Good English Grammar Books Or Resources?

[Tsukasa Buddha]

I really want to study up on it to improve my writing, but there are so many options out there. A big problem seems to be that there are a fuzzy lines between proper and improper grammar in plenty of cases. I would prefer a nice book, but I don't want to be stuck studying rules that no one cares about anyway (like ending sentences with preposition or splitting infinitives). I don't want a dumbed down guide though. I want to be able to look up if that last sentence needed a comma before "though." Right now I feel like I have to restrict my writing to fit situations I know how to deal with. My biggest issue is comma placement.

So far I have been using Google, but it is hard to sort through all the results for "comma before as." Either I end up searching with words that are too common, or I end up with results from other people asking on forums.

[angrysoba]

I think Strunk and White's Elements of Style is a good handbook for writing. I don't have it with me now but I think it covers commas.

[TragicMonkey]

"The Use and Abuse of the English Language", Robert Graves (yes, that Robert Graves, the "I, Claudius" guy). It's pretty interesting reading, as well as educational.

[Wudang]

I like Fowler and http://english.stackexchange.com/questions

[Resume]

The Practical Stylist by Sheridan Baker.

Chicago Manual of Style by . . . Chicago?

[Careyp74]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

I think Strunk and White's Elements of Style is a good handbook for writing. I don't have it with me now but I think it covers commas.

This is a bit like what the OP was describing. There are a lot of points that are just not cared about.

I think simple books like Eats Shoots and Leaves suffice for anyone that wants to learn more, and please, splitting infinitives is a big deal, not something you want to regularly do.

[alfaniner]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

I think Strunk and White's Elements of Style is a good handbook for writing. I don't have it with me now but I think it covers commas.

Seconded. A small book where it should be easy to find what you are looking for. Even if I don't follow all its recommendations when posting.

[SpitfireIX]

Originally Posted by Resume

The Practical Stylist by Sheridan Baker.

Chicago Manual of Style by . . . Chicago?

By the University of Chicago Press.

[SpitfireIX]

I had to buy The Little, Brown Handbook for freshman composition almost 30 years ago, and I used that as my main grammar reference for quite a while. I think I still have it somewhere. Now I mostly use online resources when I have questions.

[Psi Baba]

Two of my favorites are:

The Handbook of Good English by Edward D. Johnson
http://www.amazon.com/Handbook-Good-...5535350&sr=1-1

and

The Dictionary of Problem Words and Expressions by Harry Shaw
http://www.amazon.com/Dictionary-Pro...5535466&sr=1-1
This one is out of print, but it seems that used copies can be had for reasonable prices.

The Elements of Style is worth at least taking a look at since has been so widely used for so long. If you don't apply it to your own writing, it can still give you some insight into the writing styles of other people.

[AdMan]

One of my favorite books on writing (though not really on grammar, if that is what you are looking for), which taught me a lot:

On Writing Well, by William Zinsser.

[Lord Emsworth]

I own the Random House Guide to Good Writing. As you can see it is not too expensive. It sports punctuation and is a fairly entertaining read, too.

How well it stacks up to what others have recommended I can't say though.

[fuelair]

All of the above are good. Karen Elizabeth Gordon is better: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss...on's+books
I started with the first listed. Got most of them now.....

[crimresearch]

A writing guide is not a style guide is not a grammar guide.

On grammar, the queen is Betty... http://www.azargrammar.com/teachersGuides/index.html

I'd rather use charts... http://www.barcharts.com/TradePoint/...dex=&pCount=15

Don't overlook the Purdue OWL... http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/grammar/

Deluxe Transitive Vampire is amusing. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/067...49CXX2RP9EB84D

[Rat]

Another vote for Fowler's MEU here. Manages to be quite droll in places.

[JeanFromBNA]

I liked Eats, Shoots & Leaves, by Lynne Truss. As a quick reference manual, The Elements of Style is handy.

