Status
Available
Call number
Genres
Publication
New York : Viking Adult, 2014.
Description
" A short and entertaining book on the modern art of writing well by New York Times bestselling author Steven Pinker Why is so much writing so bad, and how can we make it better? Is the English language being corrupted by texting and social media? Do the kids today even care about good writing? Why should any of us care? In The Sense of Style, the bestselling linguist and cognitive scientist Steven Pinker answers these questions and more. Rethinking the usage guide for the 21st century, Pinker doesn't carp about the decline of language or recycle pet peeves from the rulebooks of a century ago. Instead, he applies insights from the sciences of language and mind to the challenge of crafting clear, coherent, and stylish prose. In this short, cheerful, and eminently practical book, Pinker shows how writing depends on imagination, empathy, coherence, grammatical knowhow,and an ability to savor and reverse-engineer the good prose of others. He replaces dogma about usage with reason and evidence, allowing writers and editors to apply the guidelines judiciously, rather than robotically, being mindful of what they are designed to accomplish. Filled with examples of great and gruesome prose, Pinker shows us how the art of writing can be a form of pleasurable mastery and a fascinating intellectual topic in its own right"-- "Pinker has a lot of ideas and sometimes controversial opinions about writing and in this entertaining and instructive book he rethinks the usage guide for the 21st century. Don't blame the internet, he says, good writing has always been hard. It requires imagination, taking pleasure in reading, overcoming the difficulty we all have in imagining what it's like to not know something we do know"--… (more)
User reviews
LibraryThing member nbmars
Steven Pinker is not only a Harvard professor and the renowned writer of numerous books and monographs on the workings of the mind, he is the chairman of the Usage Panel of the American Heritage Dictionary—and that should demonstrate his chops to write a book on writing style, or at the very
The basic thesis of the book turns upon the the intellectual war between the purists, or “prescriptivists” (who advocate adherence to the way English should be written) and the “descriptivists” (who claim language is “organic” and should reflect actual use). Pinker’s approach, which is hard to quibble with [with which it is hard to quibble (???)] to determining what is right is to look at what well-respected writers actually do in practice. Split an infinitive? - sure, if it enhances clarity. In the words of the Merriam Webster Unabridged Dictionary:
Even though there has never been a rational basis for objecting to the split infinitive, the subject has become a fixture of folk belief about grammar….Modern commentators…usually say it’s all right to split an infinitive in the interest of clarity. Since clarity is the usual reason for splitting, this advice means merely that you can split them whenever you need to."
[And yes, that quote ends a sentence with a preposition....]
Pinker issues the caveat that endeavoring to achieve clarity should not come at the expense of grace and beauty: “language ought to be a source of pleasure.”
He doesn’t always follow his own advice, however. For example, he actually defends Bill Clinton’s misuse of the nominative pronoun in his statement, “Give Al Gore and I a chance….” (Elsewhere, he decries awkward-sounding use of the predicative nominative case, such as lamenting “Woe is I” instead of “Woe is Me.” Could Pinker’s politics be influencing his grammar preferences?)
In general, though, his approach to correct diction is fairly permissive. For instance, he tolerates aggravate for “annoy” and healthy for “healthful.” He even says that the use of "hopefully" as a full sentence modifying adverb is just a newer usage that follows in the tracks of candidly, frankly, and mercifully. He may be right, but, “Hopefully, it will stop raining,” still sounds like an abomination to me.
On the other hand, Pinker is quite critical of misusing words that sound like related but distinct words, such as credible for credulous, flaunt for flout, and fortuitous for fortunate. And he probably fights against insuperable odds by insisting that data is the plural form of datum and that a parameter is a variable but not a boundary condition.
The real thrust of the book is not just a series of dos and don’ts. It is a paean to what he calls the Classic Style, an orderly way of writing in which the author remains aware of what the reader is likely to know and not know and is sensitive to the respective roles of syntax and prosody in conveying meaning.
Evaluation: Pinker has written extensively on how the mind works, and his advice here is directed at showing writers how to structure sentences and paragraphs to be more easily ingested, digested, and understood. This is not a dry vademecum however, by any means. The author has included many humorous quotes and observations, and I found myself frequently laughing out loud.
