A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language

 

A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language

 

The PDF might take a minute to load. Or, click to download PDF.

If your Web browser is not configured to display PDF files. No worries, just click here to download the PDF file.

The Art of Writing and Speaking the English Language ... Grammar & Punctuation by Sherwin Cody

The Art of Writing and Speaking the English Language ... Grammar & Punctuation

 

By Shertoin Cody

 

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

If there is a subject of really universal interest and utility,
it is the art of writing and speaking one's own language effectively.
It is the basis of culture, as we all know; but it is infinitely more
than that: it is the basis of business.  No salesman can sell anything
unless he can explain the merits of his goods in _effective_ English
(among our people), or can write an advertisement equally effective,
or present his ideas, and the facts, in a letter.  Indeed, the way
we talk, and write letters, largely determines our success in life.

Now it is well for us to face at once the counter-statement that the
most ignorant and uncultivated men often succeed best in business,
and that misspelled, ungrammatical advertisements have brought in
millions of dollars.  It is an acknowledged fact that our business
circulars and letters are far inferior in correctness to those of Great
Britain; yet they are more effective in getting business.  As far as
spelling is concerned, we know that some of the masters of literature
have been atrocious spellers and many suppose that when one can sin in
such company, sinning is, as we might say, a “beauty spot”, a defect in
which we can even take pride.

Let us examine the facts in the case more closely.  First of all, language
is no more than a medium; it is like air to the creatures of the land or
water to fishes.  If it is perfectly clear and pure, we do not notice it
any more than we notice pure air when the sun is shining in a clear sky,
or the taste of pure cool water when we drink a glass on a hot day.  Unless
the sun is shining, there is no brightness; unless the water is cool, there
is no refreshment.  The source of all our joy in the landscape, of the
luxuriance of fertile nature, is the sun and not the air.  Nature would be
more prodigal in Mexico than in Greenland, even if the air in Mexico were
as full of soot and smoke as the air of Pittsburg{h}, or loaded with the
acid from a chemical factory.  So it is with language.  Language is merely
a medium for thoughts, emotions, the intelligence of a finely wrought
brain, and a good mind will make far more out of a bad medium than a poor
mind will make out of the best.  A great violinist will draw such music
from the cheapest violin that the world is astonished.  However is that any
reason why the great violinist should choose to play on a poor violin; or
should one say nothing of the smoke nuisance in Chicago because more light
and heat penetrate its murky atmosphere than are to be found in cities only
a few miles farther north?  The truth is, we must regard the bad spelling
nuisance, the bad grammar nuisance, the inártistic and rambling language
nuisance, precisely as we would the smoke nuisance, the sewer-gas nuisance,
the stock-yards' smell nuisance.  Some dainty people prefer pure air and
correct language; but we now recognize that purity is something more than
an esthetic fad, that it is essential to our health and well-being, and
therefore it becomes a matter of universal public interest, in language
as well as in air.

There is a general belief that while bad air may be a positive evil
influence, incorrect use of language is at most no more than a negative
evil: that while it may be a good thing to be correct, no special harm
is involved in being incorrect.  Let us look into this point.

While language as the medium of thought may be compared to air as the
medium of the sun's influence, in other respects it is like the skin of
the body; a scurvy skin shows bad blood within, and a scurvy language shows
inaccurate thought and a confused mind.  And as a disease once fixed on the
skin reacts and poisons the blood in turn as it has first been poisoned by
the blood, so careless use of language if indulged reacts on the mind to
make it permanently and increasingly careless, illogical, and inaccurate
in its thinking.

The ordinary person will probably not believe this, because he conceives
of good use of language as an accomplishment to be learned from books,
a prim system of genteel manners to be put on when occasion demands,
a sort of superficial education in the correct thing, or, as the boys
would say, “the proper caper.”  In this, however, he is mistaken.
Language which expresses the thought with strict logical accuracy is
correct language, and language which is sufficiently rich in its resources
to express thought fully, in all its lights and bearings, is effective
language.  If the writer or speaker has a sufficient stock of words and
forms at his disposal, he has only to use them in a strictly logical way
and with sufficient fulness to be both correct and effective.  If his
mind can always be trusted to work accurately, he need not know a word
of grammar except what he has imbibed unconsciously in getting his stock
of words and expressions.  Formal grammar is purely for critical purposes.
It is no more than a standard measuring stick by which to try the work
that has been done and find out if it is imperfect at any point.  Of course
constant correction of inaccuracies schools the mind and puts it on its
guard so that it will be more careful the next time it attempts expression;
but we cannot avoid the conclusion that if the mind lacks material, lacks
knowledge of the essential elements of the language, it should go to the
original source from which it got its first supply, namely to reading and
hearing that which is acknowledged to be correct and sufficient―as the
child learns from its mother.  All the scholastic and analytic grammar in
the world will not enrich the mind in language to any appreciable extent.

And now we may consider another objector, who says, “I have studied
grammar for years and it has done me no good.”  In view of what has
just been said, we may easily concede that such is very likely to
have been the case.  A measuring stick is of little value unless you
have something to measure.  Language cannot be acquired, only tested,
by analysis, and grammar is an analytic, not a constructive science.

We have compared bad use of language to a scurvy condition of the skin.
To cure the skin we must doctor the blood; and to improve the language
we should begin by teaching the mind to think.  But that, you will say,
is a large undertaking.  Yes, but after all it is the most direct and
effective way.  All education should be in the nature of teaching
the mind to think, and the teaching of language consists in teaching
thinking in connection with word forms and expression through
language.  The unfortunate thing is that teachers of language have
failed to go to the root of the trouble, and enormous effort has
counted for nothing, and besides has led to discouragement.

The American people are noted for being hasty in all they do.  Their
manufactures are quickly made and cheap.  They have not hitherto
had time to secure that perfection in minute details which constitutes
“quality.”  The slow-going Europeans still excel in nearly all fine
and high-grade forms of manufacture―fine pottery, fine carpets and
rugs, fine cloth, fine bronze and other art wares.  In our language,
too, we are hasty, and therefore imperfect.  Fine logical accuracy
requires more time than we have had to give to it, and we read the
newspapers, which are very poor models of language, instead of books,
which should be far better.  Our standard of business letters is very low.
It is rare to find a letter of any length without one or more errors of
language, to say nothing of frequent errors in spelling made by ignorant
stenographers and not corrected by the business men who sign the letters.

But a change is coming over us.  We have suddenly taken to reading
books, and while they are not always the best books, they are better
than newspapers.  And now a young business man feels that it is
distinctly to his advantage if he can dictate a thoroughly good
letter to his superior or to a well informed customer.  Good letters
raise the tone of a business house, poor letters give the idea
that it is a cheapjack concern.  In social life, well written letters,
like good conversational powers, bring friends and introduce the
writer into higher circles.  A command of language is the index of
culture, and the uneducated man or woman who has become wealthy
or has gained any special success is eager to put on this wedding
garment of refinement.  If he continues to regard a good command
of language as a wedding garment, he will probably fail in his effort;
but a few will discover the way to self-education and actively follow
it to its conclusion adding to their first success this new achievement.

But we may even go farther.  The right kind of language-teaching will
also give us power, a kind of eloquence, a skill in the use of words, which
will enable us to frame advertisements which will draw business, letters
which will win customers, and to speak in that elegant and forceful way so
effective in selling goods.  When all advertisements are couched in very
imperfect language, and all business letters are carelessly written, of
course no one has an advantage over another, and a good knowledge and
command of language would not be much of a recommendation to a business
man who wants a good assistant.  But when a few have come in and by their
superior command of language gained a distinct advantage over rivals, then
the power inherent in language comes into universal demand——the business
standard is raised.  There are many signs now that the business standard
in the use of language is being distinctly raised.  Already a stenographer
who does not make errors commands a salary from 25 per cent. to 50 per
cent. higher than the average, and is always in demand.  Advertisement
writers must have not only business instinct but language instinct,
and knowledge of correct, as well as forceful, expression{.}

Granted, then, that we are all eager to better our knowledge of the
English language, how shall we go about it?

