Uh-oh. I’ve been outed as ‘a dog person’.

I bought The Elements of Style at the RMIT bookshop a little while back, sucked in by the morose basset hound on the front. I don’t live under a rock, so I’d heard of the book, and was curious about its take on the do’s and don’ts of the English language. My go-to style guy is Henry Dubya Fowler, but I thought my horizons could do with a little expanding.

While I was amongst it, as they say, I came across this article, 50 Years of Stupid Grammar Advice, by Geoffrey Pullum, co-author of the Cambridge Grammar of the English Language (via The Mumpsimus). From the title, you will be able to guess that Pullum doesn’t think ‘pon this little book with approval. In fact, he says that the authors are ‘grammatical incompetents’, Strunk having ‘very little analytical understanding of syntax, White even less’. Ouch. I had noticed a few things that perturbed me, particularly over-rigid and outdated rules such as the exhortation not to start a sentence with ‘however’ when the meaning is ‘nevertheless’. Er, doesn’t everyone do that? Pullum agrees. He declares the advice in The Elements of Style anything from ‘sensible’ to ‘toxic’.

Some wisdom can be had from this book, especially for those like me whose education did not explicitly deal with the rudiments of grammar and style. (Is it just me, or is the Australian educational system a bit hands-off with those aspects of writing?) The authors counsel the writer to ‘omit needless words’, an oft-heard dictum which blessedly rings in my own ears from time to time, perhaps not often enough. The Elements of Style is also entertaining, an artifact recalling a grumpy professor who had probably corrected one too many crappy essays. For example, Rule 21 urges the unknowing to ensure that summaries are written in the same tense throughout. The authors plaintively disparage useless generalisations:

Facility: Why must jails, hospitals, and schools suddenly become “facilities”?

Yet, as with any book spawned by human beings with proclivities and their opposities, readers should be wary of taking the rules as gospel. Some of the rules are specific to a geographical usage area, such as S&W’s US-flavoured preference for the serial comma (the comma appearing before the ‘and’ separating the final item in a list, as in: ‘She ate apples, cakes, and radishes.’) and veteran language mavens will find some of the rules gratingly basic. Other times, the authors distill their irritation into rules that are unforgivably misformed. Take the explanatory section expanding on rule 22: ‘Place the emphatic words of a sentence at the end.’ Fine, except that halfway through this section appears the somewhat silly assertion: ‘The other prominent position in the sentence is the beginning.’

I’m in two minds about this book. On the one hand, The Elements of Style is a fascinating cult book, and certainly you can learn something from its pages. Actually, it’s not so cult: have you ever wondered why your Microsoft Word document has so many goddamn green zigzag lines through it? You’re probably using too much passive language, one of the S&W bugbears. But as a reference, I don’t recommend it, particularly for an Australian/British English writer. Its reasonable advice can be easily found elsewhere, and its deleterious propositions have actually muddled in my head with other, more legitimate fodder. It’s not particularly comprehensive, either, and non-US writers are better off picking a guide that is more appropriate to their writing region.

As I mentioned earlier, my bet for stylistic curmudgeon is Fowler, even as somewhat tempered by Burchfield. Pam Peters’ The Cambridge Guide to Australian English Usage is an up-to-date, non-prescriptivist behemoth for antipodean enthusiasts. For US writers, The Mumpsimus recommends Huddleston & Pullum’s A Student’s Introduction to English Grammar, Harper’s English Grammar by John Opdycke, Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of English Usage and Patterns of English by Paul Roberts. If anyone out there champions any other Australian/British English usage guides, I’d love to hear what they are.

  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Tumblr
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Digg
  • email
  • Print

Comments (9)
  1. I studied editing and then I went to Australia and no one followed any of the "rules" in publications. I think Australian print just doesn't care as much about nitty gritty; of course, I haven't sat down and read any Australian usage guides (if there are any), but it seemed each place had it's own rules. Which is fine, of course.

    I haven't read Stunk and White since my early days, but I'd have to agree that it's horribly dated. There may be insights into personal style choices but this book is not a "bible" for writers in academia or journalism. If one wants up-to-date US grammar styles, they read "Chicago Manual of Style" or AP Style Manual, which are two of the "regulators" in the industry (quite opposite on some matters).

  2. Rebecca – Style rules do seem to vary from publication to publication in Australia. The most definitive guide is the AGPS Style Guide, which is used by the government, but it's not by any means comprehensive. Thanks for your tips. I saw the Little, Brown (I think) style guide in the bookshop the other day, it looked very meaty, but alas, it was over $100.

  3. Hi estelle, it's nice to find your blog! I studied in RMIT before. I loved Melbourne (I'm in Sydney now). It's still my favorite city in the world :)

  4. Hi Mee! Thanks for your comment. Hopefully we can have a good chat about being book nerds.

  5. Hey Estelle, have you read 'The Little Green Grammar Book' by Mark Tredinnick? I'm struggling through that at the moment and am wondering how it ranks against other grammar/style guide books.

  6. No, Thuy Linh, I haven't read it, htough I have seen it on the shelves and wondered about it. A quick google gave me this thorough review which makes me think you might be justified in struggling with it. What have been your issues with it? I'm searching for a holy grail of four or five books that I can get my teeth right into, so if you come across any others, be sure to let me know. I guess the issue with 'little' grammar books is that there isn't really any room for finesse, and since Tredinnick's not a linguist, I'm not sure how authoritative the books can be. Seems like a good casual resource for a writer interested in grammar, though. I often find reading these conversational books helps ease my way into quite difficult usage issues.

  7. Hmmm. I didn't learn a lot of grammatical rules in high school, so I struggle with a lot of the terminology he uses. He does explain everything, but I get lost after he's introduced a dozen new terms.

    He also seems to favour Americanisms i.e. using 'ize' instead of 'ise', which I dislike.

    Then again, there are some lovely, concise explanations in the book. I particularly liked the 'that vs. which' explanation. The Style Guide is rather brief on explaining the usage of the two, but Tredinnick devoted a couple of pages to explaining his way of thinking in regards to the issue.

    Hmmm. I'll add more comments when I finish reading the book.

  8. TL — I think I will definitely flick through it the next time I'm in a bookshop. Look forward to hearing the rest of your thoughts.

  9. Hi

    I have the same dog as displayed in the picture. Same colour, eyes, features and size.

    Just wondering where you got him/her from as he/she could be the related to my male dog.

Leave a reply