I recommend this book for all aspiring authors, as well as those who enjoy both literature and literacy.
(JAB)
Show More
least about correct usage, or maybe what it means to write about “correct” usage. And this book, The Sense of Style, is such a book, and in my opinion, a very good one.The basic thesis of the book turns upon the the intellectual war between the purists, or “prescriptivists” (who advocate adherence to the way English should be written) and the “descriptivists” (who claim language is “organic” and should reflect actual use). Pinker’s approach, which is hard to quibble with [with which it is hard to quibble (???)] to determining what is right is to look at what well-respected writers actually do in practice. Split an infinitive? - sure, if it enhances clarity. In the words of the Merriam Webster Unabridged Dictionary:
Even though there has never been a rational basis for objecting to the split infinitive, the subject has become a fixture of folk belief about grammar….Modern commentators…usually say it’s all right to split an infinitive in the interest of clarity. Since clarity is the usual reason for splitting, this advice means merely that you can split them whenever you need to."
[And yes, that quote ends a sentence with a preposition....]
Pinker issues the caveat that endeavoring to achieve clarity should not come at the expense of grace and beauty: “language ought to be a source of pleasure.”
He doesn’t always follow his own advice, however. For example, he actually defends Bill Clinton’s misuse of the nominative pronoun in his statement, “Give Al Gore and I a chance….” (Elsewhere, he decries awkward-sounding use of the predicative nominative case, such as lamenting “Woe is I” instead of “Woe is Me.” Could Pinker’s politics be influencing his grammar preferences?)
In general, though, his approach to correct diction is fairly permissive. For instance, he tolerates aggravate for “annoy” and healthy for “healthful.” He even says that the use of "hopefully" as a full sentence modifying adverb is just a newer usage that follows in the tracks of candidly, frankly, and mercifully. He may be right, but, “Hopefully, it will stop raining,” still sounds like an abomination to me.
On the other hand, Pinker is quite critical of misusing words that sound like related but distinct words, such as credible for credulous, flaunt for flout, and fortuitous for fortunate. And he probably fights against insuperable odds by insisting that data is the plural form of datum and that a parameter is a variable but not a boundary condition.
The real thrust of the book is not just a series of dos and don’ts. It is a paean to what he calls the Classic Style, an orderly way of writing in which the author remains aware of what the reader is likely to know and not know and is sensitive to the respective roles of syntax and prosody in conveying meaning.
Evaluation: Pinker has written extensively on how the mind works, and his advice here is directed at showing writers how to structure sentences and paragraphs to be more easily ingested, digested, and understood. This is not a dry vademecum however, by any means. The author has included many humorous quotes and observations, and I found myself frequently laughing out loud.
I recommend this book for all aspiring authors, as well as those who enjoy both literature and literacy.
(JAB)
Show Less
LibraryThing member browner56
It is rare to find a reference book—particularly a language style manual—that is interesting and insightful enough to merit reading from cover to cover. However, that is exactly what The Sense of Style proved to be for me. Written by a cognitive scientist with a linguistics background, the
The book is essentially split into two parts. In the first, Pinker goes to great lengths to convince the reader why style actually matters as well as how the modern writer can achieve what he calls “classic style”. In the second part, the author offers a very practical guide to reinterpreting many of the traditional rules defining correct grammar, word choice, and punctuation that we have been subjected to over the years. One good example is the age-old admonishment to avoid using split infinitives, which Pinker labels as “downright pernicious”. He points out that this rule evolved from the Latin where it is actually impossible to split verbs (e.g., amare = to love). However, this is not an issue in English and so mindlessly applying the same restriction can create syntax that is both imprecise and misleading.
