The Elements of Style

Oliver Strunk

 

 

 

 

Generations of Americans have grown up on a diet of Strunk’s ‘Elements of Style.’ I am not an American. I just mind my own business and to the best of my abilities follow the unwritten rules of human decency. But then I turned a corner and suddenly faced Moses himself, without the beard. He was carving in stone the very commandments of what had been my way of living all along - only this wasn’t Moses and it wasn’t about the rules of morality. It was Oliver Strunk and a book about style. American style to be precise.

 

A style that by now should be the hallmark of modern style everywhere. Of course we all know when Moses had written the ten commandments he still was the same man as before - at the time a fugitive wanted for homicide in Egypt - but at least for everybody else it was put out there as a choice to do better. Oliver Strunk has set in stone what to do in order to write good style, and he said it in a way that everybody can absorb - a style by the people, for the people, of the people. You do it his way or you don’t even need to try.

 

And that should be the end of it: we all learn how to do it, and so from now on everybody will write as good as the next, right? Wrong. The ‘Elements of Style’ is a tool, it is not something to hide behind. Strunk’s ‘Elements’ perform a double act. First it teaches you how to write good style, then it upstages your incompetence. Everybody can master the elements, but not everybody can plug in the elements into his temperament, let alone boast a temperament worth plugging in. If you have it in you, you will succeed. If not ... .

 

michael sympson, December 2006

 

Contents

Introduction

 

I. Elementary Rules of Usage

 

1. Form the possessive singular of nouns by adding 's.

2. In a series of three or more terms with a single conjunction, use a comma after each term except the last.

3. Enclose parenthetic expressions between commas.

4. Place a comma before a conjunction introducing an independent clause.

5. Do not join independent clauses with a comma.

6. Do not break sentences in two.

7. Use a colon after an independent clause to introduce a list of particulars, an appositive, an amplification, or an illustrative quotation.

8. Use a dash to set off an abrupt break or interruption and to announce a long appositive or summary.

9. The number of the subject determines the number of the verb.

10. Use the proper case of pronoun.

11. A participial phrase at the beginning of a sentence must refer to the grammatical subject.

 

II. Elementary Principles of Composition

 

12. Choose a suitable design and hold to it.

13. Make the paragraph the unit of composition.

14. Use the active voice.

15. Put statements in positive form.

16. Use definite, specific, concrete language.

17. Omit needless words.

18. Avoid a succession of loose sentences.

19. Express coordinate ideas in similar form.

20. Keep related words together.

21. In summaries, keep to one tense.

22. Place the emphatic words of a sentence at the end.

 

III. A few Matters of Form

 

IV. Words and Expressions commonly misused

 

V. An Approach to Style (With a List of Reminders)

 

1. Place yourself in the background.

2. Write in a way that comes naturally.

3. Work from a suitable design.

4. Write with nouns and verbs.

5. Revise and rewrite.

6. Do not overwrite.

7. Do not overstate.

8. Avoid the use of qualifiers.

9. Do not affect a breezy manner.

10. Use orthodox spelling.

11. Do not explain too much.

12. Do not construct awkward adverbs.

13. Make sure the reader knows who is speaking.

14. Avoid fancy words.

15. Do not use dialect unless your ear is good.

16. Be clear.

17. Do not inject opinion.

18. Use figures of speech sparingly.

19. Do not take shortcuts at the cost of clarity.

20. Avoid foreign languages.

21. Prefer the standard to the offbeat.

 

Glossary

 

 

Introduction

 

At the close of the first World War, when I was a student at Cornell, I took a course called English 8. My professor was William Strunk Jr. A textbook required for the course was a slim volume called The Elements of Style, whose author was the professor himself. The year was 1919. The book was known on the campus in those days as "the little book," with the stress on the word "little." It had been privately printed by the author.

 

I passed the course, graduated from the university, and forgot the book but not the professor. Some thirty-eight years later, the book bobbed up again in my life when Macmillan commissioned me to revise it for the college market and the general trade. Meantime, Professor Strunk had died.

