List of Latin phrases (E)#et alii

|the law arises from the facts

|

|The measure of justice is from the merit of the deed.

{{lang|la|Exempli gratiā}} is usually abbreviated "e. g." or "e.g." (less commonly, ex. gr.). The abbreviation "e.g." is often interpreted (Anglicised) as 'example given'. The plural {{lang|la|exemplōrum gratiā}} to refer to multiple examples (separated by commas) is now not in frequent use; when used, it may be seen abbreviated as "ee.g." or even "ee.gg.", corresponding to the practice of doubling plurals in Latin abbreviations. E.g. is not usually followed by a comma in British English, but it often is in American usage. E.g. is often confused with i.e. ({{lang|la|id est}}, meaning {{gloss|that is}} or {{gloss|in other words}}).{{cite web |url= http://blog.dictionary.com/whats-the-difference-between-ie-and-eg/ |title=Word Fact: What's the Difference Between i.e. and e.g.? |date=August 19, 2014 |work=blog.Dictionary.com |publisher=IAC Publishing |access-date=July 8, 2017}} Some writing styles give such abbreviations without punctuation, as ie and eg.{{efn|1=Assertions, such as those by Bryan A. Garner in Garner's Modern English Usage,{{cite book |title=Garner's Modern English Usage |edition=4th |first=Bryan A. |last=Garner |chapter='e.g.' and 'i.e.' |pages=322–323, 480 |date=2016|title-link=Garner's Modern English Usage }} This is an internationalized expansion of what was previously published as Garner's Modern American Usage. that "eg" and "ie" style versus "e.g." and "i.e." style are two poles of British versus American usage are not borne out by major style guides and usage dictionaries, which demonstrate wide variation. To the extent anything approaching a consistent general conflict can be identified, it is between American and British news companies' different approaches to the balance between clarity and expediency, without complete agreement on either side of the Atlantic, and with little evidence of effects outside journalism circles, e.g. in book publishing or academic journals.

There is no consistent British style. For example, The Oxford Dictionary for Writers and Editors has "e.g." and "i.e." with points (periods);{{cite book |title=Oxford Style Manual |chapter='e.g.' and 'i.e.' |pages=704, 768 |editor1-first=Robert M. |editor1-last=Ritter |publisher=Oxford University Press |date=2003|title-link=Oxford Style Manual }}. Material previously published separately as The Oxford Dictionary for Writers and Editors. Fowler's Modern English Usage takes the same approach,{{cite book |title=Fowler's Modern English Usage |edition=3rd |chapter='e.g.' and 'i.e.' |editor1-first=R. W. |editor1-last=Burchfield |editor1-link=Robert Burchfield |editor2-first=H. W. |editor2-last=Fowler |editor2-link=H. W. Fowler|pages=240, 376 |date=2004 |publisher=Oxford University Press|title-link=Fowler's Modern English Usage }} and its newest edition is especially emphatic about the points being retained.{{cite book |title=Fowler's Dictionary of Modern English Usage |edition=4th |chapter='e.g.' and 'i.e.' |pages=248, 393 |editor-first=Jeremy |editor-last=Butterfield |editor2-first=H. W. |editor2-last=Fowler |date=2015 |publisher=Oxford University Press|quote=Both should always be printed lower case roman with two points and no spaces.}} The Oxford Guide to Style (also republished in Oxford Style Manual and separately as New Hart's Rules) also has "e.g." and "i.e.";{{cite book |title=Oxford Style Manual |editor1-first=Robert M. |editor1-last=Ritter |date=2003 |chapter=3.8: e.g., i.e., etc. |pages=69–70 |publisher=Oxford University Press}} the examples it provides are of the short and simple variety that often see the comma dropped in American usage as well. None of those works prescribe specifically for or against a comma following these abbreviations, leaving it to writers' own judgment.