The Sense of Style is full of great examples of prose that works well and also writing that does not. Perhaps my favorite chapter (or, at least, the one that I found to be the most useful) is “The Web, the Tree, and the String”. In this section, the author revives the “lost art” of diagramming sentences to stress the point that how sentences are composed can make it either very easy or very difficult for the reader to follow the writer’s message. Using upside-down trees, he shows that sentences that are too left- or center-branching (i.e., too much information coming too early) make it hard for the audience to maintain focus until the end of the thought. This is very practical information that nicely ties together the cognitive theory and style usage themes of the book. It is also information that I find myself using every day, which is ultimately the best compliment I can offer.
Show More
premise of the work is both compelling and eminently sensible: Why don’t we create style and usage rules that make sense from the perspective of how the reader processes information in the most effective way? That is, rather than blindly adhering to the sort of conventional wisdom represented in volumes such as Strunk and White’s The Elements of Style, let’s rethink our style maxims to promote “clarity and grace” in the message received by the intended audience.The book is essentially split into two parts. In the first, Pinker goes to great lengths to convince the reader why style actually matters as well as how the modern writer can achieve what he calls “classic style”. In the second part, the author offers a very practical guide to reinterpreting many of the traditional rules defining correct grammar, word choice, and punctuation that we have been subjected to over the years. One good example is the age-old admonishment to avoid using split infinitives, which Pinker labels as “downright pernicious”. He points out that this rule evolved from the Latin where it is actually impossible to split verbs (e.g., amare = to love). However, this is not an issue in English and so mindlessly applying the same restriction can create syntax that is both imprecise and misleading.
The Sense of Style is full of great examples of prose that works well and also writing that does not. Perhaps my favorite chapter (or, at least, the one that I found to be the most useful) is “The Web, the Tree, and the String”. In this section, the author revives the “lost art” of diagramming sentences to stress the point that how sentences are composed can make it either very easy or very difficult for the reader to follow the writer’s message. Using upside-down trees, he shows that sentences that are too left- or center-branching (i.e., too much information coming too early) make it hard for the audience to maintain focus until the end of the thought. This is very practical information that nicely ties together the cognitive theory and style usage themes of the book. It is also information that I find myself using every day, which is ultimately the best compliment I can offer.
Show Less
LibraryThing member jgrann
So good. Pinker's application of psychology and scientific argument to writing was fantastic. His writing exemplifies the classic writing style he advocates for and this internal consistency was even more persuasive for me than his various excellent points. Writers today need to focus on
Show More
communicating their point clearly and persuasively. Some specific strategies included using descriptive language, focusing on the phenomena not the researchers, recasting idioms, creating sentences with right branching tress, and having someone else read your work. The back section also offers plenty of specific advice on grammar, quantity words, and tricky words, which will be particularly useful for crafting formal writing. By basing his arguments and suggestions in cognitive research, Pinker unexpectedly built motivation through understanding without resorting to shaming more typical writers. Totally impressive and useful, I highly recommend. Show Less
LibraryThing member brakketh
An enjoyable and accessible guide to modern writing.
LibraryThing member DLMorrese
This isn't just a reference book. It's a witty and informative style guide of just over 300 pages that you can read from cover to cover with some measure of enjoyment. Although it is primarily intended for writers of nonfiction, it provides insightful guidance on grammar, punctuation, and word
Show More
(mis)use that anyone can use to create more effective prose. Show Less
LibraryThing member anitatally
I am a grammar nerd, so of course I loved this book!
LibraryThing member fpagan
An up-to-date style guide for writers of English, delightful and finely crafted, benefiting from Pinker's usual verve and from his knowledge of linguistic theory and the history of the language. By no means is the book concerned solely with the numerous controversies about grammar and word meanings
Show More
but, when Pinker does zero in on these, he often comes down on the permissive side. To unabashedly split infinitives? No problem. Prepositions that sentences can end with? Absolutely. (But, for example, he rightly deplores "this criteria" as sounding like nails on a chalkboard.) One thing that surprised me was the strength of his case for a large degree of interchangeability of "that" and "which" as introducers of restrictive relative clauses; unlike him and many other writers, I think that "that" is almost always nicer than "which" for this purpose. Show Less
LibraryThing member adzebill
Lots of good tips here, and some recommendations rooted in linguistics and knowledge of how readers actually read. Does descend into sticklery language purism at the end. Would have liked to see more data-driven usage like that in Garner's book.
