Rating: 
Summary: A dictionary you can actually read for pleasure
Review: As the title of this review suggests, Bryan Garner's "A Dictionary of Modern American Usage" is as enjoyable as it is helpful. Garner's wrote this book in order to provide writers, the very people who are changing language on a daily basis, with an informed judgment of the best usage of the English language. His goal in this case is to avoid the ideological debate between Descriptivists (those who believe that language is valid as it is used) and Prescritivists (those who develop rules for best practices of language usage). Instead, Garner provides a concise, practical, and often witty definition of when to use certain words and of general rules for forming words.While Garner clearly has his own opinions about what constitutes good English usage, he is hardly dogmatic. For example, Garner points out that “self-depreciating” is the correct term for a person who puts his/herself down while “self-deprecating” is not. However, he is quick to acknowledge that numerous database searches on Nexus, Lexus and other textual repositories confirm that the incorrect term is used more frequently than the correct one. Garner concludes that like it or not, “self-deprecating” is becoming the acceptable usage. Garner's wit is apparent in areas like his definition of "suicide victim". He classifies this as an oxymoron that expresses a prejudicial view against taking one's own life. This book is an indispensable read for any professional writer or lover of language. Even if you are not concerned with those things, you will probably still find this work enjoyable for its pragmatic approach, its intelligence, and the tremendous clarity it imparts. It is the only dictionary I can think of that is as lively and entertaining as it is informative.
Rating:
Summary: The NECESSARY One
Review: Brian A. Garners', A Dictionary of Modern American Usage is the one most necessary book of its type I've found for writers, teachers - especially English and Writing teachers - and all those who think themselves educated. Keep your Fowler's, Flesch, and Strunk & White, of course, But READ this, employ it. Every serious student needs this book. Why? Because this book is far better than any other I've found to clarify, discern, and guide the foundational thinking behind one's written words. Mr. Garner is, if not a philosopher, an honest, discerning, and well-rounded thinker. He brings into clear focus many of the problems of writing effectively in English. Is this the sort of book that seems too opaque and technical for your needs? Just read his argument in the Preface. You can become a better thinker, a better writer, a better person with the use of this book.
Rating:
Summary: A worthy heir to Fowler
Review: For three generations, a single book dominated the market as the authoritative reference in matters of grammar, style, and usage in the English language: "A Dictionary of Modern English Usage" by H.W. Fowler, first published in 1926, ably revised by Sir Ernest Gowers in 1965, and now in its third edition (published 1996). But by the century's last quarter, the modern English language -- particularly its American dialect -- had begun outgrowing Fowler, and several newer guides began competing with it. The third (1996) edition of Fowler was a disappointment, and left the field without a clear leading authority. That gap was filled in 1998, when Bryan A. Garner wrote "A Dictionary of Modern American Usage" (published by the Oxford University Press, which also published Fowler). Finally, someone had written a book that matched Fowler -- not only in its erudition, but also in its accessible style, and even its wry sense of humor. And Garner's book had the advantages of being written both in modern times for a modern audience, and in the United States by an American author about American English. The book is a gem, and as authoritative a reference as you will find in this field in the last several decades (and probably the next several too). "DMAU" went into a second edition in 2003, under the title "Garner's Modern American Usage," renamed after its author in view of the acclaim that the first edition earned. A new edition was appearing after only five years because, as Garner explains in the second edition, "changing usage isn't really the primary basis for a new edition of a usage guide: it's really a question of having had five more years for research." The second edition builds upon the first: the first edition was a dictionary of words in usage, rather than words about usage, and therefore assumed that the reader possessed a certain working knowledge of basic grammatical terms and concepts. For example, the first edition didn't define such basic terms as "sentence," "phrase," "clause," "word," or "part of speech." The second edition appends a glossary that defines many such basic concepts, in addition to many new or expanded entries in the dictionary itself.