Some specific publishers, primarily in news journalism, drop one or both forms of punctuation as a matter of house style. They seem more frequently to be British than American (perhaps owing to the AP Stylebook being treated as a {{lang|la|de facto}} standard across most American newspapers, without a UK counterpart). For example, The Guardian uses "eg" and "ie" with no punctuation,{{cite web |title=abbreviations and acronyms |work=The Guardian and Observer style guide |url= https://www.theguardian.com/guardian-observer-style-guide-a |publisher=Guardian Media Group/Scott Trust |date=2017 |access-date=July 8, 2017}} while The Economist uses "eg," and "ie," with commas and without points,{{cite news|title=Abbreviations|newspaper=The Economist Style Guide|url= http://www.economist.com/style-guide/abbreviations |date=2017 |access-date=July 8, 2017}} as does The Times of London.{{cite web |title='eg,' and ', ie' |work=The Times Online Style Guide |url= http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/tools_and_services/specials/style_guide/article986727.ece |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110629014722/http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/tools_and_services/specials/style_guide/article986727.ece |archive-date=June 29, 2011 |access-date=July 8, 2017}} A 2014 revision to New Hart's Rules states that it is now "Oxford style" to not use a comma after e.g. and i.e. (which retain the points), "to avoid double punctuation".{{cite book |title=New Hart's Rules: The Oxford Style Guide |edition=2nd |chapter=4.3.8: Other uses [of the comma] |editor1-first=Anne |editor1-last=Waddingham |page=79 |date=2014 |publisher=Oxford University Press}} This is a rationale it does not apply to anything else, and Oxford University Press has not consistently imposed this style on its publications that post-date 2014, including Garner's Modern English Usage.

By way of US comparison, The New York Times uses "e.g." and "i.e.", without a rule about a following comma – like Oxford usage in actual practice.{{cite book |title=The New York Times Manual of Style|edition=5th|chapter='e.g.' and 'i.e.' |date=2015 |publisher=The New York Times Company/Three Rivers Press |editor1-first=Allan M. |editor1-last=Siegal|editor1-link=Allan M. Siegal|editor2-first=William G. |editor2-last=Connolly|editor2-link=William G. Connolly|editor3-first=Philip B. |editor3-last=Corbett |display-editors=etal}} E-book edition v3.1, {{ISBN|978-1-101-90322-3}}. The Chicago Manual of Style requires "e.g.," and "i.e.,".{{cite book|title=The Chicago Manual of Style|edition=17th |chapter=5.250: i.e; e.g. |date=2017 |publisher=University of Chicago Press}} The AP Stylebook preserves both types of punctuation for these abbreviations.{{cite book |title=Associated Press Stylebook and Briefing on Media Law |edition=2009 |chapter='e.g.' and 'i.e.' |pages=95, 136 |publisher=Associated Press/Basic Books|title-link=Associated Press Stylebook and Briefing on Media Law }}

"British" and "American" are not accurate as stand-ins for Commonwealth and North American English more broadly; actual practice varies even among national publishers. The Australian government's Style Manual for Authors, Editors and Printers preserves the points in the abbreviations, but eschews the comma after them (it similarly drops the title's serial comma before "and", which most UK and many US publishers would retain).{{cite book |title=Style Manual for Authors, Editors and Printers |edition=5th |chapter=6.73 |page=84 |date=1996 |publisher=Australian Government Publishing Service}} Editing Canadian English by the Editors' Association of Canada uses the periods and the comma;{{Cite book |title=Editing Canadian English: The Essential Canadian Guide |edition=Revised and Updated (2nd) |chapter=4.22: Latin Abbreviations |pages=52–53 |date=2000 |publisher=McClelland & Stewart/Editors' Association of Canada}}. States no rule about the comma, but illustrates use with it in §4.23 on the same page. so does A Canadian Writer's Reference.{{cite book |title=A Canadian Writer's Reference |url=https://archive.org/details/canadianwritersr0000hack_z0y1 |url-access=registration |edition=4th |first1=Diana |last1=Hacker |display-authors=etal|chapter=M4-d: Be sparing in your use of Latin abbreviations |pages=[https://archive.org/details/canadianwritersr0000hack_z0y1/page/308 308–309] |date=2008 |publisher=Bedford/St. Martin's}} This is a Canadian revision of an originally American publication. The government publication The Canadian Style uses the periods but not the comma.{{cite book |title=The Canadian Style |edition=revised and expanded 2nd |chapter=12.03: Words commonly misused or confused |pages=233–234 |date=1997 |publisher=Dundurn Press/Public Works and Government Services Canada Translation Bureau}}

Style guides are generally in agreement that both abbreviations are {{em|preceded}} by a comma or used inside a parenthetical construction, and are best confined to the latter and to footnotes and tables, rather than used in running prose.