41–50 of 60 posts
> Strunk’s likes and dislikes, explains White, “were almost as whimsical as the choice of a necktie,” yet he had an uncanny ability to make his preferences “seem convincing.” This is an important point: Learners need to have preferences fed to them, as they have none of their own, but the next step in learning is making your own preferences, not blindly following the ones given to you. Also, a point of humor I rarely…
If he had, we would not have the book.
Learn the rules so that you know how to break them, then read lots to learn when.
Reminds me of Orwell’s Politics and the English Language: https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwel... .
This is not just personal distaste. Linguists who know the facts find it intolerable.
Reminds me of Orwell’s Politics and the English Language: https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwel... .
Correct: Orwell was also very, very wrong. This is not just personal distaste. Linguists who know the facts find it intolerable.
i. Never use a metaphor, simile or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.
ii. Never use a long word where a short one will do.
iii. If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
iv. Never use the passive where you can use the active.
v. Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
vi. Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They are the products of a period and locale in which white supremacy was more or less unquestioned by a large proportion of the English-speaking population. By that standard, James Baldwin's writing is a relic of white supremacy and homophobia because he wrote when both were more or less unquestioned. Or, by a more sensible standard, you have carelessly besmirched a writer's reputation by associating him with whit…
James Baldwin's writing certainly is "the product of a period and locale in which white supremacy was more or less unquestioned by a large proportion of the English-speaking population." Do you think it is otherwise? I am not dismissing the work, I am looking at its context. White supremacy is more than klan rallies in Alabama. It was a major part of thinking and writing in the US and English-speaking world in genera…
This is true, but it also entails that it's easy to selectively weaponize opposition to white supremacy against virtually any target. Is there something you don't like? Chances are that it has a real historical connection to white supremacy, at one or two degrees of removal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You have that backwards. White wrote all of "Charlotte's Web" and much of "Elements of Style".
Charlotte's Web is also a literary masterpiece - definitely reread as an adult if you only remember it from your childhood. The Audible is narrated by EBW himself.
I had no idea the book was so funny:
Wilbur paused and listened. All the other animals lifted their heads and stared at him. Wilbur blushed. But he was determined to get in touch with his unknown friend.
“Attention, please!” he said. “I will repeat the message. Will the party who addressed me at bedtime last night kindly speak up. Please tell me where you are, if you are my friend!”
The sheep looked at each other in disgust.
Good writing matters. One of the most undervalued skills in engineering, especially at the Senior+ levels. Being able to write a clear, concise, well-argued design doc will be useful to you long after the hot framework of the moment has become obsolete. And yet, few people take the time to hone the skill. Strunk and White is a classic, sure, which this article helps to put in context. But it’s 75 years old, and it ha…
Whenever I find a copy of Elements of Style, I throw it away. I have deep-sixed at least four copies in the past five years. Geoff Pullum, at Edinburgh, calls it "The Nasty Book", because it makes people needlessly insecure about their writing, and because its supposed rules are not followed by any great writer. The most damning fact is that, when he produced the second edition after Strunk died, White made up a bunc…
I recommend you cease this activity for karmic reasons.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Correct: Orwell was also very, very wrong. This is not just personal distaste. Linguists who know the facts find it intolerable.
Can you elaborate, for the non-linguists? His prescription seems sensible: i. Never use a metaphor, simile or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print. ii. Never use a long word where a short one will do. iii. If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out. iv. Never use the passive where you can use the active. v. Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word or a jargon word if you can t…
Often a long word captures a nuance the short version can't. Its presence, by itself, calls the careful reader's attention to the distinction between it and the shorter word it displaced, without belaboring it.
Metaphors, similes, and figures of speech are the furniture of language. Most words, standing alone, embody one. Orwell certainly did not obey this stricture, or he would have been mute.
A word that could have been cut, but wasn't, calls attention to the choice made not to cut it, inviting curiosity why it wasn't, which you may then answer.
Foreign, technical, and jargon words tell the reader about your context. Substituting a word unfamiliar in that context generates confusion, and questions about what distinction you are trying to make by avoiding the usual word. Sometimes you are, in fact, making such a distinction.
Careful readers learn to recognize when writers are making their choices judiciously, and draw extra meaning from them.
So, better advice would tell you to put each such choice to work on the hard job of communicating.
Whenever I find a copy of Elements of Style, I throw it away. I have deep-sixed at least four copies in the past five years. Geoff Pullum, at Edinburgh, calls it "The Nasty Book", because it makes people needlessly insecure about their writing, and because its supposed rules are not followed by any great writer. The most damning fact is that, when he produced the second edition after Strunk died, White made up a bunc…
I disagree with what you're doing and disapprove of it on principle that destroying a book which may have some useful knowledge in it is to be avoided. I recommend you cease this activity for karmic reasons.
You might equally argue that spoiled food still contains potentially usable calories, so should not be discarded.