Take the 2-minute tour ×
TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for users of TeX, LaTeX, ConTeXt, and related typesetting systems. It's 100% free, no registration required.

This is possibly a very obscure problem. I tried searching for solutions but I had a hard time getting search engines to accept a literal ", &" string.

The problem is basically this. I'm using natbib with round and authoryear options. I'm using the citation style of Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (mn2e.bst), which says the first reference to a three-author paper must display all three names in full on the first citation and "et al." thereafter. So, if I make two citations to a paper by Smith, Jones and Parker, the first citation should be "Smith, Jones & Parker (2012)" and the second should be "Smith et al. (2012)".

This means the first citation should use the citet*. But then the output is

Smith, Jones, & Parker (2012)

which is just plain wrong. My sysadmins are allergic to updating (I'm on RHEL 5, writing this in FF3.6...) so I've got an old version of natbib. I tried playing with the punctuation with \bibpunct but I couldn't remove the correct comma. I realise this is basically the same as the standard formats (e.g. plainnat) writing "and" instead of "&" so I guess I'm asking how to remove that Oxford comma.

As required, here's a minimal example.




   author = {{Smith}, A. and {Jones}, B. and {Parker}, C.},
    title = "{A paper title}",
  journal = {Journal of Amazing Science},
 keywords = {natbib},
     year = 2012,
    month = feb,
   volume = 314,
    pages = {159}
share|improve this question

closed as too localized by lockstep, Frank Mittelbach, egreg, Torbjørn T., Alan Munn Feb 13 '12 at 18:32

This question is unlikely to help any future visitors; it is only relevant to a small geographic area, a specific moment in time, or an extraordinarily narrow situation that is not generally applicable to the worldwide audience of the internet. For help making this question more broadly applicable, visit the help center.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

It is rather difficult to debug an old version which is not present on current system. I don't get the comma with a recent natbib and the mn2e.bst (version 1.1b) from CTAN. But as far as I can see it is not possible to insert such a comma through natbib. It is mn2e.bst which decide if it is present. So you should try to update the bst. (Regardless how allergic to updating your sysadmin is: you must have a local texmf tree where you can put newer versions of packages.) –  Ulrike Fischer Feb 13 '12 at 14:45
D'oh! It's my fault. I'm using a modified version of mn2e.bst that eliminates the too-many-author problem. The standard version of mn2e.bst doesn't have this issue. I guess this can be closed as it doesn't really involve standard TeX packages. –  Warrick Feb 13 '12 at 17:06

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.