[Beerina]

Originally Posted by SpitfireIX

I had to buy The Little, Brown Handbook for freshman composition almost 30 years ago, and I used that as my main grammar reference for quite a while. I think I still have it somewhere. Now I mostly use online resources when I have questions.

Interestingly, I would argue the comma in the name (no doubt placed there deliberately) was wrong, if the intent was to show that "little" applied to Handbook and not to Brown or Brown Handbook. As there is no ambiguity, no comma is needed. They are probably playing on "little brown jug" or somesuch.

ETA: Now if it's from Brown University, say, then, nah, it's still wrong.

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by Beerina

Interestingly, I would argue the comma in the name (no doubt placed there deliberately) was wrong, if the intent was to show that "little" applied to Handbook and not to Brown or Brown Handbook.

I expect that if the comma was accidental then they would have noticed by now and removed it in subsequent editions.

In fact, the Little and Brown in the title refer to the names of the people who started up a publishing company Little, Brown and Company. Arguably it could be the "Little, Brown and Company Handbook", which sounds a little strange, or the "Little and Brown Handbook" as a comma can be used in place of "and" in American English, I think. I don't think we ever use it that way in English English.

[AdMan]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

In fact, the Little and Brown in the title refer to the names of the people who started up a publishing company Little, Brown and Company.

Exactly. Charles Coffin Little and James Brown. Little, Brown and Company.

[bruto]

Long ago when I went to a private school for seventh and eighth grades, we were given something called The Plain English Handbook. BAck in 1959 it was a bit thinner, but it still exists. The rules of grammar are clearly explained and well organized. For stylish writing you may need to look elsewhere, but for the ground rules I recommend it highly.

http://www.amazon.com/Plain-English-.../dp/0800917936

[SpitfireIX]

Originally Posted by crimresearch

Don't overlook the Purdue OWL... http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/grammar/

Purdue grad here. Glad to know I'm not the only one who finds this an excellent online grammar resource.

[brodski]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

I think Strunk and White's Elements of Style is a good handbook for writing. I don't have it with me now but I think it covers commas.

It's full of contradictory nonsence and outright error. That single book has done more to damage understanding of English grammar and diction than any other text.

[Abooga]

When I was studying English in the UK everyone in the advanced courses (for non natives) had "Practical English Usage" by Michael Swan. It's good for checking things as you say, usage of proverbs etc.

[SpitfireIX]

Originally Posted by brodski

It's full of contradictory nonsence and outright error. That single book has done more to damage understanding of English grammar and diction than any other text.

Possibly because the English language, a bastardization of French and German with words from many other languages thrown in, is full of contradictory nonsense?

[brodski]

Originally Posted by SpitfireIX

Possibly because the English language, a bastardization of French and German with words from many other languages thrown in, is full of contradictory nonsense?

No, that's not the reason. It's just a deeply ignorant book which perpetuates (and creates) myths about English, and then fails to stick to the ill-conceived "rules" it sets out.

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by brodski

It's full of contradictory nonsence and outright error. That single book has done more to damage understanding of English grammar and diction than any other text.

I didn't think it was that bad. There are some things I disagree with such as its instruction to avoid splitting the infinitive except in situations where it sounds better on the ear. There's no need to avoid splitting the infinitive IMHO.

But what examples do you find particularly worrying?

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by Abooga

When I was studying English in the UK everyone in the advanced courses (for non natives) had "Practical English Usage" by Michael Swan. It's good for checking things as you say, usage of proverbs etc.

This book is very useful for understanding the way that the English language is used, such as how to form phrasal verbs, levels of register, the meaning and strength of taboo words etc... but I think for understanding the technical side of the language it is less useful and deliberately so.

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by JeanFromBNA

I liked Eats, Shoots & Leaves, by Lynne Truss.

Yeah, but didn't you find it a bit grating when she tells a joke and then explains it to you as if you were a particularly backward brain-damaged five-year old?

Another book I sometimes found useful was "Woe is I" by Patricia T. O'Conner. Less patronizing than Lynne Truss and written in something of a mnemonic style.