There are literally thousands of published books devoted to the study
and teaching of our language.  In such a flood it would seem that we
should have no difficulty in obtaining good guides for our study.

But what do we find?  We find spelling-books filled with lists of words to
be memorized; we find grammars filled with names and definitions of all
the different forms which the language assumes; we find rhetorics filled
with the names of every device ever employed to give effectiveness to
language; we find books on literature filled with the names, dates of birth
and death, and lists of works, of every writer any one ever heard of:
and when we have learned all these names we are no better off than when
we started.  It is true that in many of these books we may find prefaces
which say, “All other books err in clinging too closely to mere system,
to names; but we will break away and give you the real thing.”  But they
don't do it; they can't afford to be too radical, and so they merely modify
in a few details the same old system, the system of names.  Yet it is a
great point gained when the necessity for a change is realized.

How, then, shall we go about our mastery of the English language?

Modern science has provided us a universal method by which we may study
and master any subject.  As applied to an art, this method has proved
highly successful in the case of music.  It has not been applied to
language because there was a well fixed method of language study
in existence long before modern science was even dreamed of, and that
ancient method has held on with wonderful tenacity.  The great fault with
it is that it was invented to apply to languages entirely different from
our own.  Latin grammar and Greek grammar were mechanical systems of
endings by which the relationships of words were indicated.  Of course the
relationship of words was at bottom logical, but the mechanical form was
the chief thing to be learned.  Our language depends wholly (or very nearly
so) on arrangement of words, and the key is the logical relationship.
A man who knows all the forms of the Latin or Greek language can write
it with substantial accuracy; but the man who would master the English
language must go deeper, he must master the logic of sentence structure
or word relations.  We must begin our study at just the opposite end from
the Latin or Greek; but our teachers of language have balked at a complete
reversal of method, the power of custom and time has been too strong, and
in the matter of grammar we are still the slaves of the ancient world.
As for spelling, the irregularities of our language seem to have driven us
to one sole method, memorizing: and to memorize every word in a language
is an appalling task.  Our rhetoric we have inherited from the middle ages,
from scholiasts, refiners, and theological logicians, a race of men who got
their living by inventing distinctions and splitting hairs.  The fact is,
prose has had a very low place in the literature of the world until
within a century; all that was worth saying was said in poetry, which
the rhetoricians were forced to leave severely alone, or in oratory,
from which all their rules were derived; and since written prose language
became a universal possession through the printing press and the
newspaper we have been too busy to invent a new rhetoric.

Now, language is just as much a natural growth as trees or rocks or
human bodies, and it can have no more irregularities, even in the matter
of spelling, than these have.  Science would laugh at the notion of
memorizing every individual form of rock.  It seeks the fundamental laws,
it classifies and groups, and even if the number of classes or groups
is large, still they have a limit and can be mastered.  Here we have a
solution of the spelling problem.  In grammar we find seven fundamental
logical relationships, and when we have mastered these and their chief
modifications and combinations, we have the essence of grammar as truly
as if we knew the name for every possible combination which our seven
fundamental relationships might have.  Since rhetoric is the art of
appealing to the emotions and intelligence of our hearers, we need to
know, not the names of all the different artifices which may be employed,
but the nature and laws of emotion and intelligence as they may be
reached through language; for if we know what we are hitting at, a little
practice will enable us to hit accurately; whereas if we knew the name of
every kind of blow, and yet were ignorant of the thing we were hitting at,
namely the intelligence and emotion of our fellow man, we would be forever
striking into the air,―striking cleverly perhaps, but ineffectively.

Having got our bearings, we find before us a purely practical problem,
that of leading the student through the maze of a new science and teaching
him the skill of an old art, exemplified in a long line of masters.

By way of preface we may say that the mastery of the English language
(or any language) is almost the task of a lifetime.  A few easy lessons
will have no effect.  We must form a habit of language study that will
grow upon us as we grow older, and little by little, but never by leaps,
shall we mount up to the full expression of all that is in us.

Also see:

• [v . 1] Word-Study 

  [v . 2] Grammar & Punctuation  

  [v . 3] Composition & Rhetoric 

  [v . 4] Constructive Rhetoric 

  [v . 5] Story Writing & Journalism 

  [v . 6] How To Read And What To Read

A Writer's Manual and Workbook by Paul P. Kies

 

A Writer's Manual and Workbook by Paul P. Kies

 

 CONTENTS

PUNCTUATION

Comma — Ch. 21, § D

Compound sent, with conjunction, 5.1, 21.10;
unnecessary with short clauses, 5.2, 21.10.

Comma splice, 5.8, 13.8, 21.11 (transitional ex-
pression not a conjunction, 5.5, 5.9); error of
merely removing comma, 5.13.

Initial adverbial elements: clause, 113, 21.12
(short clause, 11.4); long phrase, 3.2, 21.12;
prep, gerund phrase, 17.7, 21.12; inf., 21.12.

Inserted elements, 21.13.

Restrictive and non-restr. modifiers (definition
of restrictive, 10.1 — of non-restrictive, 10.2):
adj. cl., 10.3, 21.14; other adj. mod., 10.4;
restr. app., 10.5 (meaning changed bye., 10.7);
non-restr. appositive, 10.6 (meaning changed
by c., 10.7); smh as, 10.11; non-restrictive
part, 16.6; final adv. cl., 11.5; cl. with/iro-
vided that, 11.6; cl. of degree or comparison,
11.7; cl. of concession, pure result, contrast,
11,8; clause of purpose, reason, 11.9-11.10.

Series — a, b, and c, 1.4, 21.15; complicated
2-part pred., 1.3; and without comma, 1.5.

Consecutive coordinate adjectives, 21.16.

Short direct quotation, 12.6, 21.17; quotation
interrupted by he said, 12.8, 21.17.

Elements falsely read together, 21.18.

Slightly parenthetical elements, 21.19; nom. of
address, 8.2, 21.19a; nom. absolute, 16.8,
21.19b; clauses, 5.10-5.11, 21,19f; transitional
expressions (c. unnecessary after hence, etc.),
5.6, 10.12, 21.19d (“buried” transitional exp.,
5.7); parenthetical infinitive, 18,2; etc.

Complicated noun clause as subject, 12.2.

Pred. repeating last word of noun cl., 12.3.

Comma incorrect, 21.20; indirect quot., 12.9;
dropping of c. before dash, 21. ,32; dropping of
c. with question mark plus quots., 21.48; how-
ever as a rel. adv., 13.9; yon know, etc., 10.14;
most n. cl., 12.1; ger. in most uses, 17.6; short
initial phr., 3.3; initial phr. followed immedi-
ately by verb, 3,4; restrictive adj. cl., 10.3;
restrictive appositive, 10.5; restrictive part.,
16.5; series— a and b and c (or, a and b), 1.2.

Brackets — Ch. 21, § B

Editorial insertion, 21.40.

Parenthesis within parenthesis, 21.41.

Colon — Ch. 21, § F

Final appositive, list, series, etc., 21.24, 10.9.

Appositive with namely, etc., 10.12.

Final noun cl. in non-restrictive apposition, 12.5.


PUNCTUATION (continued)

Colon (completed)

Final gerund in non-restr. apposition, 17.6.
Long or formal quotation, 12.7, 21.25.
Salutation of formal letter, 21.26.

Time indication, Bible reference, 21.27.

Daslt~-Ch. 21, § G
Broken sentence, 21.28.

Complicated non-restrictive expression, 10.8
21.29; noun clause, 12.4; gerund, 17.6.
Appositive with namely, etc., 10.12.

Final appositive, 10.9.

Parenthetical material, 21.30.

Summary of preceding series, 21.31.

Dropping of comma or period before dash, 21.32
Overuse of dash, 21.33.

Exclamation Point

Exclamatory sent., 1.9; any exclamation, 21.9
Retention of exclamation p. before dash, 21.32

Parentheses— Ch. 21, § B
Parenthetical material, 21.34.

Other punctuation with parentheses, 21.35.
Separate sentence in parentheses, 21.36.
Confirmatory figure, 21.37.

Numerals for numbering points, 21.38.

