What do you think?
Rate this book
The Little English Handbook: Choices and Conventions/With Mla Update
Written by revered composition theorist Edward P.J. Corbett with co-author Sheryl Finkle, this pocket-sized, inexpensive, elegant little handbook addresses the most prevalent writing problems students face. Featuring artful prose explanations on matters of grammar, style, paragraphing, punctuation, and mechanics, the text also serves as a guide to the conventions of research writing and documentation providing coverage of online sources and ACW documentation style for citing those sources as well as coverage of MLA, APA, CBE and CMS documentation systems.
273 pages, Paperback
First published December 1, 1980
2 people are currently reading
67 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
February 9, 2019
خب خسته نباشم، یه ماهی کلاً فراموشش کرده بودم. :)) این مرضِ کتابهای متعدد را نصفه خواندن رو باید ریشهکن کنم.
یه کتاب کوچیک، خلاصه، ساده و موجز که خوندنش برا هر زبانآموزِ جدیای لازمه.
April 21, 2019
Great advice all throughout the book. Just picking something at random:
Section 28 “Use the subordinate conjunction "that" if it will prevent a possible misreading.” “The tendency of any language is toward economy of means.” That is an elegant little observation and so true. “Whether to use the conjunction that in written prose will be a problem only when a noun clause is being used as a direct object of a verb...”
This sounds confusing until you start sounding it out. “Trump thought that he was making sense, instead he was just blabbering again.” Instead try, “Trump thought he was making sense, instead he was just blabbering again.” It means the same with an economy of words. But the book points out a number of examples where you must use the word ‘that’.
“My father believed his doctor, who was a boyhood friend, was wholly trustworthy.” The sentence is not entirely clear until you insert the word, "that", between the words ,”believed” and “his”.
Twitter users need not apply, but writers and lawyers will benefit. I have been using this book for more than 30 years in an effort to better explain myself in words. This is also an invaluable resource for students writing long term papers requiring citations and clear exposition.
Sadly, like “The Elements of Style”, you can use this book in service of the Dark Side. For example, section 86, “Underline (italicize) foreign words and phrases, unless they have become naturalized or Anglicized”. For example, “Trump will never have to give a deposition again as his lawyers will successfully argue he is non compos mentis.” When you throw in correct words without giving the reader a head’s up that you’re using a term of art, the reader needs to go back and re-read the sentence. Sometimes that is the objective. Obfuscation in service of your point. The proper way to write the sentence would be “Trump will never have to give a deposition again as his lawyers will successfully argue he is NON COMPOS MENTIS.” Goodreads probably won’t allow for that distinction to appear, so you’ll have to imagine the italics in the Latin phrase. (For non lawyers, it simply means not of a sound mind.)
In any event, if you write professionally, or simply want to write a good business letter, this book is invaluable.
I’m also sorry (not sorry) for using Trump as a bad example because he neither speaks nor writes with care. Don’t follow his (bad) example.
Section 28 “Use the subordinate conjunction "that" if it will prevent a possible misreading.” “The tendency of any language is toward economy of means.” That is an elegant little observation and so true. “Whether to use the conjunction that in written prose will be a problem only when a noun clause is being used as a direct object of a verb...”
This sounds confusing until you start sounding it out. “Trump thought that he was making sense, instead he was just blabbering again.” Instead try, “Trump thought he was making sense, instead he was just blabbering again.” It means the same with an economy of words. But the book points out a number of examples where you must use the word ‘that’.
“My father believed his doctor, who was a boyhood friend, was wholly trustworthy.” The sentence is not entirely clear until you insert the word, "that", between the words ,”believed” and “his”.
Twitter users need not apply, but writers and lawyers will benefit. I have been using this book for more than 30 years in an effort to better explain myself in words. This is also an invaluable resource for students writing long term papers requiring citations and clear exposition.
Sadly, like “The Elements of Style”, you can use this book in service of the Dark Side. For example, section 86, “Underline (italicize) foreign words and phrases, unless they have become naturalized or Anglicized”. For example, “Trump will never have to give a deposition again as his lawyers will successfully argue he is non compos mentis.” When you throw in correct words without giving the reader a head’s up that you’re using a term of art, the reader needs to go back and re-read the sentence. Sometimes that is the objective. Obfuscation in service of your point. The proper way to write the sentence would be “Trump will never have to give a deposition again as his lawyers will successfully argue he is NON COMPOS MENTIS.” Goodreads probably won’t allow for that distinction to appear, so you’ll have to imagine the italics in the Latin phrase. (For non lawyers, it simply means not of a sound mind.)
