What do you think?
Rate this book
English Grammar Boot Camp
Grammar! For many of us, the word triggers memories of finger-wagging schoolteachers, and of wrestling with the ambiguous and complicated rules of using formal language. But what is grammar? In fact, it's the integral basis of how we speak and write.
As such, a refined awareness of grammar opens a world of possibilities for both your pleasure in the English language and your skill in using it, in both speech and the written word. As a foundation for writing, a detailed grounding in grammar and usage will hugely expand your resources for meaningful verbal expression, for navigating the subtleties of the language, and for achieving clarity of communication and stylistic power.
In English Grammar Boot Camp, linguist and popular Great Courses instructor Professor Curzan takes you on an enjoyable exploration of the essential aspects of English grammar. These 24 spirited and accessible lectures offer you a comprehensive core training - a linguistic "boot camp," by which we mean a thorough immersion in all of the key elements of English grammar and usage, in their most immediate, practical application.
Here you get a breadth of perspective and context you won't find elsewhere, leaving you with a more choices and rich verbal resources for your own use of the language. In discussing the different parts of speech, Professor Curzan directs your attention to how the element at hand evolved. Highlighting reflections from 18th- and 19th-century usage guides as well as from multiple modern commentators, she guides you in examining real-world language use in a variety of contexts, helping you develop a sophisticated frame of reference and a deep awareness of the idiosyncrasies of English.
This delightful and superbly insightful course offers you a unique opportunity to explore the linguistic riches of the English language, and to significantly deepen your mastery of grammar, usage, and style.
As such, a refined awareness of grammar opens a world of possibilities for both your pleasure in the English language and your skill in using it, in both speech and the written word. As a foundation for writing, a detailed grounding in grammar and usage will hugely expand your resources for meaningful verbal expression, for navigating the subtleties of the language, and for achieving clarity of communication and stylistic power.
In English Grammar Boot Camp, linguist and popular Great Courses instructor Professor Curzan takes you on an enjoyable exploration of the essential aspects of English grammar. These 24 spirited and accessible lectures offer you a comprehensive core training - a linguistic "boot camp," by which we mean a thorough immersion in all of the key elements of English grammar and usage, in their most immediate, practical application.
Here you get a breadth of perspective and context you won't find elsewhere, leaving you with a more choices and rich verbal resources for your own use of the language. In discussing the different parts of speech, Professor Curzan directs your attention to how the element at hand evolved. Highlighting reflections from 18th- and 19th-century usage guides as well as from multiple modern commentators, she guides you in examining real-world language use in a variety of contexts, helping you develop a sophisticated frame of reference and a deep awareness of the idiosyncrasies of English.
This delightful and superbly insightful course offers you a unique opportunity to explore the linguistic riches of the English language, and to significantly deepen your mastery of grammar, usage, and style.
Audible Audio
First published January 1, 2016
39 people are currently reading
314 people want to read
About the author
Anne Curzan
22 books80 followersAnne Curzan is the Geneva Smitherman Collegiate Professor of English Language and Literature, Linguistics, and Education and an Arthur F. Thurnau Professor at the University of Michigan, where she also currently serves as the dean of the College of Literature, Science, and the Arts.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 83 reviews
January 12, 2021
English Grammar Bootcamp is a 2016 Great Courses publication.
Dr. Anne Curzan is a member of the American Heritage Dictionary Usage Panel and is a professor at the University of Michigan.
My parents, who are in their eighties, love to keep their minds sharp by taking classes from Great Courses. They ranted and raved about this course so often, I decided to see what all the fuss was about.
The first thing I need to mention is that the title might be a little misleading. This is not a tough, ‘Grammar Police’ exercise course. In fact, Dr. Curzan appears to be a bit touchy about such labels.
It is much more relaxed than the title suggests, and anyone, no matter what your level of grammar knowledge or skill might be, can learn from this course.
The most fascinating part of the course is the way the English language has evolved and continues to evolve. The difference in the way we speak and the way we write, is also a common thread, which was especially helpful to me.
I would never in a million years consider myself knowledgeable enough to call myself a grammar geek, and yes, there have been times when I felt a bit resentful of those who go about correcting my grammar; however, I still felt right at home in this grammar geek hangout.
I had fun discussing the class with my parents, who then presented me with an American Heritage Dictionary for Christmas. It weighs about ten pounds and I LOVE it. Only a grammar geek would enjoy reading a dictionary. So, if there is hope for me, there is hope for anyone else who has struggled with grammar and punctuation.
I recommend this course to anyone who thinks they are an aficionado, even if it is just to brush up on your grammar. But, this course might also help you to relax a little, too, which I assure you, is not a bad thing. 😁😁
I also recommend it to those who are not grammar geeks because the course proves how fun and interesting English grammar can be, and points out many inconsistencies, perhaps offering up just a little vindication.
Overall, I enjoyed watching these short lessons when I had the chance. They are only thirty minute lectures, so it's easy to find time for them.
Some classes I fast-forwarded through- but not many. In most cases, I watched the lectures two or three times to digest some of the more difficult rules or punctuation debates.
I often found Dr. Anne to be amusing and her enthusiasm for English Grammar is contagious.
4.5 stars
*The version I used was from a Great Courses subscription- via Roku. The classes are available on audible too, I think. Some libraries also have some of the Great Courses lectures, and of course you can purchase the courses directly from GC.
Dr. Anne Curzan is a member of the American Heritage Dictionary Usage Panel and is a professor at the University of Michigan.