 

The Elements of Style, when I reexamined it in 1957, seemed to me to contain rich deposits of gold. It was Will Strunk's parvum opus, his attempt to cut the vast tangle of English rhetoric down to size and write its rules and principles on the head of a pin. Will himself had hung the tag "little" on the book; he referred to it sardonically and with secret pride as "the little book," always giving the word "little" a special twist, as though he were putting a spin on a ball. In its original form, it was a forty-three page summation of the case for cleanliness, accuracy, and brevity in the use of English. Today, fifty-two years later, its vigor is unimpaired, and for sheer pith I think it probably sets a record that is not likely to be broken. Even after I got through tampering with it, it was still a tiny thing, a barely tarnished gem. Seven rules of usage, eleven principles of composition, a few matters of form, and a list of words and expressions commonly misused — that was the sum and substance of Professor Strunk's work. Somewhat audaciously, and in an attempt to give my publisher his money's worth, I added a chapter called "An Approach to Style," setting forth my own prejudices, my notions of error, my articles of faith. This chapter (Chapter V) is addressed particularly to those who feel that English prose composition is not only a necessary skill but a sensible pursuit as well — a way to spend one's days. I think Professor Strunk would not object to that.

 

A second edition of the book was published in 1972. I have now completed a third revision. Chapter IV has been refurbished with words and expressions of a recent vintage; four rules of usage have been added to Chapter I. Fresh examples have been added to some of the rules and principles, amplification has reared its head in a few places in the text where I felt an assault could successfully be made on the bastions of its brevity, and in general the book has received a thorough overhaul — to correct errors, delete bewhiskered entries, and enliven the argument.

 

Professor Strunk was a positive man. His book contains rules of grammar phrased as direct orders. In the main I have not tried to soften his commands, or modify his pronouncements, or remove the special objects of his scorn. I have tried, instead, to preserve the flavor of his discontent while slightly enlarging the scope of the discussion. The Elements of Style does not pretend to survey the whole field. Rather it proposes to give in brief space the principal requirements of plain English style. It concentrates on fundamentals: the rules of usage and principles of composition most commonly violated.

 

The reader will soon discover that these rules and principles are in the form of sharp commands, Sergeant Strunk snapping orders to his platoon. "Do not join independent clauses with a comma." (Rule 5.) "Do not break sentences in two." (Rule 6.) "Use the active voice." (Rule 14.) "Omit needless words." (Rule 17.) "Avoid a succession of loose sentences." (Rule 18.) "In summaries, keep to one tense." (Rule 21.) Each rule or principle is followed by a short hortatory essay, and usually the exhortation is followed by, or interlarded with, examples in parallel columns — the true vs. the false, the right vs. the wrong, the timid vs. the bold, the ragged vs. the trim. From every line there peers out at me the puckish face of my professor, his short hair parted neatly in the middle and combed down over his forehead, his eyes blinking incessantly behind steel-rimmed spectacles as though he had just emerged into strong light, his lips nibbling each other like nervous horses, his smile shuttling to and fro under a carefully edged mustache.

 

"Omit needless words!" cries the author on page 23, and into that imperative Will Strunk really put his heart and soul. In the days when I was sitting in his class, he omitted so many needless words, and omitted them so forcibly and with such eagerness and obvious relish, that he often seemed in the position of having shortchanged himself — a man left with nothing more to say yet with time to fill, a radio prophet who had out-distanced the clock. Will Strunk got out of this predicament by a simple trick: he uttered every sentence three times. When he delivered his oration on brevity to the class, he leaned forward over his desk, grasped his coat lapels in his hands, and, in a husky, conspiratorial voice, said, "Rule Seventeen. Omit needless words! Omit needless words! Omit needless words!"

 

He was a memorable man, friendly and funny. Under the remembered sting of his kindly lash, I have been trying to omit needless words since 1919, and although there are still many words that cry for omission and the huge task will never be accomplished, it is exciting to me to reread the masterly Strunkian elaboration of this noble theme. It goes:

 

Vigorous writing is concise. A sentence should contain no unnecessary words, a paragraph no unnecessary sentences, for the same reason that a drawing should have no unnecessary lines and a machine no unnecessary parts. This requires not that the writer make all sentences short or avoid all detail and treat subjects only in outline, but that every word tell.

