This was a very informative book that had many parts that piqued my interest. I took notes on several parts and this is another book that definitely would serve as a book of reference.
I was interested in the attention the author drew to the subjunctive which is deployed far more often in Spanish and is unavoidable. In modern English, it's there but I'm not sure if we really raise an eyebrow if it isn't used properly.
This is an example of a conjecture of something that isn't going to happen:
If he did that next week he would be a standout.
Another way of saying the same thing would be the use of the subjunctive like this:
Were he to do that next week, he would be a standout.
The writer showed common uses of the subjunctive (this form of 'be' was what I thought used to be ebonics):
Though I be prejudiced, I feel my wife is beautiful.
And:
Till Age snow white hairs on thee (where is the verb here?)
He speaks of not switching tenses in order to preserve the logical sequence:
'The leader of the party said that he had ordered a review and Mr Smith would repay the money immediately'. Such tenses must remain consistent even if the facts seems illogical "I looked into the mirror and saw that I was bald' (being bald would hardly change and isn't the intent of the speaker to convey that it had changed).
I like the examples of the 'fused participle' with sentences such as "I dislike my best friend's violating my privacy."
I was shocked by the preposition here. One says “I went into the room”, “I got into trouble” and “I walked into the wood” but “I walked in to a lamp-post”. The choice to be made in selecting what sort of preposition to use is based on a simple criterion: does the action described result in the subject’s ending up within the object? If it does, then use into. If it does not, use in to.
I also liked the closing paragraph to section 2 which looked at a piece of writing that was perceived to be too protracted, lacking variation in tone which creates a sense of monotony. It concluded that it was like a private language, which slang tends to promote which serves to put up a barrier against outside readers.
Grammar. The purpose is that there's a general agreement on how language works. This allows precision, eliminates almost all ambiguities and is easily comprehensible. He speaks about the unnecessity of having great grammar, excellent orthography and using words correctly if one is verbose.
The author spoke about measured language, reminding those seeking to be good writers to avoid using adjectives thoughtlessly, sensationalist language for ordinary events since it robs the power of that adjective when there are other events that occur that we know to be far more drastic. This happens with clichés (soar, crash, launch, emerge) were quoted as examples and indeed often seen in tabloid reporting.
In order to get better, we should read from writers who have mastered a good style of writing. The author mentions George Orwell, Aldous Huxley, Graham Greene, Samuel Butler and Charles Dickens as being great writers.
This word in the glossary stood out to me for some reason and I decided to note it down since I enjoy when it's deployed in speech.
Tmesis - Separation of parts of a word or compound word, by another word or words (abso-bloody-lutely).
Zeugma is where, typically, one verb has two objects without its being repeated; it sometimes is deployed with humorous effect, the verb being used in one instance abstractly and in the other concretely. “He lost his nerve, and then his money” or “she packed a change of clothes and a hell of a punch” exemplify this.
Overall, a great book and a highly recommended read.