Dreyer's English

I found no clarity in this book. Probably it's me, but many of Dreyer's sentences are confusing. Most of his reasons is “because I think so”. Which fits right in with his smug-I'm-a-liberal-so-my-political-views (left-wing, of course)-are funny-and-true-and-I-can-insert-them-into-a-book-on-grammar-if-I-want-to.
Feh! I shut the book after the fifth Trump bash, and I'm not a Trump fan.

This was an interesting read and even better narrated audiobook. I frankly don't know why I picked it up but there were definitely some insights. Though if I'll be able to implement them in whatever little writing I do is still a question. But hopefully I'll be able to come back to it if I find the need.

What a delight.

For posterity — in writing about how passive voice can be used judiciously (see what I did there), Dreyer concludes with this perfect paragraph:

“‘A car rammed into counter-protesters during a violent white nationalist rally,' for example, is a sentence that may legitimately be criticized for neglecting to point out that someone was at the wheel of said car; in this case, though, the avoidance of explicit agency is a moral failure, not a grammatical one.”

This originally appeared at The Irresponsible Reader.
—

The English language...is not so easily ruled and regulated. It developed without codification, sucking up new constructions and vocabulary every time some foreigner set foot on the British Isles—to say nothing of the mischief we Americans have wreaked on it these last few centuries-and continues to evolve anarchically. It has, to my great dismay, no enforceable laws, much less someone to enforce the laws it doesn't have.

We all write, all the time: books, blogs, emails. Lots and lots of emails. And we all want to write better. Benjamin Dreyer is here to help.

As Random House's copy chief, Dreyer has upheld the standards of the legendary publisher for more than two decades. He is beloved by authors and editors alike—not to mention his followers on social media—for deconstructing the English language with playful erudition. Now he distills everything he has learned from the myriad books he has copyedited and overseen into a useful guide not just for writers but for everyone who wants to put their best prose foot forward.

As authoritative as it is amusing, Dreyer's English offers lessons on punctuation, from the underloved semicolon to the enigmatic en dash; the rules and nonrules of grammar, including why it's OK to begin a sentence with “And” or “But” and to confidently split an infinitive; and why it's best to avoid the doldrums of the Wan Intensifiers and Throat Clearers, including “very,” “rather,” “of course,” and the dreaded “actually.” Dreyer will let you know whether “alright” is all right (sometimes) and even help you brush up on your spelling—though, as he notes, “The problem with mnemonic devices is that I can never remember them.”

And yes: “Only godless savages eschew the series comma.”

Chockful of advice, insider wisdom, and fun facts, this book will prove to be invaluable to everyone who wants to shore up their writing skills, mandatory for people who spend their time editing and shaping other people's prose, and—perhaps best of all—an utter treat for anyone who simply revels in language.

joie de mot/langue

* There's a good chance that l'Académie française is going to hire someone to assassinate me for those neologisms. Whoops.

need to read

...I swear to you, a well-constructed sentence sounds better. Literally sounds better. One of the best ways to determine whether your prose is well-constructed is to read it aloud. A sentence that can't be readily voiced is a sentence that likely needs to be rewritten.

A good sentence, I find myself saying frequently, is one that the reader can follow from beginning to end, no matter how long it is, without having to double back in confusion because the writer misused or omitted a key piece of punctuation, chose a vague or misleading pronoun, or in some other way engaged in inadvertent misdirection. (If you want to puzzle your reader, that's your own business.)

faux pas

[People are] not, I've discovered, apt to be dissuaded from their prejudices by the evidence of centuries of literate literary usage or recitations from the bracingly peeve-dismantling Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of English Usage. And they're certainly not likely to be moved by the suggestion that English is in a constant state of evolution and that if our great-grandmothers ever caught us using the noun “store” when what we should have said was “shop” or using “host” as a verb, they'd wash our mouths out with soap. Well, I concede with a shrug, if the English language itself is notoriously irregular and irrational, why shouldn't its practitioners be too?

“Only godless savages eschew the series comma.”

“Before we get to what you do use apostrophes for, let's recount what you don't use them for.
Step back, I'm about to hit the CAPS LOCK key.
DO NOT EVER ATTEMPT TO USE AN APOSTROPHE TO PLURALIZE A WORD.
‘NOT EVER' AS IN ‘NEVER.'
You may reapproach.”

“Lately one encounters people referring to any full-length book, even a work of nonfiction, as a novel. That has to stop.”

“...Two Words Where One Will Do...
free gift...
join together...
kneel down...
last of all...
lesbian woman Come on, folks. Think.”

I think that should be a sufficient sample to let you decide if this is the book for you....