 

There you have a short, valuable essay on the nature and beauty of brevity — fifty-nine words that could change the world. Having recovered from his adventure in prolixity (fifty-nine words were a lot of words in the tight world of William Strunk Jr.), the professor proceeds to give a few quick lessons in pruning. Students learn to cut the dead-wood from "this is a subject that," reducing it to "this subject," a saving of three words. They learn to trim "used for fuel purposes" down to "used for fuel." They learn that they are being chatterboxes when they say "the question as to whether" and that they should just say "whether" — a saving of four words out of a possible five.

 

The professor devotes a special paragraph to the vile expression the fact that, a phrase that causes him to quiver with revulsion. The expression, he says, should be "revised out of every sentence in which it occurs." But a shadow of gloom seems to hang over the page, and you feel that he knows how hopeless his cause is. I suppose I have written the fact that a thousand times in the heat of composition, revised it out maybe five hundred times in the cool aftermath. To be batting only .500 this late in the season, to fail half the time to connect with this fat pitch, saddens me, for it seems a betrayal of the man who showed me how to swing at it and made the swinging seem worthwhile.

 

I treasure The Elements of Style for its sharp advice, but I treasure it even more for the audacity and self-confidence of its author. Will knew where he stood. He was so sure of where he stood, and made his position so clear and so plausible, that his peculiar stance has continued to invigorate me — and, I am sure, thousands of other ex-students — during the years that have intervened since our first encounter. He had a number of likes and dislikes that were almost as whimsical as the choice of a necktie, yet he made them seem utterly convincing. He disliked the word forceful and advised us to use forcible instead. He felt that the word clever was greatly overused: "It is best restricted to ingenuity displayed in small matters." He despised the expression student body, which he termed gruesome, and made a special trip downtown to the Alumni News office one day to protest the expression and suggest that studentry be substituted — a coinage of his own, which he felt was similar to citizenry. I am told that the News editor was so charmed by the visit, if not by the word, that he ordered the student body buried, never to rise again. Studentry has taken its place. It's not much of an improvement, but it does sound less cadaverous, and it made Will Strunk quite happy.

 

Some years ago, when the heir to the throne of England was a child, I noticed a headline in the Times about Bonnie Prince Charlie: "CHARLES' TONSILS OUT." Immediately Rule 1 leapt to mind.

 

1. Form the possessive singular of nouns by adding 's. Follow this rule whatever the final consonant. Thus write,

 

    Charles's friend

 

    Burns's poems

 

    the witch's malice

 

Clearly, Will Strunk had foreseen, as far back as 1918, the dangerous tonsillectomy of a prince, in which the surgeon removes the tonsils and the Times copy desk removes the final s. He started his book with it. I commend Rule 1 to the Times, and I trust that Charles's throat, not Charles' throat, is in fine shape today.

 

Style rules of this sort are, of course, somewhat a matter of individual preference, and even the established rules of grammar are open to challenge. Professor Strunk, although one of the most inflexible and choosy of men, was quick to acknowledge the fallacy of inflexibility and the danger of doctrine. "It is an old observation," he wrote, "that the best writers sometimes disregard the rules of rhetoric. When they do so, however, the reader will usually find in the sentence some compensating merit, attained at the cost of the violation. Unless he is certain of doing as well, he will probably do best to follow the rules."

 

It is encouraging to see how perfectly a book, even a dusty rule book, perpetuates and extends the spirit of a man. Will Strunk loved the clear, the brief, the bold, and his book is clear, brief, bold. Boldness is perhaps its chief distinguishing mark. On page 26, explaining one of his parallels, he says, "The lefthand version gives the impression that the writer is undecided or timid, apparently unable or afraid to choose one form of expression and hold to it." And his original Rule 11 was "Make definite assertions." That was Will all over. He scorned the vague, the tame, the colorless, the irresolute. He felt it was worse to be irresolute than to be wrong. I remember a day in class when he leaned far forward, in his characteristic pose — the pose of a man about to impart a secret — and croaked, "If you don't know how to pronounce a word, say it loud! If you don't know how to pronounce a word, say it loud!" This comical piece of advice struck me as sound at the time, and I still respect it. Why compound ignorance with inaudibility? Why run and hide?