Deletion, 21.39.

Period— Ch. 21, § B; etc.

Declarative or imperative sentence, 1.7, 21.1,
Abbreviation, 21.2, 22.11.

Fragmentary sentence, 21.3.

Quot. interrupted by he said, etc., 12.8, 21.17
Dropping of period before dash, 21.32.
Dropping of period before closing mark of paren
thesis, 21.35.

Dropping of period with question mark plu;
quotation marks, 21.48.

Question Mark — Ch. 21, § C
Interrogative sentence, 1.8, 21.4.

Indirect question, 21.5.

Polite request in question form (period), 21.6
Uncertainty, 21.7.

Irony (objectionable), 21.8.

Retention of question mark before dash, 21.32

Quotation Marks (and quotations) — Ch. 21, § i
Direct quotation, 21.42.

Indirect quotation (not), 21.43,

Quotation interrupted by he said, etc., 21.45
Quotation of more than one paragraph, 21.44. “
Change of speaker, 21.46.

Other punctuation with quotation marks, 21.47



PUNCTUATION (completed)

Quotation Marks (completed)

’ Comma or period with endamation point or
question mark plus quotation marks, 21.48.
iQuoted titles, 21.49.

,'fUnfamiliar technical terms, 21.50.

3Slang, 28.8; overuse as indication of irony or
i;; apology for slang, 21.51.

'.Quotation within quotation, 21 52.
jiBlocked quotation, 22.45.

I Citation of source of quotation, 22.46.

1 Semicolon — Ch. Zl, § E

Compound sent, without conj., S.4, 21.21.
Compound sent, with only trans. exp., 5.5, 5.9.
"Run-together” sentence, 5.12.
jAppositive with that is, 10.12.

^Quot. interrupted by he said, etc., 12.&, 21.17.
Complicated compound sentence, S.3, 21.22.
Complicated elements not indep. clauses, 21.23.

General

Sentences, Ch. 1, §H.

Clauses, Ch. 13, § E: Independent Clauses,
Ch. 5, § D, § E, § F; .Adjective Clauses, Ch. 10,
§ C; Adverbial Clauses, Ch. 11 § C; Noun
Clauses, Ch. 12, § B.

Participles, Ch. 16, § D.

Gerunds, Ch. 17, § D.

MECHANICS

Abbreviations— Ch. 2Z, § B

Abbreviations generally undesirable (excep-
tions listed), 22.7.

Abbreviations in business letters, 22.8.

Matter requiring brevity, 22.9.

Capitalization of abbreviations, 22.10.

Period after abbreviations, 21.2, 22.11,

Apostrophe — Ch. 22, § C

Possessive forms — subhead under “Grammar.”
Omission of letters, 22.36.

. Plural of figure, letter, etc., 7.12, 22.39.

Capitals — Ch. 22, § 4

Sentence, 1.6, 22.1.

Direct quotation, 22.1.

Each line of poetry, 22.2.

Proper nouns and adjectiv'es, 22.3; unnecessary
if association with original has been lost, 22.4.
Subjects of study, 22.5.

I, 0, 'Salutation of letter, etc., 22.6.

Compounds— Ch. 22, J E

^ Numerals, 22.25; fractions, 22,26,

‘■'Compound adj. modifier preceding noun, 22,27.
Compound noun ending in prep, or adv., 22,28.
Other compounds, 22.29.


MECHANICS (completed)

Investigative Paper — Ch. 22, § J

Card bibliography, 22.51 (supplementary notes.
Ap. 2) ; bibliography card for reference work,
Ap. 3; bibliography cards alphabetical, Ap, 4.

Card catalog, 22.52; Reader’s Guide, 22.53; bib-
liographies in encyclopedias, etc., 22.54; bib-
liographies for special fields, 22.55.

Notes, 22.56; exact reference, 22.57.

Outline, 22. .58.

Footnotes, 22 59: amount of text covered, i.n-
sertion in text, Ap. 5; books, 22.60 (no comma
before parenlJrcses with place and year, foot-
note for bulletin, book in series, writing un-
connected with rest of book, .Ap. 6); magazine
articles, 22 61 (no comma before parentheses
with year, .Ap. 7); “guide” for footnotes, -Ap. 8;
ibid., op. cit., loc. at., etc., 22 62; avoidance of
repeating data, 22.63; parenthetical matter,
22.64.

Bibliographical lists, 22.65; lines solid, entries
for bulletin, book in series, unconnected writ-
ing, Ap. 9; “ guide ” for bibl. entries, Ap. 10.

Note on other systems of documentation, Ap. 11.

Italics — Ch. 22, § D

Indication in typing or script, 22,19.

Words, etc., out of context, 22.20.

Quoted titles, 22,21,

Unnaturalized foreign words, 22,22.

Emphasis, 22.23, 27.16.

Ships, resolutions, law cases, 22.24.

Manuscript— Ch. 22, § U

Materials, 22.40; margins and spacing, 22.41.

Legibility, 22.42.

Titles; choice of, 22.43; mechanics of, 22.44.

Quotations, 22,45; citation of source, 22.46.

Acknowledgment of indebtedness, 22.47.

Paging, 22.48; folding, 22.49.

Endorsing, 22.50.

Numbers — Ch. 22, J C

Figures preferable, 22.12.

Words preferable, 22,13.

Dates, time of day, street numbers, references
tables, 22.14,

Avoidance of figures initially, 22.15.

Uniformity, 22,16,

Sums of money, 22.17.

Confirmatory figures, 22.18.

Syllabication — Ch. 22, § F

Avoidance of setting off short elements, 22.30.

Splitting of a syllable wTong, 22.31.

Division betw'een component parts, 22.32.

Single consonant between two vowels, 22.33,

Mote than one cons, behveen two vowels, 22.34.

Hyphen at end of first line, 22.35.



GRAMMAR


GRAMMAR (continued)


AJjecthc Old Adverb

Modifier of verb, 2.7.

Due to (adjectival), 3.1.

Adjective with verb pertaining to senses, 2.10.

Agreement— Ch. 7, § C, § E; etc.

Pron. with ant., 7.13; singularity of eacA, etc.,
7.14 (mas. pron. for common gender, 7.15).

Verb with subject, 7.16 (not with subjective
complement, 8.1): noun intervening, 7.17; as
well as, etc., 7.18; he don’t, 7.19; compound
subject with and, 7.20 (near identity, actual
identity, 7.21); compound subject with or,
nor, 7.22 (with different forms of verb, 7.23);
subj. following verb, 7.24; plu. rel. pron., 7.25;
sing. rel. pron., 7.26; collective sing., 7.27; col-
lective noun as plu. ,7.28 ; a number of, etc., 7.29;
mass plu , 7.30; data, scissors, etc., 7.31; news,
politics, athletics, 7.32; plu. title, etc., 7.33.

Case Functions— Ch. 9, § C; etc.

Subject, 9.11.

Subjective complement, 9.11.

Nominative of address, 9.11.

Direct object, 9.12.

Indirect object, 9.12.

Object of preposition, 9.12.

Objective complement, 9.12.

Adverbial noun, 9.13.

Appositive, 9.16.

Substantive of nominative absolute, 16.3.

“Subject” of obj.-inf. construction, 18.1.

Complement after to be in obj.-inf. constr., 18.1.

Poss. with gerund, 17.1 (evceptions, 17.2).

Case of relative pronoun, 10.13; not affected by
parenthetical he knows, etc., 10.14.

Case of pronoun in noun clause, 12.10.

Possessive of inanimate objects iilogical, 9.14
(exceptions, 9.15).

Comparison — Ch. 2, § C; Ch. 11, § E

Positive, 2.1.

Comparative, 2.2, 2.8.

J Superlative, 2.3, 2.8.

Forms in adjective, 2.4.

Forms in adverb, 2.5.

i Adjective, adverb lacking comparison, 2.6.

Different than, 2.9.

1 Logical comparison; comp, degree, 11.25; super-

j lative degree, 11.26; exact specification, 11.27.

' Conjunctions — Ch. 11, § D; etc.