[Rat]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

I didn't think it was that bad. There are some things I disagree with such as its instruction to avoid splitting the infinitive except in situations where it sounds better on the ear. There's no need to avoid splitting the infinitive IMHO.

But what examples do you find particularly worrying?

I think that to needlessly and greatly, in a way that can confuse the reader and make him or her go back over the sentence in order to reparse it and particularly when the split is marked off by commas, split an infinitive can be a bad idea, when it is done badly. This is true of many other forms of language.

Saying that "to boldly go" is wrong would make no more sense than saying the same of "he can boldly go", as far as I can see.

[crimresearch]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

I didn't think it was that bad. There are some things I disagree with such as its instruction to avoid splitting the infinitive except in situations where it sounds better on the ear. There's no need to avoid splitting the infinitive IMHO.

But what examples do you find particularly worrying?

http://chronicle.com/article/50-Year...-Grammar/25497

[Rat]

And as a lesson on the use of commas, here's a way to use them to make a sentence somewhat surprising on first reading.

[AdMan]

Originally Posted by Rat

And as a lesson on the use of commas, here's a way to use them to make a sentence somewhat surprising on first reading.

http://www.rattusmaximus.co.uk/forumpics/commas.png

Hmm... I don't get it. You mean using the commas to have the lurid news earlier in the sentence?

[Rat]

Originally Posted by AdMan

Hmm... I don't get it. You mean using the commas to have the lurid news earlier in the sentence?

It's entirely possible that you're just more skilled than me in reading sentences the way that the writer intended. I tend to read things first time around entirely the wrong way, such as seeing a sign reading "massive furniture sale" and thinking "what would I do with massive furniture?"

In this case, I read the bit between commas as parenthetical, which is a way that commas are often used, in which case the headline tells us that he drowned a day after his body was found.

[AdMan]

Originally Posted by Rat

It's entirely possible that you're just more skilled than me in reading sentences the way that the writer intended. I tend to read things first time around entirely the wrong way, such as seeing a sign reading "massive furniture sale" and thinking "what would I do with massive furniture?"

In this case, I read the bit between commas as parenthetical, which is a way that commas are often used, in which case the headline tells us that he drowned a day after his body was found.

Oh, now I see it--and you're right. That second comma is wrong.

[Rat]

I'm slightly loth to describe it as wrong, but it's certainly potentially misleading. I think it's the result of being written by somebody who uses commas wherever they would pause if speaking the sentence.

[crimresearch]

Originally Posted by Rat

I'm slightly loth to describe it as wrong, but it's certainly potentially misleading. I think it's the result of being written by somebody who uses commas wherever they would pause if speaking the sentence.

'Headline-ese' is its own subset of the language, much like 'ad-speak'.

[Rat]

Without a doubt. I think Bill Bryson pointed out one of my favourite unfortunate headlines - "Police Rape Claim Woman In Court". What on earth is a claim woman, and why would the police rape her in court?

[AdMan]

Originally Posted by Rat

I tend to read things first time around entirely the wrong way, such as seeing a sign reading "massive furniture sale" and thinking "what would I do with massive furniture?"

This reminded me of a different but related issue: a few years ago, the movie Eight Legged Freaks came out. The title bothered me quite a bit--surely it should have been Eight-Legged Freaks, because the actual title seemed to be referring to an attack by eight freaks with legs, rather than giant spiders. [/pedant]

[RobDog63]

For individual questions I sometimes find a forum useful rather than a book.

Just today I was able to quickly find out why "will not" is abbreviated to "won't" rather than "willn't" from thefreedictionary forum, and I've had success with finding answers to quite a few other grammar / usage questions from various other forums too.

[Wudang]

Originally Posted by crimresearch

http://chronicle.com/article/50-Year...-Grammar/25497

Ye gods! That's appalling but explains a lot.

eta: For many years I was a participant on a few English "forums" (actually IBMWORDS fwiw) and heard a lot of bizarre and mixed-up advice from a lot well-educated people (many wrote IBM manuals, many just interested) and it looks like that book, which was referenced a lot, is the source.