Scan barcode
dllh's review against another edition
5.0
A fantastic reference book that I've now put aside in favor of a more complete version. I consult one or the other of these references weekly if not nearly daily (often just for fun).
lisa_mc's review against another edition
5.0
Of the myriad dictionaries, grammar books and usage guides out there, one stands out as the argument-ender: Garner’s.
Why is this book so special? Several reasons:
First, it’s comprehensive. Pretty much any question you can think of concerning usage is covered in the nearly 1,000 pages of this book, with detailed explanations, the usage’s history and examples from print. It doesn’t just tell what’s correct or acceptable, it tells you why.
Second, the man knows of which he speaks. His concise, thoughtful entries are based on copious research and meticulous attention. Plus, they are clearly expressed with a minimum of jargon.
Third, Garner is firmly in the middle of the strict prescriptivists and the strict descriptivists. What this means is that he’s not an old fusspot clinging to outdated rules of grammar; neither is he an anything-goes endorser of unclear or ambiguous expression. He knows when it’s hopeless to rail against usages formerly labeled “substandard,” and he knows when to preserve useful distinctions.
Fourth, while many reference guides for English are more British in their points of view, Garner specifically addresses American usage. He does note differences between U.S. and British English, as well as American regionalisms and dialect expressions.
(Full disclosure: I served on the panel of critical readers for the third edition of Garner's Modern American Usage.)
Why is this book so special? Several reasons:
First, it’s comprehensive. Pretty much any question you can think of concerning usage is covered in the nearly 1,000 pages of this book, with detailed explanations, the usage’s history and examples from print. It doesn’t just tell what’s correct or acceptable, it tells you why.
Second, the man knows of which he speaks. His concise, thoughtful entries are based on copious research and meticulous attention. Plus, they are clearly expressed with a minimum of jargon.
Third, Garner is firmly in the middle of the strict prescriptivists and the strict descriptivists. What this means is that he’s not an old fusspot clinging to outdated rules of grammar; neither is he an anything-goes endorser of unclear or ambiguous expression. He knows when it’s hopeless to rail against usages formerly labeled “substandard,” and he knows when to preserve useful distinctions.
Fourth, while many reference guides for English are more British in their points of view, Garner specifically addresses American usage. He does note differences between U.S. and British English, as well as American regionalisms and dialect expressions.
(Full disclosure: I served on the panel of critical readers for the third edition of Garner's Modern American Usage.)
ashleylm's review
Mostly enjoying this but have a few niggles. For instance, I just think he's plain wrong about constructions such as "in an access of good spirits, the frat boys tipped 12 cows in one evening" that the "access" is a little-used but grammatical construction of long-standing. Undoubtedly those writing such sentences confused access with excess, intending "in an excess of good spirits," regardless of whether "access of good spirits" is grammatical or not.
But otherwise I completely defer to his good sense!
But otherwise I completely defer to his good sense!
undeadletters's review against another edition
5.0
Indespensable and invaluable. Shit, is that a redundancy? Let me check.
revafisheye's review against another edition
3.0
We just added Garner's to our editorial library at work, and I'm thoroughly enjoying the irreverent tone of voice, as well as the Language Change Index he employs to mark the ubiquity of questionable usage. I highly recommend this guide for both professional and amateur word nerds.
jeanbpdx's review against another edition
5.0
Well, I don't know that I would say I read Garner's, exactly.
The forward, about the grammar wars, is a terrific read. Otherwise, I rely heavily on Garner's when I have usage questions, just as any right-thinking person would.
The forward, about the grammar wars, is a terrific read. Otherwise, I rely heavily on Garner's when I have usage questions, just as any right-thinking person would.
erinbrenner's review
3.0
Bryan Garner has a specific approach to language usage and Garner’s Modern English Usage, the fourth edition of his usage advice, teaches it to others.
I can’t fully endorse that approach, however. While Garner wants his recommendations to be “genuinely plausible,” recognizing the language “as it currently stands,” actual usage is at the bottom of his criteria and can easily be trumped by other criteria, not all of which are objective.
For example, the guide marks a word as undesirable if it is new, seeks to take over another word’s definition, or is simply a variant of another word. To me this is unreasonable. Why impoverish the language by assigning only one word to one meaning?
In English, there are often many answers, something many usage guides, Garner’s included, ignore. Only the quickly aging Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of English Usage (DEU) takes pains to point out those various answers. So when I use Garner’s, I compare it with DEU and other grammar and usage guides, and then I make a decision. It’s not the only book I consult, but it is an important one.
So how does the new edition compare to the previous?
To find out, read the full review at Copyediting.
I can’t fully endorse that approach, however. While Garner wants his recommendations to be “genuinely plausible,” recognizing the language “as it currently stands,” actual usage is at the bottom of his criteria and can easily be trumped by other criteria, not all of which are objective.
For example, the guide marks a word as undesirable if it is new, seeks to take over another word’s definition, or is simply a variant of another word. To me this is unreasonable. Why impoverish the language by assigning only one word to one meaning?
In English, there are often many answers, something many usage guides, Garner’s included, ignore. Only the quickly aging Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of English Usage (DEU) takes pains to point out those various answers. So when I use Garner’s, I compare it with DEU and other grammar and usage guides, and then I make a decision. It’s not the only book I consult, but it is an important one.
So how does the new edition compare to the previous?
To find out, read the full review at Copyediting.
More...