My parents, who are in their eighties, love to keep their minds sharp by taking classes from Great Courses. They ranted and raved about this course so often, I decided to see what all the fuss was about.
The first thing I need to mention is that the title might be a little misleading. This is not a tough, ‘Grammar Police’ exercise course. In fact, Dr. Curzan appears to be a bit touchy about such labels.
It is much more relaxed than the title suggests, and anyone, no matter what your level of grammar knowledge or skill might be, can learn from this course.
The most fascinating part of the course is the way the English language has evolved and continues to evolve. The difference in the way we speak and the way we write, is also a common thread, which was especially helpful to me.
I would never in a million years consider myself knowledgeable enough to call myself a grammar geek, and yes, there have been times when I felt a bit resentful of those who go about correcting my grammar; however, I still felt right at home in this grammar geek hangout.
I had fun discussing the class with my parents, who then presented me with an American Heritage Dictionary for Christmas. It weighs about ten pounds and I LOVE it. Only a grammar geek would enjoy reading a dictionary. So, if there is hope for me, there is hope for anyone else who has struggled with grammar and punctuation.
I recommend this course to anyone who thinks they are an aficionado, even if it is just to brush up on your grammar. But, this course might also help you to relax a little, too, which I assure you, is not a bad thing. 😁😁
I also recommend it to those who are not grammar geeks because the course proves how fun and interesting English grammar can be, and points out many inconsistencies, perhaps offering up just a little vindication.
Overall, I enjoyed watching these short lessons when I had the chance. They are only thirty minute lectures, so it's easy to find time for them.
Some classes I fast-forwarded through- but not many. In most cases, I watched the lectures two or three times to digest some of the more difficult rules or punctuation debates.
I often found Dr. Anne to be amusing and her enthusiasm for English Grammar is contagious.
4.5 stars
*The version I used was from a Great Courses subscription- via Roku. The classes are available on audible too, I think. Some libraries also have some of the Great Courses lectures, and of course you can purchase the courses directly from GC.
September 17, 2017
Many years ago, I was having a casual (probably drunken) conversation with a college friend, and she corrected my (spoken) grammar.
Cue - sound of needle dragging across vinyl.
OH NO YOU DITENT!!!!
A rich (doubtlessly insufferable) conversation (the kind you only have in college) ensued.
I argued that the English language is (and always has been) evolving with use, and that usage should dictate standards, as opposed to standardization dictating what we (the people) can and cannot say and write.
YEAH!!!!
I think I cited Shakespeare's many innovative contributions to contemporary (now standard) English, that people like her would have scoffed at and resisted blah, blah, blah.
She pushed back, arguing that she couldn't help noticing (and correcting) my atrocious crimes against the queens tongue, and further argued that her mother (an English teacher) would light me up if I spoke like that in her presence.
We agreed to disagree. But something about the conversation just bothered me, and stuck with me all these years later.
I felt so judged, so invalidated, so misunderstood.
I'm not proud of that.
But there you go.
Call it fragile masculinity if you will.
All these years later, I'm finally understanding that the (prescriptive v descriptive) debate we were having was (and still is) playing out between Linguistics and English departments across the land.
Wild and crazy linguists argue that use should dictate standards, and stodgy grammarians argue that standards should dictate use.
As is the case with most either/or debates, the answer is both/and.
The English (as it used to be refered to) is (and always has been) evolving with use, and standardization is an important part of that process.
This course is devoted to exploring and clarifying general and specific issues in the evolution and standardization of formal and informal written and spoken (and now texted, e-mailed and tweeted) English.
The instructor, Anne Curzan is excellent, if awkward at times (as is so often the case with authentically nerdy experts).
Her apparent social anxiety may (MAY) be a contributing factor to one of my main points of contention with the course.
Time and time again, Curzan orients the course toward the objective of avoiding being negatively judged by a learned reader.
That's a fine goal. I understand. You'd hardly know it, but I'm motivated to not look like a total dumbass in my writing.
Considering the real world consequences of a poorly turned fraise, or poorly punctuated, misspelled or otherwise fucked up sentence.
But what about the other agenda of writing? You know, the whole effective communication of ideas thing?
Curzan seems way less concerned with that whole business. And I think that's unfortunate.
In Elements of Style, Steven Pinker asserts that the writers implicit objective is "to encode a web of ideas, into a string of words, using a tree of phrases."
Pinker continues, that "aspiring wordsmiths would do well to cultivate this awareness".
I'm with Steve on this one (although again, you'd hardly know it).
One of the more interesting aspects of Curzan's research has to do with the MS Word grammar correction function; its origins (i.e. where the fuck did they get their grammar rules from-because there isn't actually one authoritative source for the rules of grammar) and it's potentially immense impact on written English.
For AI paranoia people, or fans of Ray Kurzweil, this may be a 'singularity' moment that is so under the radar that (almost) no one has noticed.
Curzan also researches the emergent grammar (including punctuation trends) of e-mail, texting, FB, Twitter etc.
in short; there are definitely emergent grammar conventions in these mediums.
NEAT!!!!
This course is fascinating.
It has left me way more curious about the subject.
I learned a lot.
Mission accomplished.
Cue - image of George W. Bush (a boss grammarian if ever there was one) in a flight suit on the deck of the the USS Abraham Lincoln.
WARNING: this course is not a primer on basic English grammar (as the title may reasonably lead you to believe).
It's actually pretty technical and you may feel lost in parts of it if you're not already fairly well familiar with the argot of the field.
BTW: I gave it four stars (instead of five) because Steven Pinker.
That's an inside joke you probably won't understand unless you listen to the course, and even then you sill probably won't find it funny.
