Dreyer's English

I believe there was a thread on this topic before, but I can't find it. I am thinking about purchasing Benjamin Dreyer's Dreyer's English: An Utterly Correct Guide to Clarity and Style, and I want to know if anyone here has read it and recommends it. I've read good things about it so far.

I skimmed it a while ago in a bookstore, and wasn't impressed, It struck me as a bit of an ego trips with appended lists of 'corrections.' I didn't read it through, though, so my impression in just that. I didn't buy it, and don't plan on it.

I have a copy on order. But then I'm a sucker for books on language and its use. That said, all such books are what they are: one person's opinion.

I was impatient so I bought it today. When I'm done, or further along in reading it, I'll post what I think.

Haven't heard of it.

Fun for what it is

I enjoyed it quite a bit. It's a nice little tour through some usage standards, but it's not really a style guide for general use.

I think it's a good read for getting the mind focused on practical grammar and style, even if you don't follow his advice. That was the key plus for me. He comes at it explicitly from an editor's point of view which is nice, and he writes in a way that I found genuinely witty (some might find him pretentious).

Also, it is one of the few style guides with a stance on cum vs come in describing an orgasm, so that's something.

Of course, for a style and grammar reference, I would look elsewhere.

KeithD said:

Haven't heard of it.

Click to expand...

Dreyer is the chief copy editor at Random House. I found out about him on Twitter, where he is active. A friend of mine had raved about the book, which was published recently.

From what I've seen so far it's a good book for people who are into this sort of thing. He has a sense of humor and is candid about the fact that his opinions are his opinions, but they're also opinions grounded in decades of experience working with professional authors of fiction.

I'm still working my way through it, but enjoying what I've read so far.

I was glad to see that his opinion about come/cum is the same as mine: "come" as the verb; "cum" as the noun.

SimonDoom said:

I was glad to see that his opinion about come/cum is the same as mine: "come" as the verb; "cum" as the noun.

Click to expand...

Absolutely. Cumming as a verb is advanced brain death for me, a curse on the English language. Only dicks cum (to combine the two things that make me cringe in any story - and I don't care what you say about your lovely lady ).

SimonDoom said:

Dreyer is the chief copy editor at Random House. I found out about him on Twitter, where he is active. A friend of mine had raved about the book, which was published recently.

From what I've seen so far it's a good book for people who are into this sort of thing. He has a sense of humor and is candid about the fact that his opinions are his opinions, but they're also opinions grounded in decades of experience working with professional authors of fiction.

I'm still working my way through it, but enjoying what I've read so far.

I was glad to see that his opinion about come/cum is the same as mine: "come" as the verb; "cum" as the noun.

Click to expand...

Thanks. I stopped looking for new resources when I closed my editorial business two years ago, so I just don't have an opinion on him.

I do think that Come/coming (verb) and cum (noun) is what's acceptable to most erotica publishers at the moment. I think the trend will be to accept "cum/cumming" as the verb eventually if only to differentiate it from other meanings.

electricblue66 said:

Absolutely. Cumming as a verb is advanced brain death for me, a curse on the English language. Only dicks cum (to combine the two things that make me cringe in any story - and I don't care what you say about your lovely lady ).

Click to expand...

Did you notice my use of the semicolon?

SimonDoom said:

Did you notice my use of the semicolon?

Click to expand...

That wasn't in fiction.

Hypoxia said:

That wasn't in fiction.

Click to expand...

True. That was meant in a kidding around kind of way.

electricblue66 said:

Absolutely. Cumming as a verb is advanced brain death for me, a curse on the English language. Only dicks cum (to combine the two things that make me cringe in any story - and I don't care what you say about your lovely lady ).

Click to expand...

A split decision, agree with the verb v. noun part...

"Do you want to come, ask me permission to come."

"Oh... Oh, I'm coming. OH"... and I came.

"Hmmmm, I love the taste of your cum".

But...

The 30 or so percent of male ejaculate produced by the prostate (boy juice is 95 percent lubricant and nutrients) is totally analogous to the lubricant that goes squirt from my Skenes gland.

Love and Kisses

Lisa Ann

SimonDoom said:

Did you notice my use of the semicolon?

Click to expand...

Without a doubt, a half assed joke...