Rating:
Summary: A worthy heir to Fowler
Review: For three generations, a single book dominated the market as the authoritative reference in matters of grammar, style, and usage in the English language: "A Dictionary of Modern English Usage" by H.W. Fowler, first published in 1926, ably revised by Sir Ernest Gowers in 1965, and now in its third edition (published 1996). But by the century's last quarter, the modern English language -- particularly its American dialect -- had begun outgrowing Fowler, and several newer guides began competing with it. The third (1996) edition of Fowler was a disappointment, and left the field without a clear leading authority. That gap was filled in 1998, when Bryan A. Garner wrote "A Dictionary of Modern American Usage" (published by the Oxford University Press, which also published Fowler). Finally, someone had written a book that matched Fowler -- not only in its erudition, but also in its accessible style, and even its wry sense of humor. And Garner's book had the advantages of being written both in modern times for a modern audience, and in the United States by an American author about American English. The book is a gem, and as authoritative a reference as you will find in this field in the last several decades (and probably the next several too). "DMAU" went into a second edition in 2003, under the title "Garner's Modern American Usage," renamed after its author in view of the acclaim that the first edition earned. A new edition was appearing after only five years because, as Garner explains in the second edition, "changing usage isn't really the primary basis for a new edition of a usage guide: it's really a question of having had five more years for research." The second edition builds upon the first: the first edition was a dictionary of words in usage, rather than words about usage, and therefore assumed that the reader possessed a certain working knowledge of basic grammatical terms and concepts. For example, the first edition didn't define such basic terms as "sentence," "phrase," "clause," "word," or "part of speech." The second edition appends a glossary that defines many such basic concepts, in addition to many new or expanded entries in the dictionary itself.
Rating:
Summary: Virgules and Variants, Explained
Review: Here's something that should make language lovers sit up and take notice: a thorough, gently entertaining but always informative book about the American language, written by a lawyer, in plain English. For those who love the language, those who revere H.W. Fowler, John Bremner or Theodore Bernstein, but don't need the posturing or pomposity that sometimes accompanies columns or books on language, or those who simply enjoy wandering through the pages of a book that examines and comments upon commas, virgules, variants, Bryan A. Garner's Dictionary of Modern American Usage is the book to read. Garner takes on all manner of problems, from the proper way to use the word each, to Hobson's Choice, to ordinance vs. ordnance and hundreds of other misuses and misunderstandings about American usage. Most entries are quite short, as in the notation that "meld together" is a redundancy, while others, such as the entry on mendacity/mendicity/mendicancy, detail the distinctions that should be made in using these similar-sounding words. Most entries are accompanied by good, contemporary examples, but are sometimes explained through citations of older works. The book is quite long,707 pages of entries in the hardcover edition, but worth the time of anyone who wants to brush up language skills, rediscover old rules, dispose of some other old rules, or broaden understanding of the differences between American and British usage. Garner frequently cites newspapers and magazines when pointing out correct usage or mistakes, which makes the material fresh and relevant: Comprise and compose: If the whole comprises the parts, the reverse can't be true, e.g., "Of the 50 stocks that comprise the index, 40 had gains...", From Florida Today, June 15, 1997. In other words, comprise is not synonymous with "make up", no matter how many times people use it incorrectly. extradite, indict, the former meaning to surrender or deliver a fugitive to another jurisdiction, the latter from the Latin to "write down" but some write as if the words are related, e.g., Ventura has a court hearing Thursday in San Juan, where she is expected to waive her right to fight extradiction (read extradition)..." From the Boston Herald, Oct.4, 1994. and Prosecutors argued that..he had jumped bail after a 1984 federal mail-fraud conviction and disappeared for nine years until being found and extradicted (read extradited)..." From The New York Times, Oct.7, 1994. deceptive, deceptious. The latter is a needless variant. Or, if we have a perfectly good word, we don't need the invented alternative, which just causes readers to pause wonder about its meaning. He also provides some useful definitions I've not encountered before, for example: dysphemism, the substitution of a disagreeable word or phrase for a neutral or even positive one. It is the opposite of euphemism. Some examples:
bean counter for accountant
jock for athlete
jarhead for Marine
bleeding heart for liberal
sawbones for surgeon
mouthpiece for lawyer
nerd for intellectual
stiff for cadaver
fascist for conservative This book serves as a ready reference and a guide to those who love English. It's worth its hefty price.
