What I am objecting to is not the style advice in Elements, which might best be described the way The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy describes Earth: mostly harmless. [...] But despite the "Style" in the title, much in the book relates to grammar, and the advice on that topic does real damage. It is atrocious.
Bookmarks are a great way to share web pages you have found with others (including those on this site) and to comment on them and discuss them.
We welcome comments on public posts from members of the public. Please note, however, that all comments made on public posts must be moderated by their owners before they become visible on the site. The owner of the post (and no one else) has to do that.
If you want the full range of features and you have a login ID, log in using the links at the top of the page or at https://landing.athabascau.ca/login (logins are secure and encrypted)
Posts made here are the responsibility of their owners and may not reflect the views of Athabasca University.
Comments
I feel so sad that someone does not like 'that' with restrictive relative clauses. It suits my taste so well. On the other hand, my brush with linguistics (I remember Geoffrey Pullum as a rock star in the field--it was a big thrill to see him live back in the day) has convinced me that what we call style is mostly folk text grammar/discourse analysis. To me, Strunk & White are to grammar what Oscar Wilde is to sociology--pithy and fun, and completely unscientific. (Although I would guess that Wilde's amateur observations about us as social beings are more accurate than Strunk & White's about grammar.)