Bill, Scott and others,
What bothers me about The Elements of Style is that the authors spend  
about 90% of their time on issues of usage  and very little on style.  
Do they mean that the two are synonymous?  In terms of style, then,  
they seem to be saying that there is only one style, a formal,  
standard one and that it ought to be used in all situations. Strunk  
and White don't allow for informal or colloquial usage, to say nothing  
of the many functional varieties necessary to communicate with a  
variety of audiences today.  That narrow view doesn't help students  
make effective stylistic   choices when they write and speak, or for  
that matter, probably, to appreciate different styles being used by  
others. Just a guess: Many people who discuss ES [and I don't mean  
this about those discussing the issue here]  probably haven't read it  
recently.
Dick Betting

On Apr 16, 2009, at 3:18 PM, Spruiell, William C wrote:

> Scott:
>
> I've had similar students --- but the advice they need is more along  
> the
> lines of, "use specific nouns, not fluffy ones." The problem really
> isn't the adjectives and adverbs. And at least some of those students
> aren't deliberately being verbose, or displaying signs of functional
> illiteracy (they probably know a fair number of highly specific
> nouns...but they're part of the students' passive vocabulary, rather
> than being part of the active pool that is deployed when writing).
> Instead, they've adopted a common strategy of marking out a general  
> area
> with the noun and then using modifiers to home in on a particular spot
> in within it.
>
> In fact, it's the same thing professional writers do when they come  
> out
> with sentences such as "The fact that these results have been observed
> indicates that the phenomenon is real." "Fact" is fluffy -- but  
> since I
> know the genre, I know when I can get away with using it (if that
> sentence bothers you, all I can say is that amazing numbers of  
> articles
> have been published with near-equivalents). Students pick up on that
> kind of practice, but they don't yet have enough exposure to  
> scientific
> genre to know which words can be used in particular cases without  
> coming
> across as "gauche."
>
> This simply highlights one of Pullum's points: One of S&W's major
> injunctions is that writers should be clear and concise, but they  
> wrote
> THEIR OWN RULE in a way that attacked a side effect of the actual
> problem rather than the problem itself, and implied there was  
> something
> wrong with entire classes of words that are only problematic when
> they're used as part of a compensation mechanism. It's as if I watched
> someone using glue to connect two pieces of wood that should instead
> have been nailed together, and then proclaimed that glue is a bad  
> thing.
> I'd probably figure out my mistake once I saw people trying to nail
> wallpaper.
>
> Bill Spruiell
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Scott
> Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2009 1:08 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: An expert speaks? was ATEG Digest - 14 Apr 2009 to 15 Apr
> 2009 (#2009-86)
>
> Pulliam is the stupid one if he does not understand what The Little  
> Book
> means by
> "Write with nouns and verbs, not with adjectives and adverbs," they
> insist.
> (The motivation of this mysterious decree remains unclear to me.)
>
> Anyone who had ever graded English themes, especially descriptive
> writing,
> has been exposed to students who use plain verbs and generic nouns,  
> both
> of
> which are accompanied by a plethora of adverbs and adjectives
> respectively
> when more descriptive verbs and nouns would do a far better job with
> less
> effort.  The only explanation that I can give for such students is
> either
> functional illiteracy or sheer laziness (many theme assignments  
> have--or
> used to have--a minimum number of words).  The slovenly among them use
> any
> gimmick to expand their impoverished thoughts and expression.
>
> I cannot believe that Professor Pulliam has taught English without
> having
> encountered such students: his extreme prejudice towards The Little  
> Book
> seems to have blinded him to the extent that he can only see vices and
> never
> virtue.  The Little Book has its faults; however, I would trust Shrunk
> and
> White over a "grammarian" who has had too little contact with  
> writing to
> understand the motivation for the very sound advice:
>
> "Write with nouns and verbs, not with adjectives and adverbs."
> (The motivation of this decree is quite clear to me and has been since
> Freshman English.)
>
> Scott Catledge
> Professor Emeritus
>
> During the "God is dead" fad of the 60's, I had a bumper sticker that
> said,
> "My God is alive--sorry about yours."
>
> My understanding of the "motivation" is clear to me--sorry it's not
> clear
> to him.  Perhaps he should teach a Freshman English course sometime.
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface at:
>     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web  
> interface at:
>     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/