Cue - sound of needle dragging across vinyl.
OH NO YOU DITENT!!!!
A rich (doubtlessly insufferable) conversation (the kind you only have in college) ensued.
I argued that the English language is (and always has been) evolving with use, and that usage should dictate standards, as opposed to standardization dictating what we (the people) can and cannot say and write.
YEAH!!!!
I think I cited Shakespeare's many innovative contributions to contemporary (now standard) English, that people like her would have scoffed at and resisted blah, blah, blah.
She pushed back, arguing that she couldn't help noticing (and correcting) my atrocious crimes against the queens tongue, and further argued that her mother (an English teacher) would light me up if I spoke like that in her presence.
We agreed to disagree. But something about the conversation just bothered me, and stuck with me all these years later.
I felt so judged, so invalidated, so misunderstood.
I'm not proud of that.
But there you go.
Call it fragile masculinity if you will.
All these years later, I'm finally understanding that the (prescriptive v descriptive) debate we were having was (and still is) playing out between Linguistics and English departments across the land.
Wild and crazy linguists argue that use should dictate standards, and stodgy grammarians argue that standards should dictate use.
As is the case with most either/or debates, the answer is both/and.
The English (as it used to be refered to) is (and always has been) evolving with use, and standardization is an important part of that process.
This course is devoted to exploring and clarifying general and specific issues in the evolution and standardization of formal and informal written and spoken (and now texted, e-mailed and tweeted) English.
The instructor, Anne Curzan is excellent, if awkward at times (as is so often the case with authentically nerdy experts).
Her apparent social anxiety may (MAY) be a contributing factor to one of my main points of contention with the course.
Time and time again, Curzan orients the course toward the objective of avoiding being negatively judged by a learned reader.
That's a fine goal. I understand. You'd hardly know it, but I'm motivated to not look like a total dumbass in my writing.
Considering the real world consequences of a poorly turned fraise, or poorly punctuated, misspelled or otherwise fucked up sentence.
But what about the other agenda of writing? You know, the whole effective communication of ideas thing?
Curzan seems way less concerned with that whole business. And I think that's unfortunate.
In Elements of Style, Steven Pinker asserts that the writers implicit objective is "to encode a web of ideas, into a string of words, using a tree of phrases."
Pinker continues, that "aspiring wordsmiths would do well to cultivate this awareness".
I'm with Steve on this one (although again, you'd hardly know it).
One of the more interesting aspects of Curzan's research has to do with the MS Word grammar correction function; its origins (i.e. where the fuck did they get their grammar rules from-because there isn't actually one authoritative source for the rules of grammar) and it's potentially immense impact on written English.
For AI paranoia people, or fans of Ray Kurzweil, this may be a 'singularity' moment that is so under the radar that (almost) no one has noticed.
Curzan also researches the emergent grammar (including punctuation trends) of e-mail, texting, FB, Twitter etc.
in short; there are definitely emergent grammar conventions in these mediums.
NEAT!!!!
This course is fascinating.
It has left me way more curious about the subject.
I learned a lot.
Mission accomplished.
Cue - image of George W. Bush (a boss grammarian if ever there was one) in a flight suit on the deck of the the USS Abraham Lincoln.
WARNING: this course is not a primer on basic English grammar (as the title may reasonably lead you to believe).
It's actually pretty technical and you may feel lost in parts of it if you're not already fairly well familiar with the argot of the field.
BTW: I gave it four stars (instead of five) because Steven Pinker.
That's an inside joke you probably won't understand unless you listen to the course, and even then you sill probably won't find it funny.
May 6, 2017
Not a Boot Camp - More Like A Shoe Shine
Professor Anne Curzan is knowledgeable about grammar, but her lectures belie the course title. The lectures are cursory and repetitive. Often she covers trends in grammar and not the basics.
If you are looking for something to learn grammar skills from the ground up, this course is not for you. If you are already pretty good at grammar, English is not your first language, and you're looking for a bit of polish, this course might be what you need.
Even if you fit the profile above, I would caution you that Anne teaches this course at a glacial speed. One could decide to listen faster than regular speed, but for the odd time when she says something fundamental to grammar, you'll have to rewind. Anne is also repetitive. In a live classroom setting, repetition is perhaps a good teaching technique, but when a listener can rewind or listen over and over again as many times as they want, it's very annoying.
If a listener were to cut out the prolonged pauses, the repetition, and the tangents, you might end up with a course only one-fifth as long as the original.
Professor Anne Curzan is knowledgeable about grammar, but her lectures belie the course title. The lectures are cursory and repetitive. Often she covers trends in grammar and not the basics.
If you are looking for something to learn grammar skills from the ground up, this course is not for you. If you are already pretty good at grammar, English is not your first language, and you're looking for a bit of polish, this course might be what you need.
Even if you fit the profile above, I would caution you that Anne teaches this course at a glacial speed. One could decide to listen faster than regular speed, but for the odd time when she says something fundamental to grammar, you'll have to rewind. Anne is also repetitive. In a live classroom setting, repetition is perhaps a good teaching technique, but when a listener can rewind or listen over and over again as many times as they want, it's very annoying.
If a listener were to cut out the prolonged pauses, the repetition, and the tangents, you might end up with a course only one-fifth as long as the original.
December 26, 2016
Enjoyable but not terribly exciting. I'm a huge grammar geek, but I didn't find these lectures particularly compelling. Curzan is well-versed and committed to giving an honest picture of where English grammar is. I did appreciate her coverage of current issues and her attempt to be non-biased about contemporary changes. However, this is not my favorite book or course on English grammar or linguistics.