 

All through The Elements of Style one finds evidences of the author's deep sympathy for the reader. Will felt that the reader was in serious trouble most of the time, floundering in a swamp, and that it was the duty of anyone attempting to write English to drain this swamp quickly and get the reader up on dry ground, or at least to throw a rope. In revising the text, I have tried to hold steadily in mind this belief of his, this concern for the bewildered reader.

 

In the English classes of today, "the little book" is surrounded by longer, lower textbooks — books with permissive steering and automatic transitions. Perhaps the book has become something of a curiosity. To me, it still seems to maintain its original poise, standing, in a drafty time, erect, resolute, and assured. I still find the Strunkian wisdom a comfort, the Strunkian humor a delight, and the Strunkian attitude toward right-and- wrong a blessing undisguised.

 

1979

 

The Elements of Style

 

I. Elementary Rules of Usage

 

1. Form the possessive singular of nouns by adding 's.

 

Follow this rule whatever the final consonant. Thus write,

 

    Charles's friend

 

    Burns's poems

 

    the witch's malice

 

Exceptions are the possessives of ancient proper names ending in -es and -is, the possessive Jesus', and such forms as for conscience' sake, for righteousness' sake. But such forms as Moses' Laws, Isis' temple are commonly replaced by

 

    the laws of Moses

 

    the temple of Isis

 

The pronominal possessives hers, its, theirs, yours, and ours have no apostrophe. Indefinite pronouns, however, use the apostrophe to show possession.

 

    one's rights

 

    somebody else's umbrella

 

A common error is to write it's for its, or vice versa. The first is a contraction, meaning "it is." The second is a possessive.

 

    It's a wise dog that scratches its own fleas.

 

2. In a series of three or more terms with a single conjunction, use a comma after each term except the last.

 

Thus write,

 

    red, white, and blue gold, silver, or copper

 

    He opened the letter, read it, and made a note of its contents.

 

This comma is often referred to as the "serial" comma. In the names of business firms the last comma is usually omitted. Follow the usage of the individual firm.

 

    Little, Brown and Company Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette

 

3. Enclose parenthetic expressions between commas.

 

The best way to see a country, unless you are pressed for time, is to travel on foot.

 

This rule is difficult to apply; it is frequently hard to decide whether a single word, such as however, or a brief phrase is or is not parenthetic. If the interruption to the flow of the sentence is but slight, the commas may be safely omitted. But whether the interruption is slight or considerable, never omit one comma and leave the other. There is no defense for such punctuation as

 

    Marjories husband, Colonel Nelson paid us a visit yesterday. or

 

    My brother you will be pleased to hear, is now in perfect health.

 

Dates usually contain parenthetic words or figures. Punctuate as follows:

 

    February to July, 1992

 

    April 6, 1986

 

    Wednesday, November 14, 1990

 

Note that it is customary to omit the comma in

 

    6 April 1988

 

The last form is an excellent way to write a date; the figures are separated by a word and are, for that reason, quickly grasped.

 

A name or a title in direct address is parenthetic.

 

    If, Sir, you refuse, I cannot predict what will happen.

 

    Well, Susan, this is a fine mess you are in.

 

The abbreviations etc., i.e., and e.g., the abbreviations for academic degrees, and titles that follow a name are parenthetic and should be punctuated accordingly.

 

    Letters, packages, etc., should go here.

 

    Horace Fulsome, Ph.D., presided.

 

    Rachel Simonds, Attorney

 

    The Reverend Harry Lang, S.J.

 

No comma, however, should separate a noun from a restrictive term of identification.

 

    Billy the Kid

 

    The novelist Jane Austen

 

    William the Conqueror

 

    The poet Sappho

 

Although Junior, with its abbreviation Jr., has commonly been regarded as parenthetic, logic suggests that it is, in fact, restrictive and therefore not in need of a comma.

 

    James Wright Jr.

 

Nonrestrictive relative clauses are parenthetic, as are similar clauses introduced by conjunctions indicating time or place. Commas are therefore needed. A nonrestrictive clause is one that does not serve to identify or define the antecedent noun.

 

The audience, which had at first been indifferent, became more and more interested.

 

In 1769, when Napoleon was born, Corsica had but recently been acquired by France.

