Quote:
Originally Posted by rhadin
I think the fallacy with that approach is that the authors who chose to ignore the rules of grammar did so with knowledge of what the rules were and found that the rules stifled the message they were trying to convey.
The rules of grammar are designed to ensure that communication is understandable. Isaac Asimov, to use one of your examples, deviated from the rules of grammar only after many years of writing that adhered to the rules, that is, after having mastered the rules. Twain deviated to make a point.
I also think you mistake the rules of grammar for a straitjacket. They are not rigid, unbendable rules; they are guides to ensure what you write can be understood by any reader. The rules are always in flux; the only immutable rule of grammar is to write clearly so that any reader can understand your message.
|
I didn't mean to imply that the rules weren't needed or anything like that, just that past authors (or living authors) who I read the work of do show good examples of how to write for clarity and good pacing, among other things. You can study the rules of Chess all you want but until you see a game played (or play one yourself) you will miss out on some of the substance of the game itself.