August 9, 2017
English is truly the illegitimate bastard child of Latin and Germanic. It often doesn't make any sense. This had some interesting content but I had to fast forward through a couple particularly boring lectures. Grammar geeks should dig this.
February 5, 2020
The Great Courses Series on Audible: they are PHENOMENAL. And if you have an audible account, they’re just a credit like any other book. 12.5 straight hours of fascinating lecture about grammar—I seriously felt my brain getting smarter! Anne Curzan is brilliant in her study of etymology and the history of language.
.
My biggest takeaway: language usage is fluid! There’s not a set book of rules people sat down and decided on hundreds of years ago. There are usage guides that offer suggestions, but what is acceptable and unacceptable in grammar shifts and change just as the way we speak shifts and changes.
.
Also: we are pretty smart to understand English! It is governed by so many unwritten rules, nearly all of which are broken in some instances—yet we can intuitively string words together, and we just _know_ when something is wrong even if we don’t know _why_. This audiobook went through hundreds of the examples of “why,” but with enough humor and common sense that it didn’t feel like your high school grammar teacher breathing down your throat. I highly recommend it!
.
My biggest takeaway: language usage is fluid! There’s not a set book of rules people sat down and decided on hundreds of years ago. There are usage guides that offer suggestions, but what is acceptable and unacceptable in grammar shifts and change just as the way we speak shifts and changes.
.
Also: we are pretty smart to understand English! It is governed by so many unwritten rules, nearly all of which are broken in some instances—yet we can intuitively string words together, and we just _know_ when something is wrong even if we don’t know _why_. This audiobook went through hundreds of the examples of “why,” but with enough humor and common sense that it didn’t feel like your high school grammar teacher breathing down your throat. I highly recommend it!
July 21, 2022
The English Grammar Boot Camp is a series of 24 lectures for total language nerds. Each lecture focuses on a specific grammatical structure (like noun phrases, prepositions, or punctuation) and describes several usage issues.
The author Anne Curzan is both an English professor and a linguist. As a result she manages to include both the prescrictive (how should you use the language) and the descriptive perspective (how is the language actually used). As a result I became more aware of several usage rules in Standard American English while (hopefully) also becoming more lenient with other people and their language usage.
This book's target audience is mainly native English college students who want to become a writer or an editor. I am neither of those but still had an fabulous time listening to this book.
The author Anne Curzan is both an English professor and a linguist. As a result she manages to include both the prescrictive (how should you use the language) and the descriptive perspective (how is the language actually used). As a result I became more aware of several usage rules in Standard American English while (hopefully) also becoming more lenient with other people and their language usage.
This book's target audience is mainly native English college students who want to become a writer or an editor. I am neither of those but still had an fabulous time listening to this book.
June 20, 2018
I enjoyed this series of lectures and it has, I think, left me more flexible and open-minded about grammar, although I did end it thinking that maybe I wasn't quite so obsessed with the topic as I'd thought (i.e. I enjoyed this but not enough to consider doing a whole degree in it!)
November 3, 2017
Interesting for the history and musings on the changeable nature of our language.
May 29, 2017
As a writing coach who aims to do this sort of clarity, I admire the balanced style-- neither pedantic nor overly loose. The lecturer has a talent for explaining challenging concepts with charm. I was not expecting to enjoy this as much as I did!
January 18, 2019
I can honestly say that I sucked at gammer. I was never properly taught grammar in school, but this book greatly helped me.
April 24, 2017
Watch out, everyone - Stanton just listened to another of the Great Courses about grammar!
This was pretty interesting; I would not have minded sitting through the actual college course (and I love the idea behind these audiobooks, by the way - a half hour a day, listening to lectures, and you pretty much have an entire college course in your head).
The thing about knowing your grammar (as I feel I do) and listening to a course like this, though, is that they ask you to unlearn some of what you are pretty sure you know. Like I know that a plural pronoun needs a plural antecedent, but this course provides backstory to this idea and challenges it using reputable texts. I know this idea of mine is losing traction and that some style guides (and Grammar Girl, whom I admire) now accept "they" as a non-specific singular third-person pronoun, but such loose rules kind of bother me.
That's not Professor Curzan's fault, by the way, and I appreciate the work she's done putting this together. I guess the one thing that is sticking in my craw is that things I would mark on a college essay (such as zero-case possessives such as "my mom house") are referred to as grammatical Pet Peeves.
Still, I like things that open my head, so five for five from me!
This was pretty interesting; I would not have minded sitting through the actual college course (and I love the idea behind these audiobooks, by the way - a half hour a day, listening to lectures, and you pretty much have an entire college course in your head).
The thing about knowing your grammar (as I feel I do) and listening to a course like this, though, is that they ask you to unlearn some of what you are pretty sure you know. Like I know that a plural pronoun needs a plural antecedent, but this course provides backstory to this idea and challenges it using reputable texts. I know this idea of mine is losing traction and that some style guides (and Grammar Girl, whom I admire) now accept "they" as a non-specific singular third-person pronoun, but such loose rules kind of bother me.
That's not Professor Curzan's fault, by the way, and I appreciate the work she's done putting this together. I guess the one thing that is sticking in my craw is that things I would mark on a college essay (such as zero-case possessives such as "my mom house") are referred to as grammatical Pet Peeves.
Still, I like things that open my head, so five for five from me!