 

Nether Stowey, where Coleridge wrote The Rime of the Ancient Mariner, is a few miles from Bridgewater.

 

In these sentences, the clauses introduced by which, when, and where are nonrestrictive; they do not limit or define, they merely add something. In the first example, the clause introduced by which does not serve to tell which of several possible audiences is meant; the reader presumably knows that already. The clause adds, parenthetically, a statement supplementing that in the main clause. Each of the three sentences is a combination of two statements that might have been made independently.

 

The audience was at first indifferent. Later it became more and more interested.

 

Napoleon was born in 1769. At that time Corsica had but recently been acquired by France.

 

Coleridge wrote The Rime of the Ancient Mariner at Nether Stowey. Nether Stowey is a few miles from Bridgewater.

 

Restrictive clauses, by contrast, are not parenthetic and are not set off by commas. Thus,

 

    People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

 

Here the clause introduced by who does serve to tell which people are meant; the sentence, unlike the sentences above, cannot be split into two independent statements. The same principle of comma use applies to participial phrases and to appositives.

 

    People sitting in the rear couldn't hear, (restrictive)

 

    Uncle Bert, being slightly deaf, moved forward, (non-restrictive)

 

    My cousin Bob is a talented harpist, (restrictive)

 

    Our oldest daughter, Mary, sings, (nonrestrictive)

 

When the main clause of a sentence is preceded by a phrase or a subordinate clause, use a comma to set off these elements.

 

Partly by hard fighting, partly by diplomatic skill, they enlarged their dominions to the east and rose to royal rank with the possession of Sicily.

 

4. Place a comma before a conjunction introducing an independent clause.

 

The early records of the city have disappeared, and the story of its first years can no longer be reconstructed.

 

The situation is perilous, but there is still one chance of escape.

 

Two-part sentences of which the second member is introduced by as (in the sense of "because"), for, or, nor, or while (in the sense of "and at the same time") likewise require a comma before the conjunction.

 

If a dependent clause, or an introductory phrase requiring to be set off by a comma, precedes the second independent clause, no comma is needed after the conjunction.

 

The situation is perilous, but if we are prepared to act promptly, there is still one chance of escape.

 

When the subject is the same for both clauses and is expressed only once, a comma is useful if the connective is but. When the connective is and, the comma should be omitted if the relation between the two statements is close or immediate.

 

    I have heard the arguments, but am still unconvinced.

 

    He has had several years' experience and is thoroughly competent.

 

5. Do not join independent clauses with a comma.

 

If two or more clauses grammatically complete and not joined by a conjunction are to form a single compound sentence, the proper mark of punctuation is a semicolon.

 

    Mary Shelley's works are entertaining; they are full of engaging ideas.

 

    It is nearly half past five; we cannot reach town before dark.

 

It is, of course, equally correct to write each of these as two sentences, replacing the semicolons with periods.

 

    Mary Shelley's works are entertaining. They are full of engaging ideas.

 

    It is nearly half past five. We cannot reach town before dark.

 

If a conjunction is inserted, the proper mark is a comma. (Rule 4.)

 

    Mary Shelley's works are entertaining, for they are full of engaging ideas.

 

    It is nearly half past five, and we cannot reach town before dark.

 

A comparison of the three forms given above will show clearly the advantage of the first. It is, at least in the examples given, better than the second form because it suggests the close relationship between the two statements in a way that the second does not attempt, and better than the third because it is briefer and therefore more forcible. Indeed, this simple method of indicating relationship between statements is one of the most useful devices of composition. The relationship, as above, is commonly one of cause and consequence.

 

Note that if the second clause is preceded by an adverb, such as accordingly, besides, then, therefore, or thus, and not by a conjunction, the semicolon is still required.

 

    I had never been in the place before; besides, it was dark as a tomb.

 

An exception to the semicolon rule is worth noting here. A comma is preferable when the clauses are very short and alike in form, or when the tone of the sentence is easy and conversational.

 

    Man proposes, God disposes.

 

    The gates swung apart, the bridge fell, the portcullis was drawn up.

 

    I hardly knew him, he was so changed.

 

    Here today, gone tomorrow.

 

6. Do not break sentences in two.

 

In other words, do not use periods for commas.