Rating: 
Summary: Pedantic
Review: I also purchased this book after reading DFW's essay. I must say that it has exceeded all of my expectations. You might not think that you would enjoy a technical usage book, but it is surprisingly interesting. Garner really owes Wallace one for any sudden escalation in sales.
Rating:
Summary: Better than Lovinger's
Review: I bought both Lovinger's book (Penguin) and Bryan A. Garner's book for a reference library, and I find Garner's book much more thorough. Just opening up both books and comparing the type sizes and layouts shows how much more information is packed into Garner's book than Lovinger's. Garner is also meticulous about citing where he found his examples. The citations give the usage heft very much like the historical examples given for definitions in the OED. To be fair, Lovinger provides good examples, too, but they don't include the citation and are probably constructions of the author rather than real-world examples. Garner's book stands taller than Lovinger's because it also includes rehtorical and grammatical entries as well as word and usage entries. You won't find an entry for "ergative verbs" or "etymology" or "euphuism," to name just a random few from the Es. Wouldn't you rather have a usage dictionary that contains such things in case you ever want to know more about them? For these reasons, I'd say go with Garner's book. (That is, if you need something more detailed and contemporary than the second edition of H. W. Fowler's Modern English Usage; the best there is.)
Rating:
Summary: A useful guide and a complete pleasure to read.
Review: I learned about this book by reading David Foster Wallace's amazing essay in Harper's ("Tense Present", April 2001). The book lives up completely to Wallace's praise. It's exhaustive, witty, and endlessly fascinating. If you love English, want to improve your speaking and writing skills, or just want an engrossing book about language, this is for you.
Rating: 
Summary: Good Reference Work
Review: Over the years I've collected dozens of books on writing and English usage. This book was a recent addition to the collection. I found the coverage of each language topic thorough; providing insight to a Canadian that lives in a schizophrenic world of English usage - caught between the Queen's English and that of America's.
My only complaint with this book was based solely on a stylistic issue rather than its content. Each entry tried to compress space by placing examples of good and bad usage directly inline with the author's commentary. I thought Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of English Usage did a better job in formatting its entries by clearly separating commentary from examples through the use of paragraphing and indentation.
Nevertheless, Garner's Modern American Usage book makes an excellent reference and a fun read.
Rating:
Summary: This belongs in the library of all editors & writers.
Review: This is an amazing book! I use it every single time that I edit anything, and this is one book I don't mind carrying with me to clients' sites. Garner's book has extensive coverage of most aspects of our language, broken down by individual words and phrases; his thorough cross-referencing helps the user successfully navigate throughout the entire book. Garner provides numerous examples of correct and incorrect usage of every word covered, and for each incorrect usage, he provides a suggested revision. If more than one variation of a word usage or phrase is possible (e.g., "different from" vs. "different than"), Garner tells the reader which term or phrase is used more frequently (or is more preferable) under which circumstances. It is so refreshing to see a book that provides so many rewrites instead of just criticizing poor word usage/style; the rewrites alone provide invaluable assistance to the writer and editor alike. To top if off, Garner's writing style is humorous, friendly, and quite approachable-not a hint of arrogance or condescension. Garner's upbeat, helpful attitude, along with his citing of many examples of venerable publications/authors erring in some way, makes it very difficult to feel bad about not knowing the proper usage of some word or phrase. My only criticism of his book is that he doesn't cover every single word or phrase that vexes me-but this is a minor "nit" and doesn't occur often enough to deter me from using his book on a daily basis and recommending his book to all my colleagues.
|