April 3, 2017
I think I enjoyed the context and historical views in this series moreso than the actual grammar. That's largely due to the discovery that grammar is something I need to sit down and work on and I find it hard to learn a rule from hearing a couple of examples. That's more a personal learning issue than a criticism of the series. I think it works well in making me aware of things I was previously unaware of and serves as a springboard for buying some reference books. It has at least made me think about my writing more carefully and possibly made me a little self-conscious until I practice and fully grasp the material. The lecturer does a good job of reassuring the listener that some aspects of grammar are fluid and there's never been a long period in the history of English where the grammar has been fixed. While I can benefit from commitiing the lessons to memory, I think the aspect I enjoyed the most was the linguistic aspect.
September 7, 2017
A disappointing series. Not systematic, not rigorous, nothing like "boot camp." Much more of a "safe space" tone. The lecturer tends toward the descriptive rather than the prescriptive side, which is a legitimate option for grammarians - but not for drill sergeants. She likes to talks about herself or her own lecture script, which is often irrelevant and always distracting.
Still, I'm glad I finished. Her historical research proves the relative nature of grammatical rules. She has a few memorable one-liners: "A preposition is everything a squirrel can do to a tree" (we are told this is mostly true). Some of her digital resources sound interesting. The final few lectures include practical advice on writing (the known-new templates) and useful names for words outside the familiar parts of speech: discourse markers, existential pronouns, and quotative "like."
Still, I'm glad I finished. Her historical research proves the relative nature of grammatical rules. She has a few memorable one-liners: "A preposition is everything a squirrel can do to a tree" (we are told this is mostly true). Some of her digital resources sound interesting. The final few lectures include practical advice on writing (the known-new templates) and useful names for words outside the familiar parts of speech: discourse markers, existential pronouns, and quotative "like."
July 30, 2018
I enjoyed this audio book. The instructor was good and had a good sense of humor, which I appreciated. I was very interested to see that some of the things that I had questions on (i.e., usage of who, whom, or that/who when referring to a person) were issues shared by many others. I was surprised to learn that there was so much division between what is/is not considered acceptable in formal writing, even among the experts. Many times, the advice was to do what looks/feels right to you, or the more lawyerly advice of "it depends." She also explained how some usage came into existence, as well as described how language usage shifts over the years. Many of the things that we consider to be hard and fast grammar rules actually derive from one person's preference that happened to be published at a certain time. One thing I found fascinating was when she talked about the influence of the Microsoft grammar checker, and how if that software marks something as wrong [even if it is not wrong], it can have an impact on our language. When she was describing some of the definitions of some parts of speech, or rules that apply in some situations but not others, I realized that I never actually learned a lot of this formally, but rather, absorbed it through reading and conversations. I can definitely see why English can be difficult to learn as a second language, with all of the nuances.
August 1, 2019
As a grammar course for native speaker, this audio book doesn't talk much about basic grammar rules, but focus on more interesting topics, like prescriptive vs descriptive grammar rules, capitalization issues, loss of inflections, etc. It also debunks some myths, about split infinitive, stranded prepositions, not start a sentence with and, etc. You can learn tons of terminologies, origins and histories of some English grammar rules, and some strange aspects of the language. But above all, you learn to be more humble, open-minded, and not to judge other people's grammar "mistake" too hastily, as it can be just a preference.
If you are not sure about one of these questions below, you may find the book useful.
1. Is split infinitive acceptable?
2. Past participle of prove is proved or proven?
3. What is the plural of this word: heir apparent?
4. Is double negative bad? How about double possessive?
5. Why more fun instead of funner?
6. 3 items or less? 3 items or fewer?
7. Data is singular or plural?
8. It is me? It is I?
9. Feel bad? Feel badly?
10. What is the meaning of these terminologies: infinitive, gerund, conjunction, auxiliary, inflection, interrogative, Oxford comma, dangling participles, stranded preposition, declension, nominative?
etc
If you are not sure about one of these questions below, you may find the book useful.
1. Is split infinitive acceptable?
2. Past participle of prove is proved or proven?
3. What is the plural of this word: heir apparent?
4. Is double negative bad? How about double possessive?
5. Why more fun instead of funner?
6. 3 items or less? 3 items or fewer?
7. Data is singular or plural?
8. It is me? It is I?
9. Feel bad? Feel badly?
10. What is the meaning of these terminologies: infinitive, gerund, conjunction, auxiliary, inflection, interrogative, Oxford comma, dangling participles, stranded preposition, declension, nominative?
etc
April 5, 2019
This book was much different from what I expected. I expected a review of basic grammar for people who have not studied grammar since high school and wanted to improve their grammar. Though there was some of that, overall I felt like it was more geared to writers, editors, and English teachers. I still enjoyed hearing about a lot of the history of grammar and learned a lot. She takes a very subjective approach to grammar. Most of the course is spent discussing all the exceptions. I would have preferred focusing on the rules rather than the exceptions. She also spent a little too much time trying to make us feel good about what we already know. That time could have been better spent just teaching me what I don't know. Having said that, I did learn a lot and I did enjoy hearing about all of the different debates between editors and grammar teachers today.
May 24, 2020
This course is intended mainly for English native speakers and focuses on formal writing, even though other more colloquial uses are discussed as well. It was interesting to compare descriptive approach to English language with prescriptive one used for my mother tongue (and the only approach taught in schools here).
July 24, 2018
Took a dry topic and made it decently interesting while also treating the English language with the flexibility it deserves. The approach of viewing language not as a strict grammarian, but rather through the lens of linguistics is a good approach.
June 7, 2017
What's not to like? It is a 12 hour romp through grammar and the history of language.