I 31s ... or vs. 50 ... <M, 11.1.

j As ... os, than not prep., 11.20 {than whom,
11.21);pron. asobj. after as . . .as, than, 11.22-,
ambiguous noun after as as, than. 11,23.


Conjunctions (completed)

Mixture of than and as . . . as, 11.24.
Omission of subordinating conjunction, 11.2.

Like not a conj., 11.11; a preposition, 11.12.
Willmil not a conjunction, 11.13.

While for and, 11.14.

While for whereas, 11.15.

IFh/fe for concession, 11.16.

As and since for cause, 11.17.

Providing for provided, 11.18.

So and such as intensives, 11.19.

Because in noun clause, 12.11.

When or where cl. as subj. complement, 12.12.
Where clause as direct object, lll3.

Dangling Elements

Participle, 16.9.

Gerund phrase: active, 17.3; passive, 17.4
general agent, 17.5.

Infinitive, 18.3.

Elliptical clause, 23.4.

Plural of Nouns — Ch. 7, § A

Nounsnot ending in sibilant, 7,1.

Nouns ending in sibilant, 7.2.

Common nouns in y, 7.3.

Proper nouns in y, 7.4.

Nouns in / or fe, 7.5.

Nouns in o, 7.6.

Nouns adding en, 7.7.

Nouns changing vowels, 7.8.

Unchanged plurals, 7.9.

Foreign plurals, 7.10.

Compound nouns, 7.11.

Letter, symbol, etc., 7.12.

Position of Modifiers — Ch. 13, § A; etc.

Elements falsely read together, 13.1; adverbial
modifier moved to beginning, 13.2; change of
construction desirable, 13.3.

Confused compound predicate, 13.4.

Position of only, etc., 13.5.

Adjective cl. separated from word modified, 13.6, ,
Squinting modifier, 13,7. V

Awkward split infinitive, 18.5; permissible split '
infinitive, 18.4.

Possessive Forms— Ch. P, § A, § B
Personal, relative, and inter, pron., 9.Z, 22.38.
Indefinite pronoun, 9.2, 22.37.

Nouns, 22.37: poss. sing, of most nouns, 9.3;
poss. sing, of nouns in s, 9.4 (apostrophe never
precedes original s, 9.5) ; poss. plu. of s plurals,
9.6; poss. plu. of plurals not in s, 9.7; avoid-
ance of awkward forms by phr. with of, 9.8;^
compound expression, 9.9; joint ownership, *
9.10; poss. of inanimate objects illogical, 9.14
(exceptions, 9.15).



GRAMMAR (completed)

Sentences and Fragments — Ch. 4; etc.
Necessity of subject and predicate, 1.1, 4.1.

Necessity of finite form, 4.2.

Elliptical sentences: commands, 4.,3; answers,
4.4; ciclamations, 4.,S; other situations (not
recommended for student), 4.6.

Fragments, 20.1, 21.3: appositive, 10.10; de-
pendent clause, 13.10; participle, 16.7; nom-
inative absolute, 16.8.

Subjunctive — (Jh. 15 , § C

Conditions contrary to fact, 15.1.

Wishes, 15.2.

Commands, motions, etc., 15.3.

Clauses of purpose, 15.4.

As ij and as though clauses, 15.5.

Concessions (if supposition), 15.6.

Simple conditions (optional), 15.7.

Tense — Ch. 6

Past for past perfect, 6.1.

Inconsistent change of tense, 6.2.

Sequence of tense after past t., 6.3; general
truth, 6.4; in purpose cl, 6.6; in verbal, 18 6.

Sequence of tense after present tense, 6.5; in
purpose clause, 6,6.

Shall — loill; simple future, 6.7; determination
of speaker, 6.8; determination of subject, 6,9;
willingness, promise in 1st person, 6.10; ques-
tions, 6,11; indirect quotation, 6.12.

Should — would: obligation, improbable condition,
reasonable expectation, 6.13; customary ac-
tion, wish, 6.14; other meanings, 6.15.

Troublesome Verbs— Ch. 19

Principal parts of troublesome verbs, 19.1.

Rise — raise, 19,2.

Lie — lay, 19.3.

Sit— set, 19.4.

Shall — will, should— would, see “Tense.”

RHETORIC
Diction — Ch. 2S

Exact word, 28.1; loose phrasing, 28.2; specific
word, 28. ,3,

Diction appropriate to subject, occasion, and
tone, 28.4: colloquialism, 28.5 (contraction,
28.6); vulgarism, 28.7; slang, 28.8; archaic,
obsolete, or poetic word, 28,9; “fine writing,”
28.10; triteness, 28.11 (in letters, 30.17); unidi-
omatic expression, 28.12; diction appropriate
to readers, 28,13.

Concrete word, 28.14; suggestive word, 28.15
(misleading suggestion, 28.16); figure of
speech, 28.17 (mixed figure, 28.18).

Emphatic diction, 28.19.

Glossary of faulty usage, 28.20.

, Economy — Ch. 23

Wordiness, 23.1.

Tautology, 23,2.

Elliptical clause, 23.3.


RHETORIC (completed)

Emphasis — Ch. 24, Cli. 27

Subordination, 24.1, 27.1: weakness of so re-
sult clause, 24.2; correction of comma splice
by subordination, 24.3; choppy sentences, 24.4;
stringiness, 24.5 (repetition of but or for to
join clauses, 24.6); upside-down subordination,
24.7; subordination by verbals, 24.8 (use of
verbals to remove stringiness and choppiness,
24.9).

Weak passive, 14.2, 27.2.

Effective passive, 14.1, 27.3,

Balance, 27.4.

Separation, 27.5.

Position, 27.6,

Last sentence of paragraph, 27.7.

Periodic sentence, 27,8.

Parenthetical element at end, 27.9.

Frequent weakness of nominative absolute, 16.4;
at end, 27.9.

“Buried” parenthetical element, 5.7, 27.10.
Order of climax, 27.11.

Transposed word order, 27.12.

Omission of useless words, 23.1-3, 27,13,
Repetition, 25,9, 27.14.

Variety, 25.1-10, 27.15.

Italics, 22.23, 27.16.

Rhetorical question, 27.17.

Emphatic diction, 28.19.

Parallelism — Ch. 26; etc.

Parallel structure, 26,1; outline, 26.2.
Disagreeable change of voice, 14.3.

Necessary change of voice, 14.4.

Misleading parallelism, 26.3; and who, etc.,

26.4.

Correlatives, 26,5.

Reference of Pronouns — Ch. 25, § E

Ambiguous antecedent, 25.11.

Inconspicuous or implied antecedent, 25.12.
Possible antecedent of impersonal pronoun, 25. 13.
Tow, they, it as indefinite pronouns, 25,14.

Clause as antecedent of pronoun, 25.15.

Singular pronoun with each, etc., 7.14, 25.16.

Variety — Ch. 25

Variety of sentence types, 25.1.

Variety of sentence beginning, 25.2 ; avoidance of
strained word order and faulty emphasis, 25.3;
verbals for variety of sentence beginning,

25.4.

Repetition of words, 25.5; avoidance of awk-
wardness, etc., 25.6.

Repetition for clearness, 25.7 (repetition of
article for clearness, 25.8).

Repetition of sound, 25.10.

Reference of pronouns — see previous subhead.



MISCELLANEOUS TOPICS

Correspondence — Ch. 30

Stationery: business letter, 30.1; social letter,
30.2.

Headings, 30.3; cautions (;?; 12/24/36; st, etc.,
with the day after the month; omission of
Slreel, Avenue), preferable not to abbreviate
except D. C. and U. S. A., 30.4.

Inside address, 30.5: for clergymen and public
officials, 30.6; for married women, 30.7; names
of positions not abbreviated, 30.8.

Salutation, 30.0; for clergymen and public offi-
cials, 30.10; “attention of ,” 30.11; salu-

tation in a personal letter, 30.12.

Body, 30.13; paragraph length, 30.14, .Ap. 15e;
conciseness and directness, 30.15; standard
grammar, spelling, punctuation, 30.16; trite
diction, 30.17; courtesy, 30.18; the reply letter,
30.19; paragraphing and adaptation of per-
sonal letter, 30.20.

