|
I hope that you do put it on the list. It was clear and
understandable.
mailto:avromf@xxxxxxxx or mailto:af413@xxxxxxxx
----- Original Message -----
From: mailto:essence@xxxxxxxx href="mailto:essence@xxxxxxxxmorris krok
To: xywrite@xxxxxxxx href="xywrite@xxxxxxxxxywrite@xxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2005 2:05 PM
Subject: english grammar fFrom Morris,
i am attaching an
e-mail I sent privately to Patricia, and her reply direct to me. This is sent to
the list because I believe good, elegant English goes hand-in-hand with an
all-embracing wordprocessing program such as XyWrite.
From: "morris krok" mailto:essence@xxxxxxxx href="mailto:essence@xxxxxxxxessence@xxxxxxxx
To: "Patricia M Godfrey" mailto:pmgodfrey@xxxxxxxx href="mailto:pmgodfrey@xxxxxxxxpmgodfrey@xxxxxxxx Subject: grammar Date: 20 March 2005 01:18 AM
Patricia,
I had an English teacher in high school who said that if we wrote the way we spoke, our written English would be generally good. This may be so but I would like to know what is meant by not splitting the infinitives or the fine distinction between will and shall, should and would. You no doubt know of Elements of Style where the author tells us to simplify and cut out every unncessary word - that is words that do not add to clarifying the meaning of the sentence which of course is another term for a thought. Clear thinking makes for clear writing, yet very often our thoughts are precise but our writing is muddy. Inverted commas, is there any rule where they should be placed - before or after a comma or period.
Your answer in good time will be appreciated.
With regards,
Morris,
P.S. This teacher said my writing was like an orange that looked whole and beautiful, but there was a little brown spot that denoted it was rotten to the core. Why he said this was a mystery to me as he did not criticize or have a good or bad word for my fellow class-mates (am I jusitifed in using a hyphen here). From: "Patricia M Godrey" mailto:pmgodfrey@xxxxxxxx href="mailto:pmgodfrey@xxxxxxxxpmgodfrey@xxxxxxxx To: mailto:essence@xxxxxxxx href="mailto:essence@xxxxxxxxessence@xxxxxxxx Subject: Re: grammar Date: 20 March 2005 10:53 PM In my humble opinion, "Elements of Style" is vastly overrated. It's
good as far as it goes, but anyone who aspires to be an editor, or even a
writer, had better know a lot more that is found there.
Nor do I think write as you speak is necessarily a good
recommendation. It partly depends on how you speak. But it is also a fact that
speech and writing have different tools at their command (inflection and spoken
stress in the first case, punctuation and typography in the second). Some things
can be said but not written ( I have an example somewhere, but cannot recall it
now); others can be written but not spoken (e.g., this from Kipling: "But holy
state we have lived to learn, endeth in wholly slave."):
1. Not splitting infinitives: a split infinitive is one where another
word comes between the "to" that is (usually) the sign of the infinitive in
English and the infinitive proper: "to mostly speak good English." Another word
coming between an auxiliary verb and the participle ("I have never seen") is NOT
a split infinitive. Nor is an infinitive split if it is one of the past or
perfect infinitives and the other word comse between the auxiliary and the
infinitive: "to have never seen." But a split infinitive is often acceptable and
sometimes necessary. The "rule" (even Fowler called it a superstition) against
splitting infinitives was derived from Latin, where it is impossible to split an
infinitive, since it is one word ("to carry" is portare). But English is a
Germanic language, and in German (and Dutch?), as in English, an infinitive is
preceeded by a function word indicating that it is an infinitive (`to' in
English, `zu' [which is also a preposition meaning toward or in the direction
of] in German). The adverb `thoroughly' (which in German would be the
inseparable prefix `ver-') often calls for splitting the infinitive. (I have a
whole tractate on this, but it's on--I hope--backup CDs and so temporarily
inacessable.)
2. Shall and will, should and would: Americans mostly use `will' and `would' all the time, except in legal language or other instances where the verb depends on another verb of permission or command: Garbage shall not be placed at the curb before 7 p.m.
The English, however, make a nice distinction. To express simple futurity, they say I or we shall or should; thou, you, he, she, it, they will or would. To express determination, they reverse them: I shall probably go tomorrow if it doesn't rain. He will probably go too. I shall do it tomorrow, come hell or high water, and no one shall stop me. And then, if you're Winston Churchill, you use simple futurity to express the utmost determination: We shall fight... Should I forget (I trained myself in the English pattern in my
teens), remind be when I get back on the list to send you the full version of
these essays, if you want them.
Patricia |