November 6, 2020
I finally finished this! Fun Fact: the exclamation point is one of the least used punctuation marks. This was a nice refresher.
November 22, 2018
This was the first Audible title that I have listened to twice. I finished it and started it over a minute later. I wish I had listened to this in the 7th Grade. I wish I had an instructor that was capable of such complete explanations of the language and usage. Instructors always went straight to the rules, never mentioning the realities of grammar and language history. I always thought myself ignorant of so many parts of grammar. After listening to Anne Curzan explain the differences between conversational and formal written grammar and usage I am a new person!
I correct reports almost daily at work. I was doing it correctly, most of the time. Now I can explain to the authors what my motivation is for making changes. Anne Curzan details why certain usage sounded wrong to me. She explains why my English teachers in school seemed to never agree on what to correct on my papers.
I will listen to this again. I purchased an American Heritage Dictionary. I have explored the online databases Anne Curzan introduces in her lectures. Oh how I wish I could sit with her for a day with the reports from work so we could discuss what is happening in the realm of writing that I deal with. I am saving this for my daughter, next year I am going to make it mandatory listening!
I correct reports almost daily at work. I was doing it correctly, most of the time. Now I can explain to the authors what my motivation is for making changes. Anne Curzan details why certain usage sounded wrong to me. She explains why my English teachers in school seemed to never agree on what to correct on my papers.
I will listen to this again. I purchased an American Heritage Dictionary. I have explored the online databases Anne Curzan introduces in her lectures. Oh how I wish I could sit with her for a day with the reports from work so we could discuss what is happening in the realm of writing that I deal with. I am saving this for my daughter, next year I am going to make it mandatory listening!
April 13, 2018
This is a set of 24 lectures by Anne Curzan, a grammarian with the University of Michigan. Each lecture is about 30-35 minutes. I watched the video version, which is probably more useful than the audio-only version as the viewer can read along with the numerous examples used. The presentation is not quite as polished as some of The Great Courses I've seen. I think the blame for some of that can be inadequate camera cues. Curzan moves before the camera angle swtich, which can be distracting (and humorous). The lecturer seems a little awkward and stiff, but I prefer this over a couple of the courses I've watched where the presenter was haughty or tried to be too folksy.
The description of this course might lead one to believe this is a grammar review. It does include grammar, but it is really more a review of prescriptive versus descriptive language and the main differences between grammatical/acceptable and standard/non-standard. Curzan tends to fall on the more permissive side of the prescriptive/descriptive fence, insisting that the changing nature of language and the fact that spoken language tends to be the driving force of written language makes rules more fluid than many of the self-appointed grammar police might want to admit. While I can't really argue that she's wrong about that (she's not, much as I hate to admit it), my stance tends to be summed up more by the admonishment used by many parents, which is "Just because all your friends appear to be doing it doesn't mean you have to stoop to their level." Yes, language undergoes constant change, but we still need some guidelines that amount to more than "here's a suggestion" or "if it's in this published article or book, so it must be acceptable." That assumes published work is edited. First, I've found grammar and usage errors in so many published books in recent years that it's become a bit of a drinking game. Second, I know for a fact that newspapers at the last three places I lived did not employ a single copy editor or proofreader. Reporters were expected to edit their own work. Perhaps some people who see the errors that make it to print recognize they are errors, but it is equally likely some people think that it is correct and so replicate the errors in their own writing or speech.
Side note: The one trend I wish Curzan had addressed is one that sets my teeth completely on edge, which is "way" as an intensifier. Way more. Way better. Way longer. Perhaps the worst use I've heard of this includes my other pet peeve: way awesome. Yeah. Way to sound like a verbally-challenged five year old. The problem is that I know this use of "way" can be traced back further than I want to admit, so I'm not going to win my battle against it. What I'd like to know, however, is why the use of it has exploded in the last year or two.
The description of this course might lead one to believe this is a grammar review. It does include grammar, but it is really more a review of prescriptive versus descriptive language and the main differences between grammatical/acceptable and standard/non-standard. Curzan tends to fall on the more permissive side of the prescriptive/descriptive fence, insisting that the changing nature of language and the fact that spoken language tends to be the driving force of written language makes rules more fluid than many of the self-appointed grammar police might want to admit. While I can't really argue that she's wrong about that (she's not, much as I hate to admit it), my stance tends to be summed up more by the admonishment used by many parents, which is "Just because all your friends appear to be doing it doesn't mean you have to stoop to their level." Yes, language undergoes constant change, but we still need some guidelines that amount to more than "here's a suggestion" or "if it's in this published article or book, so it must be acceptable." That assumes published work is edited. First, I've found grammar and usage errors in so many published books in recent years that it's become a bit of a drinking game. Second, I know for a fact that newspapers at the last three places I lived did not employ a single copy editor or proofreader. Reporters were expected to edit their own work. Perhaps some people who see the errors that make it to print recognize they are errors, but it is equally likely some people think that it is correct and so replicate the errors in their own writing or speech.
Side note: The one trend I wish Curzan had addressed is one that sets my teeth completely on edge, which is "way" as an intensifier. Way more. Way better. Way longer. Perhaps the worst use I've heard of this includes my other pet peeve: way awesome. Yeah. Way to sound like a verbally-challenged five year old. The problem is that I know this use of "way" can be traced back further than I want to admit, so I'm not going to win my battle against it. What I'd like to know, however, is why the use of it has exploded in the last year or two.
August 14, 2020
Very dry!
July 4, 2020
I try to do an English Grammar review periodically. I'm by no means part of the grammar guard and I tromp all over the English language every time I open my mouth. But I do try to respect the important rules and keep up with what's going on in the world.
