trouble with it.