Complimentary close: business letter, 30.21;
personal letter, 30.22.

Signature: business letter, 30.23; initials of
typist, 30.24; woman’s signature in personal
letter, 30.25.

Outside address, 30.26; of married woman or
widow, 30.27; legibility and return address,
30.28.

Formal notes, 30.29; semi-formal notes, 30.30.

Paragraph — Ap. IV

Unity, Ap. 12.

Coherence, Ap. 13.

Choppy paragraphs, Ap. 14 (situations per-
mitting short paragraphs, Ap. 15).


MISCELLANEOUS TOPICS (completed)

Spelling — Ch. 29 ;

Plurals of nouns — subhead under “ Grammar.”

Possessive forms — subhead under “Grammar.”

Compounds — subhead under “Mechanics.”

Contractions, 22.36.

Suffijces; doubling of final consonant, 16.1 ; drop-
ping of final e, 16.2 (retention of e after c or g
if before a back vowel, 29.1; change of c to
ck before a front vowel, 29.2); y before vowel
suffix, 29.3; y before s, 29.4; any letter but y
before consonantal suffix, 29.5; addition of -ly,
29.6; -ful, 29.7.

Prefixes: prefix ending in unassimilated con-
sonant, 29.8; prefix ending in assimilated con-
sonant, 29.9; prefix ending in vowel, 29.10;
words with per- (not pre-), 29.11; words with
de- (not dis-), 29.12. ;

Order of ic and ei, 29.13.

Verbs in -ceed, -cede, related nouns, 29.14.

Misspelling because ©f mispronunciation, 29.15'
(insertion of a sound, 29.16).

Omission of silent letters, 29.17.

Tricky vowels: o, 29.18; », 29.19; e, 29.20; o,
29.21.

Superficial resemblances, 29.22; related words
with minor differences, 29.23.

All right, altar, alter, conscience, Mississippi,
murmur, necessary, necessity, written, embar-
rass, occasion, night, occupy, pantomime, priv-
ilege, sergea7it, similar, villain, captain, certain,
Britain, where, which, 29.24.

Test list, 29.25; supplementary test list, 29.26.

Words with two spellings: preferred form, 29.27;
form preferred in America, 29.28.


The PDF might take a minute to load. Or, click to download PDF.

If your Web browser is not configured to display PDF files. No worries, just click here to download the PDF file.

An Advanced English Grammar with Exercises by Farley and Kittredge

 

An Advanced English Grammar with Exercises 

BY
GEORGE LYMAN KITTREDGE
GURNEY PROFESSOR OF ENGLISH LITERATURE IN HARVARD UNIVERSITY
AND
FRANK EDGAR FARLEY
PROFESSOR OF ENGLISH LITERATURE IN WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY

GINN AND COMPANY
BOSTON · NEW YORK · CHICAGO · LONDON ATLANTA · DALLAS · COLUMBUS · SAN FRANCISCO

COPYRIGHT, 1913, BY GEORGE LYMAN KITTREDGE AND FRANK EDGAR FARLEY
ENTERED AT STATIONERS’ HALL
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
424.2

The Athenæum Press
GINN AND COMPANY · PROPRIETORS · BOSTON · U.S.A.

 

This grammar is intended for students who have already received instruction in the rudiments.

The PDF might take a minute to load. Or, click to download PDF.

If your Web browser is not configured to display PDF files. No worries, just click here to download the PDF file.

An English Grammar by William Malone Baskervill and James Witt Sewell

 

An English Grammar 

by William Malone Baskervill and James Witt Sewell

FOR THE USE OF

HIGH SCHOOL, ACADEMY, AND COLLEGE CLASSES

The PDF might take a minute to load. Or, click to download PDF.

If your Web browser is not configured to display PDF files. No worries, just click here to download the PDF file.

Lessons in English by Arthur Lee, Vol. 1

 

Lessons in English 

by Arthur Lee 

Vol. 1

 

A Lesson on Sentences Story Telling: A Desperate Situation A Class Composition Book.


The PDF might take a minute to load. Or, click to download PDF.

If your Web browser is not configured to display PDF files. No worries, just click here to download the PDF file.

The Art of Writing and Speaking the English Language, Constructive & Rhetoric, Vol, 4

 

 The Art of Writing and Speaking the English Language

 

Constructive & Rhetoric, Vol, 4

by Sherwin Cody

 

 If there is a subject of really universal interest and utility, it is the art of writing and speaking one's own language effectively. It is the basis of culture, as we all know; but it is infinitely more than that: it is the basis of business. No salesman can sell anything unless he can explain the merits of his goods in effective English (among our people), or can write an advertisement equally effective, or present his ideas, and the facts, in a letter. Indeed, the way we talk, and write letters, largely determines our success in life.

Now it is well for us to face at once the counter-statement that the most ignorant and uncultivated men often succeed best in business, and that misspelled, ungrammatical advertisements have brought in millions of dollars. It is an acknowledged fact that our business circulars and letters are far inferior in correctness to those of Great Britain; yet they are more effective in getting business. As far as spelling is concerned, we know that some of the masters of literature have been atrocious spellers and many suppose that when one can sin in such company, sinning is, as we might say, a “beauty spot”, a defect in which we can even take pride.

 Let us examine the facts in the case more closely. First of all, language is no more than a medium; it is like air to the creatures of the land or water to fishes. If it is perfectly clear and pure, we do not notice it any more than we notice pure air when the sun is shining in a clear sky, or the taste of pure cool water when we drink a glass on a hot day. Unless the sun is shining, there is no brightness; unless the water is cool, there is no refreshment. The source of all our joy in the landscape, of the luxuriance of fertile nature, is the sun and not the air. Nature would be more prodigal in Mexico than in Greenland, even if the air in Mexico were as full of soot and smoke as the air of Pittsburg{h}, or loaded with the acid from a chemical factory. So it is with language. Language is merely a medium for thoughts, emotions, the intelligence of a finely wrought brain, and a good mind will make far more out of a bad medium than a poor mind will make out of the best. A great violinist will draw such music from the cheapest violin that the world is astonished. However is that any reason why the great violinist should choose to play on a poor violin; or should one say nothing of the smoke nuisance in Chicago because more light and heat penetrate its murky atmosphere than are to be found in cities only a few miles farther north? The truth is, we must regard the bad spelling nuisance, the bad grammar nuisance, the inártistic and rambling language nuisance, precisely as we would the smoke nuisance, the sewer-gas nuisance, the stock-yards' smell nuisance. Some dainty people prefer pure air and correct language; but we now recognize that purity is something more than an esthetic fad, that it is essential to our health and well-being, and therefore it becomes a matter of universal public interest, in language as well as in air.

 

There is a general belief that while bad air may be a positive evil influence, incorrect use of language is at most no more than a negative evil: that while it may be a good thing to be correct, no special harm is involved in being incorrect. Let us look into this point.

While language as the medium of thought may be compared to air as the medium of the sun's influence, in other respects it is like the skin of the body; a scurvy skin shows bad blood within, and a scurvy language shows inaccurate thought and a confused mind. And as a disease once fixed on the skin reacts and poisons the blood in turn as it has first been poisoned by the blood, so careless use of language if indulged reacts on the mind to make it permanently and increasingly careless, illogical, and inaccurate in its thinking.

 

 The ordinary person will probably not believe this, because he conceives of good use of language as an accomplishment to be learned from books, a prim system of genteel manners to be put on when occasion demands, a sort of superficial education in the correct thing, or, as the boys would say, “the proper caper.” In this, however, he is mistaken. Language which expresses the thought with strict logical accuracy is correct language, and language which is sufficiently rich in its resources to express thought fully, in all its lights and bearings, is effective language. If the writer or speaker has a sufficient stock of words and forms at his disposal, he has only to use them in a strictly logical way and with sufficient fulness to be both correct and effective. If his mind can always be trusted to work accurately, he need not know a word of grammar except what he has imbibed unconsciously in getting his stock of words and expressions. Formal grammar is purely for critical purposes. It is no more than a standard measuring stick by which to try the work that has been done and find out if it is imperfect at any point. Of course constant correction of inaccuracies schools the mind and puts it on its guard so that it will be more careful the next time it attempts expression; but we cannot avoid the conclusion that if the mind lacks material, lacks knowledge of the essential elements of the language, it should go to the original source from which it got its first supply, namely to reading and hearing that which is acknowledged to be correct and sufficient?as the child learns from its mother. All the scholastic and analytic grammar in the world will not enrich the mind in language to any appreciable extent.