This audio series includes 12 1/2 hours of 24 separate lectures on English grammar. And I'm sure I just broke a rule with that last sentence. Anne Curzan is an intelligent, informed and talented teacher and speaker. Did I just break another rule? Anyway, she is at the top of the list of my favorite "Great Courses" lecturers based solely on her delivery, respect for her audience and sound of her voice..
There is plenty to learn/review. And the overall message reiterated in the 24th and final lecture is that there ARE some rules for good grammar, but don't be a NAZI about it. Grammar is fluid. What was a "rule" 100 years ago may not be a rule, today. Curzan discusses a number of examples of grammar that is in transition (or is it "are in transtion"??). She frequently admits some of her own hangups and then explains why she's trying not to be a hag about it.
Admittedly, most people would find this stuff boring and would rather not spend 12 and a half hours listening. But I listened to one lecture a day over a 24 day period and found doing so to be a nice break from the drama taking place in June and early July of 2020.
In case you are wondering, I deduct two stars for the following reasons that you may or may not find legit. But this is my review, so you'll have to just get over it:
1. At times, it felt like we were discussing things just to make this last 12 and 1/2 hours. Eight hours would have been plenty.
2. Relativity. Yes, grammar is fluid but when we're being told to take Ebonics seriously and to refer to ghetto-gutturals as "African American English" (LOL), you have GOT to be kidding me. Talk about RACISM. Liberals like Ann (based on things she said in her lectures) really need to confess their sin of racism. They believe blacks are an inferior race that must be treated like they are mentally retarded, incapable and "unevolved" as a race. Nope. Ebonics is black-trash talk, just like white trash who try to talk like black trash is just as ignorant and unacceptable.
All lives matter. Including blacks who talk in "African American English". They matter enough to be told that they need to learn the English language and to use it properly.
This audio series includes 12 1/2 hours of 24 separate lectures on English grammar. And I'm sure I just broke a rule with that last sentence. Anne Curzan is an intelligent, informed and talented teacher and speaker. Did I just break another rule? Anyway, she is at the top of the list of my favorite "Great Courses" lecturers based solely on her delivery, respect for her audience and sound of her voice..
There is plenty to learn/review. And the overall message reiterated in the 24th and final lecture is that there ARE some rules for good grammar, but don't be a NAZI about it. Grammar is fluid. What was a "rule" 100 years ago may not be a rule, today. Curzan discusses a number of examples of grammar that is in transition (or is it "are in transtion"??). She frequently admits some of her own hangups and then explains why she's trying not to be a hag about it.
Admittedly, most people would find this stuff boring and would rather not spend 12 and a half hours listening. But I listened to one lecture a day over a 24 day period and found doing so to be a nice break from the drama taking place in June and early July of 2020.
In case you are wondering, I deduct two stars for the following reasons that you may or may not find legit. But this is my review, so you'll have to just get over it:
1. At times, it felt like we were discussing things just to make this last 12 and 1/2 hours. Eight hours would have been plenty.
2. Relativity. Yes, grammar is fluid but when we're being told to take Ebonics seriously and to refer to ghetto-gutturals as "African American English" (LOL), you have GOT to be kidding me. Talk about RACISM. Liberals like Ann (based on things she said in her lectures) really need to confess their sin of racism. They believe blacks are an inferior race that must be treated like they are mentally retarded, incapable and "unevolved" as a race. Nope. Ebonics is black-trash talk, just like white trash who try to talk like black trash is just as ignorant and unacceptable.
All lives matter. Including blacks who talk in "African American English". They matter enough to be told that they need to learn the English language and to use it properly.
December 7, 2019
The book is not what the title suggests. First, it is not for beginners. It does not teach English grammar systematically; instead, it talks about (somewhat random) grammar issues aiming at English speakers who are already familiar with basic grammatical terms. Second, it is not an intense, compressed, and practical training course, but a relaxed and entertaining conversation. The book covers many grammatical topics, including usage of specific words and phrases and discussion about well-known usage rules.
The main message is that grammar rules are not carved in stone. Many rules change over time; others depend on locale and context (e.g., formal vs. informal writing). The author draws support from usage statistics such as the Corpus of Contemporary American English, expert opinions such as the American Heritage Dictionary Usage Panel, and quotes from edited writings. Another interesting fact is that many “unorthodox” usages are not modern deviations from established rules. They are actually historical remanences.
On the other hand, the evolution of English is not always towards simplification and uniformity. For example, some verbs used to have a regular past tense. However, they take on irregular forms over time because they are similar to other irregular verbs.
The value of the books is not specific knowledge. Instead, it brings a new perspective to grammar - what the author calls the descriptive approach. Namely, the actual usage takes priority over textbooks and written usage guides. Therefore, the best way to improve on gramma is by reading more and reading with awareness.
The main message is that grammar rules are not carved in stone. Many rules change over time; others depend on locale and context (e.g., formal vs. informal writing). The author draws support from usage statistics such as the Corpus of Contemporary American English, expert opinions such as the American Heritage Dictionary Usage Panel, and quotes from edited writings. Another interesting fact is that many “unorthodox” usages are not modern deviations from established rules. They are actually historical remanences.
On the other hand, the evolution of English is not always towards simplification and uniformity. For example, some verbs used to have a regular past tense. However, they take on irregular forms over time because they are similar to other irregular verbs.
The value of the books is not specific knowledge. Instead, it brings a new perspective to grammar - what the author calls the descriptive approach. Namely, the actual usage takes priority over textbooks and written usage guides. Therefore, the best way to improve on gramma is by reading more and reading with awareness.