LibraryThing member Silvernfire
Not your typical writing reference book. In the first half, Pinker applies linguistics and neuroscience to writing. This was the part that tempted me into buying the book, and for the most part, I enjoyed reading it. Pinker's aim isn't to give you writing rules, but to explain what a clear,
The second half of the book is when Pinker looks at the rules for what to do and not do in your writing. It's still readable, as he takes the time to explain why these rules should or shouldn't be followed. But it's a lot more episodic than the first half, and you can dip into it as needed if you don't want to read it from start to finish. Overall, this is a book to read if you want a better understanding of why good writing works in order to improve your own writing. If you need a style guide, though, you'll probably want some other book altogether.
Show More
understandable writing style entails. My favorite chapter was "The Curse of Knowledge:" where he explains why the people who really understand a subject are so often horrible at writing about it—which I suspect was the problem with my least favorite chapter, "The Web, the Tree, and the String." I was interested in the topic—convoluted, confusing sentences, and why they're hard to follow—but the chapter got bogged down in sentence diagramming trees and technical terms. I minored in linguistics, and I still had to force myself to finish this chapter. Yes, the chapter after that was much more interesting!The second half of the book is when Pinker looks at the rules for what to do and not do in your writing. It's still readable, as he takes the time to explain why these rules should or shouldn't be followed. But it's a lot more episodic than the first half, and you can dip into it as needed if you don't want to read it from start to finish. Overall, this is a book to read if you want a better understanding of why good writing works in order to improve your own writing. If you need a style guide, though, you'll probably want some other book altogether.
Show Less
LibraryThing member annbury
I loved Steven Pinker's "The Language Instinct" and "The Better Angels of Our Nature", and I love style guides, so I eagerly awaited the release of this book. Alas, when it came out and I read it, my high hopes were disappointed. This book provides an interesting and potentially very useful
Starting with the best, Chapter 5 ("Arcs of Coherence") goes beyond grammer to examine style (clarity, impact, coherence) more broadly. I found this very interesting, and very unusual in that most writing about style stops with grammer. Chapter 3 ("The Curse of Knowledge") also sparked some definite "ah ha!" moments. Writers who are expert in a field do indeed too often assume that their readers know more about a subject than the readers in fact do, because the writers are so immersed in the field themselves. The book is well worth reading for these two chapters alone, and some other sections are also interesting and helpful. In addition, the overall tone -- reasons not rules -- is a big positive, and the book is engagingly written. Finally, thank you Mr. Pinker for using "she" rather than "he" as the generic pronoun a lot of the time.
But one section of the book -- the one on grammer -- does not live up to the good bits, or indeed to Pinker's own central theme. Again and again, he stresses that clarity is essential to good writing. His own section on grammer, however, was not entirely clear to me. In particular, the introduction of "deep structure" into his discussion of syntax (Chapter 4 -- "The Web, The Tree, and The String") left me somewhat baffled. Pinker himself says that if a reader says "I think I understand it", she probably doesn't. In reading through this section (more than once), I kept thinking "i think I understand it". And there was something familiar about that fuzzy feeling: over the years, I have read a good bit about language and linguistics, but Noam Chomsky always left me thinking "I think I understand it". Upon reconsideration, I don't think I did, and I don't think that I fully grasped Pinker's Chapter 4 either.
I would definitely recommend this book to anyone interested in the process of writing: you can learn a lot. But I would not say that this book is a definitive guide to current English style, which is I suppose what I was hoping for. Still, I definitely intend to read it again, and will update my review after doing so.
Show More
approach to writing well (or more properly not writing badly), basing its analysis of style and (mostly) grammer on the way people think, not on arbitrary rules. In some parts, it meets that objective; in others, I think that it falls short. Starting with the best, Chapter 5 ("Arcs of Coherence") goes beyond grammer to examine style (clarity, impact, coherence) more broadly. I found this very interesting, and very unusual in that most writing about style stops with grammer. Chapter 3 ("The Curse of Knowledge") also sparked some definite "ah ha!" moments. Writers who are expert in a field do indeed too often assume that their readers know more about a subject than the readers in fact do, because the writers are so immersed in the field themselves. The book is well worth reading for these two chapters alone, and some other sections are also interesting and helpful. In addition, the overall tone -- reasons not rules -- is a big positive, and the book is engagingly written. Finally, thank you Mr. Pinker for using "she" rather than "he" as the generic pronoun a lot of the time.
