Recommendations?

October said:

I need a brush-up on my grammar. Or is it a mega overhaul? The "Grammar for Grasshoppers" board is awesome, but I'd rather have something I can actually hold in my hands.

I'm looking for a book that (obviously) reviews grammar. If it had exercises with answers to them that would be a plus. It needs to cover punctuation, too (odd, I know, but I've seen a couple books that didn't cover punctuation with grammar).

To give you an idea of what I'm lost on, this is it: adverbs, semi-colons, dashes, double-dashes, linking/transitive verbs, subject/object of sentences (so embarrassing), etc.

I'm also on a budget. Twenty-five bucks (US) is my limit, though for a really good book I could probably scrape an extra five into my grimy little hands.

Thanks for listening.

Click to expand...

Try "The Grammar Bible", by Michael Strumpf and Auriel Douglas. It was $19 at Borders. It's pretty good.

You need to brush up your grammar? Nothing wrong with your post.

Strunk 'n' White kills all known grammar-gremlins dead.

scarletpeaches said:

Strunk 'n' White kills all known grammar-gremlins dead.

Click to expand...

Yes, it does. But he wanted tons of exercises to work out and S&W sadly doesn't have any.

(However, October, if you can buy both these books, you will be a very happy person.)

Elements of Style is a style guide, not a grammar.

Style is an umbrella term which also covers grammar.

scarletpeaches said:

Style is an umbrella term which also covers grammar.

Click to expand...

Grammatical structures are the Elements of Style, so much is true. But neither Strunk nor White explain them. They assume you know them. For example, the rule entitled "Use the Active Voice" has this little sentence:

"Many a tame sentence of description or exposition can be made lively and emphatic by substituting a transitive in the active voice for some such perfunctory expression as there is, or could be heard."

Please tell me where in the booklet they explain what a "transitive in the active voice" is. They don't. But if you don't know that, you might get the idea that the following examples of bad writing contain passive voice:

"There were a great number of dead leaves lying on the ground." // "It was not long before he was very sorry that he had said what he had."

They don't. They simply don't contain a "transitive in the active voice", which the improved sentences do.

You won't learn grammar from Strunk & White. You need grammar to understand them.

ETA Hmmmm. This post (mine) doesn't read right, somehow, does it? Sorry - joins in head-banging.

Most folk should write more effectively after reading The Elements of Style, regardless of their technical knowledge of grammatical issues.

Click to expand...

*headdesk*

Something to consider when choosing a grammar guide: For which audience is your writing intended? One size doesn’t necessarily fit all.

When I wrote theses as a state university liberal arts graduate student, it would have been suicide to consult other than Modern Language Association’s latest guidebook. Likewise, science majors went with American Psychological Association’s handbook.

When I wrote Montana newspaper columns and when editing submissions to U.S. gun magazines, The Associated Press Stylebook and Briefing on Media Law was and is the bible.

Here in Oregon, the local college bookstore keeps Harcourt-Brace’s Harbrace Handbook on hand. It serves well for general use and has the exercises you seek.

If I were lucky enough to write for publications in London or Brisbane, I would most certainly make use of the grammar guide most in use by the writers targeting that market.