 

 And now we may consider another objector, who says, “I have studied grammar for years and it has done me no good.” In view of what has just been said, we may easily concede that such is very likely to have been the case. A measuring stick is of little value unless you have something to measure. Language cannot be acquired, only tested, by analysis, and grammar is an analytic, not a constructive science.

We have compared bad use of language to a scurvy condition of the skin. To cure the skin we must doctor the blood; and to improve the language we should begin by teaching the mind to think. But that, you will say, is a large undertaking. Yes, but after all it is the most direct and effective way. All education should be in the nature of teaching the mind to think, and the teaching of language consists in teaching thinking in connection with word forms and expression through language. The unfortunate thing is that teachers of language have failed to go to the root of the trouble, and enormous effort has counted for nothing, and besides has led to discouragement.

 

 The American people are noted for being hasty in all they do. Their manufactures are quickly made and cheap. They have not hitherto had time to secure that perfection in minute details which constitutes “quality.” The slow-going Europeans still excel in nearly all fine and high-grade forms of manufacture?fine pottery, fine carpets and rugs, fine cloth, fine bronze and other art wares. In our language, too, we are hasty, and therefore imperfect. Fine logical accuracy requires more time than we have had to give to it, and we read the newspapers, which are very poor models of language, instead of books, which should be far better. Our standard of business letters is very low. It is rare to find a letter of any length without one or more errors of language, to say nothing of frequent errors in spelling made by ignorant stenographers and not corrected by the business men who sign the letters.

But a change is coming over us. We have suddenly taken to reading books, and while they are not always the best books, they are better than newspapers. And now a young business man feels that it is distinctly to his advantage if he can dictate a thoroughly good letter to his superior or to a well informed customer. Good letters raise the tone of a business house, poor letters give the idea that it is a cheapjack concern. In social life, well written letters, like good conversational powers, bring friends and introduce the writer into higher circles. A command of language is the index of culture, and the uneducated man or woman who has become wealthy or has gained any special success is eager to put on this wedding garment of refinement. If he continues to regard a good command of language as a wedding garment, he will probably fail in his effort; but a few will discover the way to self-education and actively follow it to its conclusion adding to their first success this new achievement.

 

 But we may even go farther. The right kind of language-teaching will also give us power, a kind of eloquence, a skill in the use of words, which will enable us to frame advertisements which will draw business, letters which will win customers, and to speak in that elegant and forceful way so effective in selling goods. When all advertisements are couched in very imperfect language, and all business letters are carelessly written, of course no one has an advantage over another, and a good knowledge and command of language would not be much of a recommendation to a business man who wants a good assistant. But when a few have come in and by their superior command of language gained a distinct advantage over rivals, then the power inherent in language comes into universal demand——the business standard is raised. There are many signs now that the business standard in the use of language is being distinctly raised. Already a stenographer who does not make errors commands a salary from 25 per cent. to 50 per cent. higher than the average, and is always in demand. Advertisement writers must have not only business instinct but language instinct, and knowledge of correct, as well as forceful, expression{.}

Granted, then, that we are all eager to better our knowledge of the English language, how shall we go about it?

 There are literally thousands of published books devoted to the study and teaching of our language. In such a flood it would seem that we should have no difficulty in obtaining good guides for our study.

But what do we find? We find spelling-books filled with lists of words to be memorized; we find grammars filled with names and definitions of all the different forms which the language assumes; we find rhetorics filled with the names of every device ever employed to give effectiveness to language; we find books on literature filled with the names, dates of birth and death, and lists of works, of every writer any one ever heard of: and when we have learned all these names we are no better off than when we started. It is true that in many of these books we may find prefaces which say, “All other books err in clinging too closely to mere system, to names; but we will break away and give you the real thing.” But they don't do it; they can't afford to be too radical, and so they merely modify in a few details the same old system, the system of names. Yet it is a great point gained when the necessity for a change is realized.

 

How, then, shall we go about our mastery of the English language?

Modern science has provided us a universal method by which we may study and master any subject. As applied to an art, this method has proved highly successful in the case of music. It has not been applied to language because there was a well fixed method of language study in existence long before modern science was even dreamed of, and that ancient method has held on with wonderful tenacity. The great fault with it is that it was invented to apply to languages entirely different from our own. Latin grammar and Greek grammar were mechanical systems of endings by which the relationships of words were indicated. Of course the relationship of words was at bottom logical, but the mechanical form was the chief thing to be learned. Our language depends wholly (or very nearly so) on arrangement of words, and the key is the logical relationship. A man who knows all the forms of the Latin or Greek language can write it with substantial accuracy; but the man who would master the English language must go deeper, he must master the logic of sentence structure or word relations. We must begin our study at just the opposite end from the Latin or Greek; but our teachers of language have balked at a complete reversal of method, the power of custom and time has been too strong, and in the matter of grammar we are still the slaves of the ancient world. As for spelling, the irregularities of our language seem to have driven us to one sole method, memorizing: and to memorize every word in a language is an appalling task. Our rhetoric we have inherited from the middle ages, from scholiasts, refiners, and theological logicians, a race of men who got their living by inventing distinctions and splitting hairs. The fact is, prose has had a very low place in the literature of the world until within a century; all that was worth saying was said in poetry, which the rhetoricians were forced to leave severely alone, or in oratory, from which all their rules were derived; and since written prose language became a universal possession through the printing press and the newspaper we have been too busy to invent a new rhetoric.

 Now, language is just as much a natural growth as trees or rocks or human bodies, and it can have no more irregularities, even in the matter of spelling, than these have. Science would laugh at the notion of memorizing every individual form of rock. It seeks the fundamental laws, it classifies and groups, and even if the number of classes or groups is large, still they have a limit and can be mastered. Here we have a solution of the spelling problem. In grammar we find seven fundamental logical relationships, and when we have mastered these and their chief modifications and combinations, we have the essence of grammar as truly as if we knew the name for every possible combination which our seven fundamental relationships might have. Since rhetoric is the art of appealing to the emotions and intelligence of our hearers, we need to know, not the names of all the different artifices which may be employed, but the nature and laws of emotion and intelligence as they may be reached through language; for if we know what we are hitting at, a little practice will enable us to hit accurately; whereas if we knew the name of every kind of blow, and yet were ignorant of the thing we were hitting at, namely the intelligence and emotion of our fellow man, we would be forever striking into the air,?striking cleverly perhaps, but ineffectively.

Having got our bearings, we find before us a purely practical problem, that of leading the student through the maze of a new science and teaching him the skill of an old art, exemplified in a long line of masters.

 By way of preface we may say that the mastery of the English language (or any language) is almost the task of a lifetime. A few easy lessons will have no effect. We must form a habit of language study that will grow upon us as we grow older, and little by little, but never by leaps, shall we mount up to the full expression of all that is in us.

The PDF might take a minute to load. Or, click to download PDF.

If your Web browser is not configured to display PDF files. No worries, just click here to download the PDF file.

 

Also see:

• [v . 1] Word-Study 

  [v . 2] Grammar & Punctuation  

  [v . 3] Composition & Rhetoric 

  [v . 4] Constructive Rhetoric 

  [v . 5] Story Writing & Journalism 

  [v . 6] How To Read And What To Read

The Art of Writing and Speaking the English Language, Word-Study, Vol, 1

 The Art of Writing and Speaking the English Language

 

Word-Study

 Vol,1

by Sherwin Cody

 

CONTENTS.