November 6, 2020
If you were hoping to use this to brush up on your grammar, you may be disappointed.
As the author suggested herself, if you speak English fluently, you'll know these rules already. Even if you don't know how to describe these rules using correct grammatical terms. Herein lies the problem with a "grammar boot camp": would you go through the grammatical rules systematically and list out the exceptions, as if it were a course for ESL/ESOL learners, for example, drawing out distinctions between past tense versus past participles? Or would you focus on the origins and evolution of these rules into present day usage, given the reader already speaks English?
The author tried to do both but neither approach, even when meshed together, was particularly engaging or interesting. Having learnt "what is right" by reading loads as a child, I did not learn most grammatical rules, preferring to go by "does it sound right" rule when I write. So I found the bits covering the grammatical rules really hard to follow, because I simply don't know enough on, for example, the nine modals of auxiliary verbs (but I do know instinctively when to use which one!). The course did however made me super conscious about how many "rules" I'm breaching just by writing this review!
My main takeaway, after struggling through half of it, was that my time would probably be better spent reading a modern usage guide, or even better yet, just have one handy the next time I need to seriously nail a piece.
As the author suggested herself, if you speak English fluently, you'll know these rules already. Even if you don't know how to describe these rules using correct grammatical terms. Herein lies the problem with a "grammar boot camp": would you go through the grammatical rules systematically and list out the exceptions, as if it were a course for ESL/ESOL learners, for example, drawing out distinctions between past tense versus past participles? Or would you focus on the origins and evolution of these rules into present day usage, given the reader already speaks English?
The author tried to do both but neither approach, even when meshed together, was particularly engaging or interesting. Having learnt "what is right" by reading loads as a child, I did not learn most grammatical rules, preferring to go by "does it sound right" rule when I write. So I found the bits covering the grammatical rules really hard to follow, because I simply don't know enough on, for example, the nine modals of auxiliary verbs (but I do know instinctively when to use which one!). The course did however made me super conscious about how many "rules" I'm breaching just by writing this review!
My main takeaway, after struggling through half of it, was that my time would probably be better spent reading a modern usage guide, or even better yet, just have one handy the next time I need to seriously nail a piece.
March 27, 2021
I recently listened to one of the Great Courses. T'was the English Grammar Boot Camp taught by Anne Curzan.
I know. I do. You are thinking he threw 't'was' right into the second sentence of a review regarding an English grammar boot camp! Didn't he learn anything?
Let me start this off by saying that I don't claim to be a master of the English language. In point of fact, if the English language was a martial art I would be wearing one of the lower valued belts.
Before you go full gammarmando, a word construction used by the teacher of the course that combines the words grammar and commando, I willing admit my English-fu is weak. I did find certain parts of this course complex. In fact, I'm not wholly certain I grasped all her points.
Certain parts of the course could, however, be understood by a casual Joe like me. She discussed descriptive and prescriptive grammar, differences in the spoken language vs formal writing, using 'they' in the singular as a solution to non-binary choices, and more.
Conclusion: I don't feel I got the full value out of this course because certain parts of it felt like it went over my head. I did, however, derive a lot of value from it and feel my English-fu has improved, at least a little bit, from listening to this course.
I know. I do. You are thinking he threw 't'was' right into the second sentence of a review regarding an English grammar boot camp! Didn't he learn anything?
Let me start this off by saying that I don't claim to be a master of the English language. In point of fact, if the English language was a martial art I would be wearing one of the lower valued belts.
Before you go full gammarmando, a word construction used by the teacher of the course that combines the words grammar and commando, I willing admit my English-fu is weak. I did find certain parts of this course complex. In fact, I'm not wholly certain I grasped all her points.
Certain parts of the course could, however, be understood by a casual Joe like me. She discussed descriptive and prescriptive grammar, differences in the spoken language vs formal writing, using 'they' in the singular as a solution to non-binary choices, and more.
Conclusion: I don't feel I got the full value out of this course because certain parts of it felt like it went over my head. I did, however, derive a lot of value from it and feel my English-fu has improved, at least a little bit, from listening to this course.
August 27, 2023
Harmless, informative, and a fair bit engaging, Anne Curzan's English Grammar Boot Camp is pretty good. It is not really about correcting your grammar. If anything, if you bought the course with the expectation that the professor would correct you and tell you about all the rules you should follow, you're in for a relatively rude awakening. Curzan mostly takes grammatical rules as a vehicle to introduce debate, and more often than not she takes a stance that is rather at odds with what you would expect from a grammarian. Sometimes she'll look into the past to give you some historical context, while other times she'll tell you about language shifting and widespread acceptance among younger people toward grammar that, on occasion, makes older folks cringe. As such, the course might have been better named "English Grammar Debates." Its still fine to me, but I imagine that may give some people pause.
April 3, 2018
This set of courses is more about some of the controversies of usage in English than a step by step guide to usage or sentence construction etc. Still the lecturer is an engaging and enthusiastic speaker who imparts some interesting ideas and gives lots of interesting perspective on the issues. As a pretty permissive English user I was worried the whole thing might be too doctrinaire for my tastes but I was pleased to discover despite the lecturer's admission of her own inner grammando being strong. She was actually very open to a fluid use of rules in composition. I have only listened to the lectures once and I think a second time through at least would be necessary to really let the information sink in, but there was plenty of stuff of just casual interest that came up, such as the procedures of the American Heritage dictionary usage panel...
Displaying 1 - 30 of 83 reviews