Apologies - somebody had to go there; I'm surprised it took this long, and I'm ashamed it was me .

electricblue66 said:

Without a doubt, a half assed joke...

Apologies - somebody had to go there; I'm surprised it took this long, and I'm ashamed it was me .

Click to expand...

Um...sorry, dude, but shouldn't that be hyphenated? Half-assed?

As in, "I just had to make a half-assed attempt at editorial humor on your post."

LexxRuthless said:

Um...sorry, dude, but shouldn't that be hyphenated? Half-assed?

As in, "I just had to make a half-assed attempt at editorial humor on your post."

Click to expand...

Fuuuck. I'm going to swear away from this grammar stuff! Hyphens when I don't need them, blank spaces when I do .

KeithD said:

I do think that Come/coming (verb) and cum (noun) is what's acceptable to most erotica publishers at the moment. I think the trend will be to accept "cum/cumming" as the verb eventually if only to differentiate it from other meanings.

Click to expand...

It's a matter of clarity. "I'm coming, Mother!" and "I'm cumming, Mother!" may sound the same (an old Firesign Theatre gag there) but it's good to have the meaning spelled out for those with a busy hand.

I recall a prior thread on tenses. Oh gosh, the past of both 'cum' and 'come' is 'came' -- unless we go with "did cum". Or an alternate orgasmic synonym; a few are available. Hey, 'cummed' pops up here and there. Totally nonstandard now, but so was 'cum' not long ago. We'll see how acceptable usage evolves. I doubt most LIT readers care.

As a non-native English speaker, I personally prefer 'cum' both as a noun and a verb. I feel this is the case with most millennials, from what I've observed.

Although, I rarely use the verb at all.

I've read most of the book by now -- enough to give an opinion.

I recommend this book for anyone who's interested in the subject of English prose style, grammar, and punctuation.

Dreyer has a great deal of practical experience with the subject. He's the copy chief of Random House, which means he supervises the copy editing of hundreds of works of fiction. He's copyedited works by many famous and acclaimed authors, like Richard Russo and Shirley Jackson. There's no question he knows his stuff.

Dreyer has very strong opinions about some things but is more flexible about others. On the issue of whether "said" alone should be used as a dialogue tag, for instance, he's a moderate. In general, his tone on most subjects is light-hearted and practical. He feels strongly about some things, such as the use of the serial comma (he's for it). He prefers, however, to call it a "series comma" ("serial" makes him think of serial killers and "Oxford" conflicts with his sense of patriotism).

I found the book to be entertaining. It can be used as a reference guide, but it's stuffed with anecdotes and personal observations that make it much more enjoyable to read than a pure, dry reference guide. I found the personal stuff also made his positions on style more convincing.

Since his job is copyediting fiction, his guide is more useful to a fiction writer than many other guides, which are more useful to students writing term papers.

It's not a comprehensive reference guide like the Chicago Manual of Style, but it's far more entertaining, so it's much more likely that you will get through the whole thing. It packs a great deal of useful information in a modestly sized volume.

You can learn a lot from reading a book like this even if you do not ultimately agree with all of his writing prescriptions. A big thumbs up from me.

I'm reading reviews at GoodReads and elsewhere. Most like the book.

I see Dreyer's audience as USA copyeditors, writers who may deal with them, and grammar hounds. Alas, Ænglish is not a standard global language. Would local editors revise this book for readers in India, Australia, Philippines, the British Isles' components, or South Africa?

Standards and appetites for fiction also vary by region, genre, media, and age cohort. Region: What's troubling in Tupelo may be plain in Maine. Genre: Pulp westerns don't read like Gothic romances. Media: Big printed books can show longer words than smartphone screens. Age: Taste and patience evolve.

You’ve all convinced me it’s worth a read.

Hypoxia said:

I'm reading reviews at GoodReads and elsewhere. Most like the book.

I see Dreyer's audience as USA copyeditors, writers who may deal with them, and grammar hounds. Alas, Ænglish is not a standard global language. Would local editors revise this book for readers in India, Australia, Philippines, the British Isles' components, or South Africa?

Standards and appetites for fiction also vary by region, genre, media, and age cohort. Region: What's troubling in Tupelo may be plain in Maine. Genre: Pulp westerns don't read like Gothic romances. Media: Big printed books can show longer words than smartphone screens. Age: Taste and patience evolve.