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

WORD-STUDY

INTRODUCTION — THE STUDY OF SPELLING

CHAPTER I. LETTERS AND SOUNDS
 {VOWELS CONSONANTS EXERCISES THE DICTIONARY}

CHAPTER II. WORD-BUILDING  {PREFIXES}

CHAPTER III. WORD-BUILDING — Rules and Applications {EXCEPTIONS}

CHAPTER IV. PRONUNCIATION

CHAPTER V. A SPELLING DRILL

    APPENDIX 

Description

Excerpt from The Art of Writing and Speaking the English Language, Vol. 1: Word-Study


The spelling problem is not to learn how to spell nine tenths of our words correctly. Nearly all of us can and do accomplish that. The good speller must spell nine hundred and ninety-nine one thousandths of his word correctly, which is quite another matter. Some of us go even one figure higher.

  

Also see:

• [v. 1] Word-Study 

  [v . 2] Grammar & Punctuation  

  [v . 3] Composition & Rhetoric 

  [v . 4] Constructive Rhetoric 

  [v . 5] Story Writing & Journalism 

  [v . 6] How To Read And What To Read

 

About the Author 

 

Alpheus Sherwin Cody (November 30, 1868 – April 4, 1959) was an American writer and entrepreneur who developed a long-running home-study course in speaking and writing and a signature series of advertisements asking “Do You Make These Mistakes in English?” A critic of traditional English education, Cody advocated colloquial style and grammar. His course, presented in a patented workbook format which he described as self-correcting, was purchased by over 150,000 students from its inception in 1918. He published essays, books and articles virtually nonstop from 1893 through 1950. In a book published in 1895, he gave the advice, "Write what you know—so go out and know something." Wikipedia

Buy Sherwin Cody Books at Amazon 

The PDF might take a minute to load. Or, click to download PDF.

If your Web browser is not configured to display PDF files. No worries, just click here to download the PDF file.

The Art of Writing and Speaking the English Language, Vol. 3: Composition & Rhetoric

 

 The Art of Writing and Speaking the English Language

 

Vol. 3: Composition & Rhetoric

 

by Sherwin Cody

 

 Description

Excerpt from The Art of Writing and Speaking the English Language, Vol. 3: Composition & Rhetoric

The spelling problem is not to learn how to spell nine tenths of our words correctly. Nearly all of us can and do accomplish that. The good speller must spell nine hundred and ninety-nine one thousandths of his word correctly, which is quite another matter. Some of us go even one figure higher.

 

About the Author 

 

Alpheus Sherwin Cody (November 30, 1868 – April 4, 1959) was an American writer and entrepreneur who developed a long-running home-study course in speaking and writing and a signature series of advertisements asking “Do You Make These Mistakes in English?” A critic of traditional English education, Cody advocated colloquial style and grammar. His course, presented in a patented workbook format which he described as self-correcting, was purchased by over 150,000 students from its inception in 1918. He published essays, books and articles virtually nonstop from 1893 through 1950. In a book published in 1895, he gave the advice, "Write what you know—so go out and know something." Wikipedia

Buy Sherwin Cody Books at Amazon 

 

Also see:

• [v . 1] Word-Study 

  [v . 2] Grammar & Punctuation  

  [v . 3] Composition & Rhetoric 

  [v . 4] Constructive Rhetoric 

  [v . 5] Story Writing & Journalism 

  [v . 6] How To Read And What To Read

The PDF might take a minute to load. Or, click to download PDF.

If your Web browser is not configured to display PDF files. No worries, just click here to download the PDF file.

The Art of Writing and Speaking the English Language by Sherwin Cody, Grammar, Volume 2

 

Art of Writing and Speaking the English Language

 

Grammar, Volume 2

 

by Sherwin Cody

 

CONTENTS.

 

• THE ART OF WRITING AND SPEAKING THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE.
• GENERAL INTRODUCTION
• WORD-STUDY
• INTRODUCTION——THE STUDY OF SPELLING
• CHAPTER I. LETTERS AND SOUNDS {VOWELS CONSONANTS EXERCISES THE DICTIONARY}
• CHAPTER II. WORD-BUILDING {PREFIXES}
• CHAPTER III. WORD-BUILDING———Rules and Applications {EXCEPTIONS}
• CHAPTER IV. PRONUNCIATION
• CHAPTER V. A SPELLING DRILL
• APPENDIX
  

 

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

If there is a subject of really universal interest and utility, it is the art of writing and speaking one's own language effectively. It is the basis of culture, as we all know; but it is infinitely more than that: it is the basis of business. No salesman can sell anything unless he can explain the merits of his goods in effective English (among our people), or can write an advertisement equally effective, or present his ideas, and the facts, in a letter. Indeed, the way we talk, and write letters, largely determines our success in life.

Now it is well for us to face at once the counter-statement that the most ignorant and uncultivated men often succeed best in business, and that misspelled, ungrammatical advertisements have brought in millions of dollars. It is an acknowledged fact that our business circulars and letters are far inferior in correctness to those of Great Britain; yet they are more effective in getting business. As far as spelling is concerned, we know that some of the masters of literature have been atrocious spellers and many suppose that when one can sin in such company, sinning is, as we might say, a “beauty spot”, a defect in which we can even take pride.

Let us examine the facts in the case more closely. First of all, language is no more than a medium; it is like air to the creatures of the land or water to fishes. If it is perfectly clear and pure, we do not notice it any more than we notice pure air when the sun is shining in a clear sky, or the taste of pure cool water when we drink a glass on a hot day. Unless the sun is shining, there is no brightness; unless the water is cool, there is no refreshment. The source of all our joy in the landscape, of the luxuriance of fertile nature, is the sun and not the air. Nature would be more prodigal in Mexico than in Greenland, even if the air in Mexico were as full of soot and smoke as the air of Pittsburg{h}, or loaded with the acid from a chemical factory. So it is with language. Language is merely a medium for thoughts, emotions, the intelligence of a finely wrought brain, and a good mind will make far more out of a bad medium than a poor mind will make out of the best. A great violinist will draw such music from the cheapest violin that the world is astonished. However is that any reason why the great violinist should choose to play on a poor violin; or should one say nothing of the smoke nuisance in Chicago because more light and heat penetrate its murky atmosphere than are to be found in cities only a few miles farther north? The truth is, we must regard the bad spelling nuisance, the bad grammar nuisance, the inártistic and rambling language nuisance, precisely as we would the smoke nuisance, the sewer-gas nuisance, the stock-yards' smell nuisance. Some dainty people prefer pure air and correct language; but we now recognize that purity is something more than an esthetic fad, that it is essential to our health and well-being, and therefore it becomes a matter of universal public interest, in language as well as in air.

There is a general belief that while bad air may be a positive evil influence, incorrect use of language is at most no more than a negative evil: that while it may be a good thing to be correct, no special harm is involved in being incorrect. Let us look into this point.

While language as the medium of thought may be compared to air as the medium of the sun's influence, in other respects it is like the skin of the body; a scurvy skin shows bad blood within, and a scurvy language shows inaccurate thought and a confused mind. And as a disease once fixed on the skin reacts and poisons the blood in turn as it has first been poisoned by the blood, so careless use of language if indulged reacts on the mind to make it permanently and increasingly careless, illogical, and inaccurate in its thinking.

The ordinary person will probably not believe this, because he conceives of good use of language as an accomplishment to be learned from books, a prim system of genteel manners to be put on when occasion demands, a sort of superficial education in the correct thing, or, as the boys would say, “the proper caper.” In this, however, he is mistaken. Language which expresses the thought with strict logical accuracy is correct language, and language which is sufficiently rich in its resources to express thought fully, in all its lights and bearings, is effective language. If the writer or speaker has a sufficient stock of words and forms at his disposal, he has only to use them in a strictly logical way and with sufficient fulness to be both correct and effective. If his mind can always be trusted to work accurately, he need not know a word of grammar except what he has imbibed unconsciously in getting his stock of words and expressions. Formal grammar is purely for critical purposes. It is no more than a standard measuring stick by which to try the work that has been done and find out if it is imperfect at any point. Of course constant correction of inaccuracies schools the mind and puts it on its guard so that it will be more careful the next time it attempts expression; but we cannot avoid the conclusion that if the mind lacks material, lacks knowledge of the essential elements of the language, it should go to the original source from which it got its first supply, namely to reading and hearing that which is acknowledged to be correct and sufficient―as the child learns from its mother. All the scholastic and analytic grammar in the world will not enrich the mind in language to any appreciable extent.

And now we may consider another objector, who says, “I have studied grammar for years and it has done me no good.” In view of what has just been said, we may easily concede that such is very likely to have been the case. A measuring stick is of little value unless you have something to measure. Language cannot be acquired, only tested, by analysis, and grammar is an analytic, not a constructive science.

We have compared bad use of language to a scurvy condition of the skin. To cure the skin we must doctor the blood; and to improve the language we should begin by teaching the mind to think. But that, you will say, is a large undertaking. Yes, but after all it is the most direct and effective way. All education should be in the nature of teaching the mind to think, and the teaching of language consists in teaching thinking in connection with word forms and expression through language. The unfortunate thing is that teachers of language have failed to go to the root of the trouble, and enormous effort has counted for nothing, and besides has led to discouragement.

The American people are noted for being hasty in all they do. Their manufactures are quickly made and cheap. They have not hitherto had time to secure that perfection in minute details which constitutes “quality.” The slow-going Europeans still excel in nearly all fine and high-grade forms of manufacture―fine pottery, fine carpets and rugs, fine cloth, fine bronze and other art wares. In our language, too, we are hasty, and therefore imperfect. Fine logical accuracy requires more time than we have had to give to it, and we read the newspapers, which are very poor models of language, instead of books, which should be far better. Our standard of business letters is very low. It is rare to find a letter of any length without one or more errors of language, to say nothing of frequent errors in spelling made by ignorant stenographers and not corrected by the business men who sign the letters.

But a change is coming over us. We have suddenly taken to reading books, and while they are not always the best books, they are better than newspapers. And now a young business man feels that it is distinctly to his advantage if he can dictate a thoroughly good letter to his superior or to a well informed customer. Good letters raise the tone of a business house, poor letters give the idea that it is a cheapjack concern. In social life, well written letters, like good conversational powers, bring friends and introduce the writer into higher circles. A command of language is the index of culture, and the uneducated man or woman who has become wealthy or has gained any special success is eager to put on this wedding garment of refinement. If he continues to regard a good command of language as a wedding garment, he will probably fail in his effort; but a few will discover the way to self-education and actively follow it to its conclusion adding to their first success this new achievement.

But we may even go farther. The right kind of language-teaching will also give us power, a kind of eloquence, a skill in the use of words, which will enable us to frame advertisements which will draw business, letters which will win customers, and to speak in that elegant and forceful way so effective in selling goods. When all advertisements are couched in very imperfect language, and all business letters are carelessly written, of course no one has an advantage over another, and a good knowledge and command of language would not be much of a recommendation to a business man who wants a good assistant. But when a few have come in and by their superior command of language gained a distinct advantage over rivals, then the power inherent in language comes into universal demand——the business standard is raised. There are many signs now that the business standard in the use of language is being distinctly raised. Already a stenographer who does not make errors commands a salary from 25 per cent. to 50 per cent. higher than the average, and is always in demand. Advertisement writers must have not only business instinct but language instinct, and knowledge of correct, as well as forceful, expression{.}

Granted, then, that we are all eager to better our knowledge of the English language, how shall we go about it?

There are literally thousands of published books devoted to the study and teaching of our language. In such a flood it would seem that we should have no difficulty in obtaining good guides for our study.

But what do we find? We find spelling-books filled with lists of words to be memorized; we find grammars filled with names and definitions of all the different forms which the language assumes; we find rhetorics filled with the names of every device ever employed to give effectiveness to language; we find books on literature filled with the names, dates of birth and death, and lists of works, of every writer any one ever heard of: and when we have learned all these names we are no better off than when we started. It is true that in many of these books we may find prefaces which say, “All other books err in clinging too closely to mere system, to names; but we will break away and give you the real thing.” But they don't do it; they can't afford to be too radical, and so they merely modify in a few details the same old system, the system of names. Yet it is a great point gained when the necessity for a change is realized.

How, then, shall we go about our mastery of the English language?

Modern science has provided us a universal method by which we may study and master any subject. As applied to an art, this method has proved highly successful in the case of music. It has not been applied to language because there was a well fixed method of language study in existence long before modern science was even dreamed of, and that ancient method has held on with wonderful tenacity. The great fault with it is that it was invented to apply to languages entirely different from our own. Latin grammar and Greek grammar were mechanical systems of endings by which the relationships of words were indicated. Of course the relationship of words was at bottom logical, but the mechanical form was the chief thing to be learned. Our language depends wholly (or very nearly so) on arrangement of words, and the key is the logical relationship. A man who knows all the forms of the Latin or Greek language can write it with substantial accuracy; but the man who would master the English language must go deeper, he must master the logic of sentence structure or word relations. We must begin our study at just the opposite end from the Latin or Greek; but our teachers of language have balked at a complete reversal of method, the power of custom and time has been too strong, and in the matter of grammar we are still the slaves of the ancient world. As for spelling, the irregularities of our language seem to have driven us to one sole method, memorizing: and to memorize every word in a language is an appalling task. Our rhetoric we have inherited from the middle ages, from scholiasts, refiners, and theological logicians, a race of men who got their living by inventing distinctions and splitting hairs. The fact is, prose has had a very low place in the literature of the world until within a century; all that was worth saying was said in poetry, which the rhetoricians were forced to leave severely alone, or in oratory, from which all their rules were derived; and since written prose language became a universal possession through the printing press and the newspaper we have been too busy to invent a new rhetoric.

Now, language is just as much a natural growth as trees or rocks or human bodies, and it can have no more irregularities, even in the matter of spelling, than these have. Science would laugh at the notion of memorizing every individual form of rock. It seeks the fundamental laws, it classifies and groups, and even if the number of classes or groups is large, still they have a limit and can be mastered. Here we have a solution of the spelling problem. In grammar we find seven fundamental logical relationships, and when we have mastered these and their chief modifications and combinations, we have the essence of grammar as truly as if we knew the name for every possible combination which our seven fundamental relationships might have. Since rhetoric is the art of appealing to the emotions and intelligence of our hearers, we need to know, not the names of all the different artifices which may be employed, but the nature and laws of emotion and intelligence as they may be reached through language; for if we know what we are hitting at, a little practice will enable us to hit accurately; whereas if we knew the name of every kind of blow, and yet were ignorant of the thing we were hitting at, namely the intelligence and emotion of our fellow man, we would be forever striking into the air,―striking cleverly perhaps, but ineffectively.

Having got our bearings, we find before us a purely practical problem, that of leading the student through the maze of a new science and teaching him the skill of an old art, exemplified in a long line of masters.

By way of preface we may say that the mastery of the English language (or any language) is almost the task of a lifetime. A few easy lessons will have no effect. We must form a habit of language study that will grow upon us as we grow older, and little by little, but never by leaps, shall we mount up to the full expression of all that is in us.

About the Author 

 

Alpheus Sherwin Cody (November 30, 1868 – April 4, 1959) was an American writer and entrepreneur who developed a long-running home-study course in speaking and writing and a signature series of advertisements asking “Do You Make These Mistakes in English?” A critic of traditional English education, Cody advocated colloquial style and grammar. His course, presented in a patented workbook format which he described as self-correcting, was purchased by over 150,000 students from its inception in 1918. He published essays, books and articles virtually nonstop from 1893 through 1950. In a book published in 1895, he gave the advice, "Write what you know—so go out and know something." Wikipedia

Buy Sherwin Cody Books at Amazon 

 

Also see:

• [v . 1] Word-Study 

  [v . 2] Grammar & Punctuation  

  [v . 3] Composition & Rhetoric 

  [v . 4] Constructive Rhetoric 

  [v . 5] Story Writing & Journalism 

  [v . 6] How To Read And What To Read

The PDF might take a minute to load. Or, click to download PDF.

If your Web browser is not configured to display PDF files. No worries, just click here to download the PDF file.