Firstly, the biggest difference that I noticed was the overall style of each book. In reading “Elements of Style,” it felt more like a ‘quick and dirty’ rule book, meant be kept in your pocket to refer to when you needed to look up a ‘rule.’ I fell asleep many times while attempting to read this book, grant it that it was sort of a grammar rule book, it possessed little more charm than the dictionary. Much of the book was of the form, “do this…, don’t do this…” The authors provided very short examples of the right and wrong ways to do things. Although this was focused, and therefore perhaps more clearly presented a way to write better, I feel it was lacked a larger view of communication.

I enjoyed reading Williams “Style, Toward Clarity and Grace,” which began with a ‘larger picture’ than Strunk and White. I felt like Williams focused more on answering the question, “how do I communicate better through writing?” whereas Strunk and White focused more on the question, “how do I write sentences correctly?”

It’s not that Williams didn’t eventually break down writing to getting the sentences correct, he did, but, he was not so zoomed into grammar to begin with. Williams provided longer examples of writing, passages, to convey and illustrate each point he made. I especially liked it when he bold-faced the topics in a passage to show how much easier it was to read when the topics of sentences where clear and placed toward the beginning of the sentences. Williams also had a better way of explaining the flow of sentences within a passage and how to arrange the flow of information from oldest to newest knowledge to the reader. Throughout the book he provided little charts of where a part of a sentence structure should exist and I found this more helpful than Strunk and White.

I feel there was greater variety and scope of Williams book over Strunk and White. I felt that Williams felt more comprehensive, even though there was more nebulous information that you couldn’t quite nail down into a short little rule, and short little example (ah, my redundant words, maybe I am doing this for effect Williams), the way Strunk and White made an greater effort to do. However, one good point that for Strunk and White was that I felt their rules were usually precise and easier to follow that Williams rules, perhaps this was because of the way the rules were presented.

1a) Disciplinary action will be taken as per applicable collective bargaining agreements and University policy up to and including termination of employment for habitual repeat offenders.

1b) The University will take disciplinary action against repeat offenders, as per collective bargaining agreements and University policy up to and including termination of employment.

2a) Because their lungs are not fully developed, young children are particularly susceptible to second-hand smoke.

2b) Young children are particularly susceptible to second-hand smoke because their lungs are not fully developed.

3a) Cigarette smoking approximately doubles a person’s risk for stroke.

3b) A person who smokes cigarettes approximately doubles their risk for stroke.

In each revision I tried to pay attention to what the character, action, subject and topic were. I moved the ‘characters’ to the front of the sentence, so that the reader does not have to find out who the ‘who’ is mid-way the sentence. Each sentence starts with a result or a cause that will occur because of what ‘happens’ at the end of the rest of the sentence, I tried to make the action-consequence relation more clear by writing it in a way that is easier for me to think about it, which is to put it in a sort of chorological or of, action-consequence I also moved important things to the end of the sentence, for instance in 1 and 3, the endings are “termination of employment” and “doubles their risk for stroke.”

I hope I’m going about the rearranging and modifying sentences correctly. Some of the examples didn’t provide me with a clear impression of which examples were ‘better’ than others, even though most of the examples were clear.

The dash— so abrupt and alarming—that I hesitate to ever use it. I feel like dashes should be reserved for fiction. I rarely use these – I am no Emily Dickenson.

Keeping related words together is one of the most important rules because it can cause reader confusion about what is trying to be said. This one drives me crazy when I have to read other people’s writing and there is some mix up in the describing of things: I saw this a lot in a creative writing class I took. However, I’m guilty of this too, and need to read my work with fresh eyes to identify when I accidently separate my related words (Rule 20, p. 28-31).

Nowadays, it seems very common to inject one’s own opinion into a piece of writing. Unless the piece is a formal paper, I like to hear opinion, so long as there is some kind of supporting evidence. Why are blogs, comments on news articles, editorials, and opinion pieces so popular if we shouldn’t use them? I guess it could be motivated purely by self absorption, but for me, I like to read that stuff. I feel like Rule 17(p. 79-80) is outdated for common writing.

One other note about S & W, I know that they provide incorrect examples to illustrate their point further; however, I’m always afraid to actually read these. I have a sense that if I see just as many bad examples as good examples to follow, I won’t remember which is which, or have a sense of what ‘looks’ correct.  Sometimes if you see a sentence and it looks a bit different, you can determine that the grammar is off, but what if you are used to seeing incorrect grammar, then it doesn’t jump out at you with vigor, surprise, and an eerie feeling.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1m71m-LBqFQ

I also am considering the Snickers commercials with Betty White or Franklin

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1Sv_z9jm8A

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLrsCnBvQFo

One element of the ‘figures of thought’ section that I didn’t like was the ‘reasoning by question and answer’ which, from the example, seemed incongruent, unnatural, and lacking of free-flowing conversation, like an interrogation. I understand what it’s trying to do, I just don’t want to read it. As the text said, not all forms are ‘elegant.’

The elements listed under ‘figures of thought’ I had always classified as ‘figures of speech” previously, but I have thought about it and think it is more suiting to call it a figure of thought since it has more to do with the idea that is being conveyed when we use personification, irony, or hyperbole to describe something rather than just a play on words like a pun (although sometimes puns can fall into this category too I think). So much more is communicated through one of these styles mentioned above, or say a metaphor, which paints a picture and describes more than what plain language would accomplish. Again, I agree with the bit about what Aristotle said, that a metaphor be beautiful or appeal to the senses, here it becomes a picture worth a thousand words, because it gives us a certain sense about what is described.

In the past I have only used pencil/pen and paper mostly for school work, and chalk and sidewalk when I was a kid, maybe some crayons and makers too.

As far as tools that I avoid using, I can’t think of anything in particular, except that sometimes I find email a little bit annoying just because of all the junk that gets though the spam blocker.