Click to expand...

I think the audience for the book is anyone among the 330 million+ who speak and write predominantly American English and who enjoy books about writing or about the language for its own sake, or who are interested in improving their writing. It's a pretty big audience.

It's a big, complex world, and even in the US the fiction market is, as you say, diverse. Take some time to read the best of different genres of writing, however, and you'll see the adoption of basic writing standards common to all of them. Everyone, in my view, who aspires to write should learn what those standards are. Throwing up one's hands and saying "fie on your standards, I'm going to do things my own way" is not the way people who really want to be good at something do things. That's true of carpentry, gastroenterology, soccer, phlebotomy, bond-trading, engineering, guitar-playing, and, yes, writing.

SimonDoom said:

I think the audience for the book is anyone among the 330 million+ who speak and write predominantly American English and who enjoy books about writing or about the language for its own sake, or who are interested in improving their writing. It's a pretty big audience.

It's a big, complex world, and even in the US the fiction market is, as you say, diverse. Take some time to read the best of different genres of writing, however, and you'll see the adoption of basic writing standards common to all of them. Everyone, in my view, who aspires to write should learn what those standards are. Throwing up one's hands and saying "fie on your standards, I'm going to do things my own way" is not the way people who really want to be good at something do things. That's true of carpentry, gastroenterology, soccer, phlebotomy, bond-trading, engineering, guitar-playing, and, yes, writing.

Click to expand...

"It is a narrow minded person who thinks there is only one way to spell a word."
--H.Oliver, typesetter

Hypoxia said:

"It is a narrow minded person who thinks there is only one way to spell a word."
--H.Oliver, typesetter

Click to expand...

That's a nice quote, but nobody really believes that. It's an appealingly contrarian statement that no one actually believes or follows. I've read some of your work. It doesn't follow that adage at all.

If you read a story where "rabbit" was spelled "rabvutt" and "garden" was spelled "gaarduun," you'd be annoyed, you'd probably give up on the story, and you'd probably decide you were reading the work of someone who either had no idea how to spell or was trying your patience with silly literary tricks.

Obviously, literary "rules" have a somewhat tentative and provisional nature, and they're often observed in the breach by very good authors who know what the rules are and therefore know how and when to break them. But none of that justifies ignorance of good spelling, good grammar, and good punctuation. EVERY aspiring writer can benefit from learning about writing style from people who've actually done it well and people who've edited them.

SimonDoom said:

That's a nice quote, but nobody really believes that. It's an appealingly contrarian statement that no one actually believes or follows. I've read some of your work. It doesn't follow that adage at all.

If you read a story where "rabbit" was spelled "rabvutt" and "garden" was spelled "gaarduun," you'd be annoyed, you'd probably give up on the story, and you'd probably decide you were reading the work of someone who either had no idea how to spell or was trying your patience with silly literary tricks.

Click to expand...

Colour. Fœtid. Organise. Meagre. Connexion. Fæces. Dialogue. Routeing. Sceptic. Dreamt. Gotten. Aeroplane. Kerb. Liquorice. Jardin. Rarebit.

Obviously, literary "rules" have a somewhat tentative and provisional nature, and they're often observed in the breach by very good authors who know what the rules are and therefore know how and when to break them. But none of that justifies ignorance of good spelling, good grammar, and good punctuation. EVERY aspiring writer can benefit from learning about writing style from people who've actually done it well and people who've edited them.

Click to expand...

Yes, learn from the masters, even those spewing bad diction, orthography, and sense. At least in their dialogs / dialogues. Much literature (scripts especially) are mostly speech which of course if often ragged or informal, as first-person narratives may be -- there I'll cite Flowers for Algernon's evolving effect. Pulp detectives, and horse-soap-space operas, and graphic novels / comix, may not follow Random House guidelines.

Yes, reality and good orthography rank high in my fetishes. Yes, reading much well-written stuff gives me models and goals. Which is why I try to emulate 1930's pulp SciFi, or stiffly translated narration, in some stories. Back when PJ O'Rourke was funny (the Lampoon era) he said learning bad, obsolete, and pretentious styles was necessary to write their parodies. I sometime parody bad pr0n. It can get ugly, hey?

I *do* adore strong yet graceful prose. Mary Renault is hard to beat.