Sentence Fragments and Run-on sentences

[MMI]

None of the above applies to simple phrases. You can disregard them utterly even if you have never published a word before.

And, of course, it is perfectly possible to break rules without knowing them, and still be understood - and that's what most writers are aiming for. After all, what authority is there for any rule of grammar? Certainly not OUP or the US Government Printing Office. Their standards have persuasive authority only.

Common usage is the only reliable authority I can think of.

I, personally, reject any notion that the possesive form of Jesus is Jesus' and the suggestion that the possessive of conscience is conscience' is supremely ridiculous.

It's not bad grammar that is the problem - any one of us can cope with grammatical mistakes while we are reading, and most of us will pass over them without even noticing. The rest of us are probably pedants.

No, the real problem is poor expression: not making the proper connections between your thoughts and your writing. You know what you mean, but somehow, you set it down on paper ambiguously.

I once submited a piece of writing for a competition in which I broke virtually every rule of grammar that applied. But my story made perfect sense and conveyed the flavour of the character's thoughts that rigid grammatical precision would have destroyed. I didn't think, as I was writing, Ah! I shall ignore the need to make sure subject and verb agree. I simply had to write it that way.

[blythe spirit]

This thread is well worth the read. Interesting. I endeavor to be as grammatically correct in my writing as the imperfections of today's grammar will allow. Oft' times I fail.

I once submited a piece of writing for a competition in which I broke virtually every rule of grammar that applied. But my story made perfect sense and conveyed the flavour of the character's thoughts that rigid grammatical precision would have destroyed. I didn't think, as I was writing, Ah! I shall ignore the need to make sure subject and verb agree. I simply had to write it that way.

The above quote amazes me. Of course, you didn't say if you "won" the competition, or not? I've found competition to be extremely technical on proper grammar, even when not grammar related, because there are an abundance of entries. I was once disqualified, because I used my initials, rather than my full first name. Guess they never heard of e.e. cummings or T.S. Eliot. lol

Due to the rigidity of competition, MMI, I was always pleased when my piece was awarded. Obviously, they judged on more than the content. I would really like to know in what competitions proper grammar is not expected, because I'd like to enter. hehehe

[MMI]

This thread is well worth the read. Interesting. I endeavor to be as grammatically correct in my writing as the imperfections of today's grammar will allow. Oft' times I fail.




The above quote amazes me. Of course, you didn't say if you "won" the competition, or not? I've found competition to be extremely technical on proper grammar, even when not grammar related, because there are an abundance of entries. I was once disqualified, because I used my initials, rather than my full first name. Guess they never heard of e.e. cummings or T.S. Eliot. lol

Due to the rigidity of competition, MMI, I was always pleased when my piece was awarded. Obviously, they judged on more than the content. I would really like to know in what competitions proper grammar is not expected, because I'd like to enter. hehehe

Not even placed!

Your implied suggestion that only if I'd won would my earlier post have been valid is refuted. By expecting me to win, you are, perhaps, less demanding than those who permit me to only use bad grammar if I've sold half a million books, but I reject your yardstick as much as theirs.

I did receive several complimentary messages from readers and fellow competitors, however, and not one of them objected to the grammatical "mistakes".

But I suspect that hardly anyone here - if anyone at all - finds my incorrect use of English interferes with their understanding of what I say. I would go so far as to suggest that pedantic adherence to correct grammar can and frequently does make comprehension much harder, however - to the unending joy of lawyers, no doubt; and if that is the case, I'm all for disregarding the rules. Common usage is greater authority than Strunk and Fowler combined!

Remember, whole languages have developed and are spoken fluently by man and child without the need for grammarians to impose their arcane rules about what word order to use, whether a word is a noun or a substantive, and how it should be declined, or how a verb must be conjugated. They are probably all the better for it.