But one section of the book -- the one on grammer -- does not live up to the good bits, or indeed to Pinker's own central theme. Again and again, he stresses that clarity is essential to good writing. His own section on grammer, however, was not entirely clear to me. In particular, the introduction of "deep structure" into his discussion of syntax (Chapter 4 -- "The Web, The Tree, and The String") left me somewhat baffled. Pinker himself says that if a reader says "I think I understand it", she probably doesn't. In reading through this section (more than once), I kept thinking "i think I understand it". And there was something familiar about that fuzzy feeling: over the years, I have read a good bit about language and linguistics, but Noam Chomsky always left me thinking "I think I understand it". Upon reconsideration, I don't think I did, and I don't think that I fully grasped Pinker's Chapter 4 either.
I would definitely recommend this book to anyone interested in the process of writing: you can learn a lot. But I would not say that this book is a definitive guide to current English style, which is I suppose what I was hoping for. Still, I definitely intend to read it again, and will update my review after doing so.
Show Less
LibraryThing member dmturner
Yet another style book, this one written by the famously knowledgeable psycholinguist Steven Pinker. His description of classic style is opaque and his explication of the linguistics of grammar gives both too much information and not enough to make it clear how school grammar gets it wrong.
Show More
However, parts are delightful and I particularly liked his defense of the singular "they." It was a slog getting through the book, though. He's not as elegant a writer as he thinks he is. I still recommend it. Show Less
LibraryThing member thenumeraltwo
A readable book of grammar! Having tried and failed with Fowler's Modern English and Strunk & White (both sitting hopeful on my desk at work), Pinker's decision to give the first third of the book to a readable essay tricked me into reading this. In fact, it was only when seeing the rule set in the
Show More
monster Chapter 6 did I realise this was a book on grammar. Show Less
LibraryThing member faganjc
This book is more of a collection of observations than a systematic style manual. That said, Pinker's background makes his observations highly relevant for me as an academic. I certainly fall into the traps he describes. After reading his description of the Classic Style and its advantages I can
Show More
see it when others use that style (or don't) and I am beginning to be able to write better sentences when I put my mind to it. There is a chapter on coherence I should probably read again. Show Less
LibraryThing member Charon07
A great debunking of Miss Thistlebottom's hobgoblins, as well as excellent, practical advice for clear, classic prose writing. Not a reference guide per se, except for the last chapter, which I found valuable more as insight into a good writer and linguist's pet peeves (see, we all have them!).
LibraryThing member steve02476
I'm always happy to read a Steven Pinker book. Unlike a lot of "improve your writing" books this one has a lot about why certain writing styles work better than others - not just a lot of rules to be memorized.
LibraryThing member qaphsiel
4.5 out of 5.
I listened to this, which might seem a bit strange for a book on writing style, but well worth it. Arthur Morey gives a excellent narration, intonating the bits of wry humor Pinker wrote perfectly.
Grammar and style are well-mined fields only slightly less contentious than abortion,
Pinker states that we needed a modern style guide to replace the aging standbys and I couldn't agree more. I can think of a couple style guides of recent vintage that cover the style and grammar in a similarly useful way, but none of them broke into the mainstream. Pinker's popular enough that hopefully The Sense of Style will.
I listened to this, which might seem a bit strange for a book on writing style, but well worth it. Arthur Morey gives a excellent narration, intonating the bits of wry humor Pinker wrote perfectly.