In any event, if you write professionally, or simply want to write a good business letter, this book is invaluable.
I’m also sorry (not sorry) for using Trump as a bad example because he neither speaks nor writes with care. Don’t follow his (bad) example.
June 2, 2024
Cover, for reference:
This is perfectly in my wheelhouse, yet it reads like a tremendous slog. I suppose that should be expected—since it's designed to be used as a reference, not an afternoon's leisure—but I can't help wanting to read any book all at once, in order to give a proper and thorough review (I will forget things if I pick it up and put it down repeatedly).
That said, I IMMEDIATELY had some questions:
"Pair of em dashes"?? An em dash should be the proper punctuation to use instead of double-hyphens! Why is anyone using TWO of them in a row??
(I hope this actually means use a pair of them like I've used a pair of parentheses here, but it's not clear from just the notation.)
"Transpose letters or words" also feels unnecessary; easier to just cross out the incorrect part and write in the correct one.
It also has some odd conventions, like "dangling verbal" instead of the "dangling modifier" or "dangling element" more currently in use. Granted, the preface explains that this is more of a replacement for an in-person mentor, who would presumably be more familiar with current conventions than a book from *1973* would. I mean, most of the guides are still pretty much the same—things haven't changed THAT much, I hope! At the same time, it's only somewhat helpful for more formal use and probably only good for folks who have literally no other references (rare in this internet age).
Good for when it was made, but I guarantee there are better references available now.
This is perfectly in my wheelhouse, yet it reads like a tremendous slog. I suppose that should be expected—since it's designed to be used as a reference, not an afternoon's leisure—but I can't help wanting to read any book all at once, in order to give a proper and thorough review (I will forget things if I pick it up and put it down repeatedly).
That said, I IMMEDIATELY had some questions:
"Pair of em dashes"?? An em dash should be the proper punctuation to use instead of double-hyphens! Why is anyone using TWO of them in a row??
(I hope this actually means use a pair of them like I've used a pair of parentheses here, but it's not clear from just the notation.)
"Transpose letters or words" also feels unnecessary; easier to just cross out the incorrect part and write in the correct one.
It also has some odd conventions, like "dangling verbal" instead of the "dangling modifier" or "dangling element" more currently in use. Granted, the preface explains that this is more of a replacement for an in-person mentor, who would presumably be more familiar with current conventions than a book from *1973* would. I mean, most of the guides are still pretty much the same—things haven't changed THAT much, I hope! At the same time, it's only somewhat helpful for more formal use and probably only good for folks who have literally no other references (rare in this internet age).
Good for when it was made, but I guarantee there are better references available now.
May 15, 2012
For ESL students, this should be a Bible. If you're native, then this should have been condensed into problem areas where the rules everyone knows break down or are hard to understand (it's/its, split infinitives, dangling participles).
The flaw with these little books about syntax is that they don't teach you how to write. To write, you have to break all these rules and then revise until you're only breaking a few. But I can't delineate my creative process into the narrow confines of Corbett's Queen's English without feeling the pinch. Give me freedom to write, I say, and then freedom to edit later!
The flaw with these little books about syntax is that they don't teach you how to write. To write, you have to break all these rules and then revise until you're only breaking a few. But I can't delineate my creative process into the narrow confines of Corbett's Queen's English without feeling the pinch. Give me freedom to write, I say, and then freedom to edit later!
December 22, 2008
I have the 5th edition that I picked up in a used book store. Everyone should own a copy of this book. It was extraordinarily helpful through college, and I still pick it up from time to time.
Includes a list of correction and proofreader's marks, manuscript format, grammar, style, paragraphing, punctuation, mechanics, etc.
This little book is a treasure!
Includes a list of correction and proofreader's marks, manuscript format, grammar, style, paragraphing, punctuation, mechanics, etc.
This little book is a treasure!
January 23, 2009
I wish I knew more...
May 27, 2012
Mostly repetitive of Turabian.
January 16, 2016
Another college text, this one saw me through many, many essays and research papers.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews