Adieu, Grammar Snobs!

Well, our time with Mrs. Casagrande has now come to a close, and I'd like to reflect a bit on what I liked about the book, and what I disliked.

I think she has a strong, confident, and relatable voice. She isn't pretentious, which is great and incredibly rare it seems with authors writing on grammar. She isn't a grammar expert, and she makes that blatantly clear. Instead, she is a normal person trying to understand grammar at a functional level. She doesn't dabble in frivolous points of contention (much), but rather just examines those things that affect most people in their writing, such as quote usage, confusing words, commas, semicolons, colons--you know, the bread and butter of everyday writing. I think she did a good job relating these rules in an enjoyable way.

That being said, her chapters seemed formulaic to me. I started to expect to read a funny, short story, and then jump into rules. She tried mixing it up by having short, one paragraph chapters, but I don't think it really worked. There was also, inevitably and ironically, a slight transformation in her into a grammar snob. Maybe she didn't turn into a ravenous, frothing snob like she makes an example of in her introduction, but there is no denying she imbibes some of those qualities as her book progresses. I think she never addressed just how easy it is for one to turn into a grammar snob. Often the people who try their very hardest to learn the rules, maybe out of insecurity in their own writing, are those people who go around correcting others. It's not necessary a capital offense like she portrays it as, and it can happen to anyone.

But yeah, I enjoyed her book.

2/18/08

I always use 'alright.' I had no idea that this was not a real word. Hell I've used it in academic papers...whoops! So yeah, that was nice to find out.

And that brings me to another point: We can use conjunctions, 'so', and 'because' to start out sentences. I've known this fact for a few years. I frequently start sentences with 'and' or 'but' out of spite for my high school teachers who told me not to do it. BUT yeah, that was affirming to read.

Oh, and the ending on chapter 25 was awesome. "Who the !@#!! are you?" Haha, that's great.

2/13/08

I enjoyed the conciseness of chapters 16-23. It's nice that she chops them up into small, quick reads. It makes it more enjoyable.

I snickered at the section about "irregardless," because I had a high school English teacher that would fail a paper that used it. She claimed that it was not a word, and it was one of her unforgivable infractions. Hah, talk about grammar snobbery...

Now that I'm about halfway through the book, I've started to get a better feel for its rhythm. I'm enjoying the way she teaches about grammar a tad more than I did at the start. I mentioned it felt formulaic for the first few chapters, but the latest ones have seemed to break out of the previous mold of funny story->lesson, funny story->lesson. And hell, I'm learning things every chapter. Granted, I know a lot of what she is teaching, but with respect to parentheses inside of parentheses, ellipses, and that/which, I've been able to pick up quite a bit. I had no idea, for example, that 'which' always needed to be partitioned off with a comma.

Cool...

scooter

Chapter 8

There were very few concrete rules, but here is what I decided on summarizing this chapter with

The Rule:

1) There are no rules.

The Exception:

a) I'm sure there are many exceptions. Like you pretty much need to write in an existing language for example.

The Example:

a)I dreamt about grammar last night. I dreamed about grammar last night. They're both correct.

Degree of Agreement:

Probably one star. There are lots of grammar snobs out there.

2/4/08

Having already blogged on chapter 8-14 in "Grammar Snobs" last week, I will do the most logical alternative: blog about chapters 8-14 again.

Last week I failed to mention Casagrande's letter at the opening of chapter eight. In this letter, she beseeches an old coworker (and romantic interest) to forgive her for an instance of grammar snobbery in her past. It seems that at one point during her teen years, June corrected a boy named "E.J." on his usage of "dreamed," informing that the right way to say it is "dreamt." June apologizes for this flash of grammar snobbery and says that in fact they were both right, further propelling her argument that there are very few instances with one "right" way to say things.

It's a good point, but it brings up the interesting question of who is a grammar snob? The short answer? Everyone.

I think that, in the endless struggle to polish our communication, sound intelligent, or simply convey meaningful information, it's alarmingly easy to become a grammar snob. It doesn't mean you're a bad person. I wouldn't consider myself a, say, permanent grammar snob, but there have been those times when I've arrogantly corrected the usage of my friends. I cringe now when friends defer to me for the right way to state something. I cringe mostly because I usually don't know and am embarrassed to admit it, but also in part because I hate to be reminded that I have touted myself at times as "knowing best." So yeah, I think it's important to acknowledge that grammar snobbery can happen to anyone, at anytime.

It's like George Lucas' concept of "the dark side." It's easy to fall to the dark side while searching for truth and justice, because it is a kind of power that helps you achieve an end. With grammar, we always try to perfect our own so we can be respected as writers and be great communicators, but if we aren't careful, we might just end up on the dark side that is grammar snobbery.