Grammar and style are well-mined fields only slightly less contentious than abortion,
Show More
Palestine and US foreign policy. Pinker, though, had the right combination of bravery and audacity to tackle them. For my money, he did a great job. The advice is eminently practical - always backed up by solid reasons. Typically to benefit the reader: to make comprehension easier, to help the text flow better, to avoid ambiguity. At the end of the book is, if anywhere, were one may differ with Pinker. He evaluates various grammar and usage rules and opines on whether they should be followed or not. But, even in this section, he gives practical reasons and the opinion of a panel of usage experts. Sometimes the reasons are rooted in simply being coherent and avoiding confusion; sometimes a rule is on the silly side, but violating it will piss off so many and/or make them think you are either stupid or careless you should simply knuckle under and follow it regardless of how silly it may be. In the few instances where he descends to prescriptivism, he admits it.Pinker states that we needed a modern style guide to replace the aging standbys and I couldn't agree more. I can think of a couple style guides of recent vintage that cover the style and grammar in a similarly useful way, but none of them broke into the mainstream. Pinker's popular enough that hopefully The Sense of Style will.
Show Less
LibraryThing member PDCRead
What makes writing good? Is is a pedantic knowledge of of all the rules and having perfect grammar and punctuation or understanding those rules and knowing when to bend them? Writing well is not an easy task, ask any author who has a deadline, as it demands consistency and coherence. In this book
The book is full of examples of how to write well, as well as illustrations of how not to do it. His wit and humour underlies all that he writes, as he outlines best practice, and then mentions that he disobeyed the rules in the paragraph before and did you notice? He has selected a number of cartoons to illustrate his points and has a series of anecdotes to reinforce the points that he is making, the most amusing of which was where an academic had written a critic of Eats Shoots and Leaves by Lynne Truss, pointing out all her grammatical errors; he then had another author write an article highlighting the errors he had made. It could have gone on forever…
Overall it was worth reading. It is written from an American linguistic perspective, but he does acknowledge the subtle differences between their language and ours. The English language is an immense too that has layers and layers of complexity and subtlety, and this goes so way to give modern writers a framework.
One to dip into again I think.
Show More
the linguist Steve Pinker brings us the latest scientific understanding about what makes our language great. The book is full of examples of how to write well, as well as illustrations of how not to do it. His wit and humour underlies all that he writes, as he outlines best practice, and then mentions that he disobeyed the rules in the paragraph before and did you notice? He has selected a number of cartoons to illustrate his points and has a series of anecdotes to reinforce the points that he is making, the most amusing of which was where an academic had written a critic of Eats Shoots and Leaves by Lynne Truss, pointing out all her grammatical errors; he then had another author write an article highlighting the errors he had made. It could have gone on forever…
Overall it was worth reading. It is written from an American linguistic perspective, but he does acknowledge the subtle differences between their language and ours. The English language is an immense too that has layers and layers of complexity and subtlety, and this goes so way to give modern writers a framework.
One to dip into again I think.
Show Less
LibraryThing member mykl-s
I read "Sense of Style" some time ago, but somehow did not add it to my LibraryThing list. In fact, I still have some pages copied from its glossary, ones I've looked at more than once. So when I saw the book on a library shelf, it seemed worth checking out again.
Pinker writes well and studies
The index, twenty pages or more, is actually useful, as an index should be, but often isn't in a book like this. One that will be a reference work as well as a guide for writers and readers. The many examples of good and bad writing are usually clear and to the point and well explained.
This is a book I maybe should own.
This is also a book I wish more writers owned and used.
Pinker writes well and studies
Show More
human thinking and language, so it's worth knowing what he believes good writing, mostly non-fiction writing, should look like. I'm not disappointed. He discusses the goal of describing a topic for a reader who is as smart as the author, but who doesn't know as much about the topic as the author does. "Clear" and "simple" are terms that come up often. The index, twenty pages or more, is actually useful, as an index should be, but often isn't in a book like this. One that will be a reference work as well as a guide for writers and readers. The many examples of good and bad writing are usually clear and to the point and well explained.
This is a book I maybe should own.
This is also a book I wish more writers owned and used.
Show Less
Subjects
Awards
The Economist Best Books (2014.8)
Publishers Weekly's Best Books of the Year (Nonfiction — 2014)
Language
Original publication date
2014
ISBN
0670025852 / 9780670025855