 

I met them on a Cunard liner many years ago. Coming home from Liverpool to New York.

 

She was an interesting talker. A woman who had traveled all over the world and lived in half a dozen countries.

 

In both these examples, the first period should be replaced by a comma and the following word begun with a small letter.

 

It is permissible to make an emphatic word or expression serve the purpose of a sentence and to punctuate it accordingly:

 

    Again and again he called out. No reply.

 

The writer must, however, be certain that the emphasis is warranted, lest a clipped sentence seem merely a blunder in syntax or in punctuation. Generally speaking, the place for broken sentences is in dialogue, when a character happens to speak in a clipped or fragmentary way.

 

Rules 3, 4, 5, and 6 cover the most important principles that govern punctuation. They should be so thoroughly mastered that their application becomes second nature.

 

7. Use a colon after an independent clause to introduce a list of particulars, an appositive, an amplification, or an illustrative quotation.

 

A colon tells the reader that what follows is closely related to the preceding clause. The colon has more effect than the comma, less power to separate than the semicolon, and more formality than the dash. It usually follows an independent clause and should not separate a verb from its complement or a preposition from its object. The examples in the lefthand column, below, are wrong; they should be rewritten as in the righthand column.

 

Your dedicated whittler requires: a knife, a piece of wood, and a back porch.

 

Understanding is that penetrating quality of knowledge that grows from: theory, practice, conviction, assertion, error, and humiliation.

 

Your dedicated whittler requires three props: a knife, a piece of wood, and a back porch.

 

Understanding is that penetrating quality of knowledge that grows from theory, practice, conviction, assertion, error, and humiliation.

 

Join two independent clauses with a colon if the second interprets or amplifies the first.

 

But even so, there was a directness and dispatch about animal burial: there was no stopover in the undertaker's foul parlor, no wreath or spray.

 

A colon may introduce a quotation that supports or contributes to the preceding clause.

 

The squalor of the streets reminded her of a line from Oscar Wilde: "We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars."

 

The colon also has certain functions of form: to follow the salutation of a formal letter, to separate hour from minute in a notation of time, and to separate the title of a work from its subtitle or a Bible chapter from a verse.

 

    Dear Mr. Montague:

 

    departs at 10:48 P.M.

 

    Practical Calligraphy: An Introduction to Italic Script

 

    Nehemiah 11:7

 

8. Use a dash to set off an abrupt break or interruption and to announce a long appositive or summary.

 

A dash is a mark of separation stronger than a comma, less formal than a colon, and more relaxed than parentheses.

 

His first thought on getting out of bed - if he had any thought at all - was to get back in again.

 

The rear axle began to make a noise - a grinding, chattering, teeth-gritting rasp.

 

The increasing reluctance of the sun to rise, the extra nip in the breeze, the patter of shed leaves dropping - all the evidences of fall drifting into winter were clearer each day.

 

Use a dash only when a more common mark of punctuation seems inadequate.

 

                       

9. The number of the subject determines the number of the verb.

 

Words that intervene between subject and verb do not affect the number of the verb.

 

           

A common blunder is the use of a singular verb form in a relative clause following "one of..." or a similar expression when the relative is the subject.

 

                       

Use a singular verb form after each, either, everyone, everybody, neither, nobody, someone.

 

    Everybody thinks he has a unique sense of humor.

 

    Although both clocks strike cheerfully, neither keeps good time.

 

With none, use the singular verb when the word means "no one" or "not one."

 

    None of us are perfect.

 

    None of us is perfect.

 

A plural verb is commonly used when none suggests more than one thing or person.

 

    None are so fallible as those who are sure they're right.

 

A compound subject formed of two or more nouns joined by and almost always requires a plural verb.

 

    The walrus and the carpenter were walking close at hand.

 

But certain compounds, often cliches, are so inseparable they are considered a unit and so take a singular verb, as do compound subjects qualified by each or every.

 

    The long and the short of it is ...

 

    Bread and butter was all she served.

 

    Give and take is essential to a happy household.

 

    Every window, picture, and mirror was smashed.

 

A singular subject remains singular even if other nouns are connected to it by with, as well as, in addition to, except, together with, and no less than.

 

    His speech as well as his manner is objectionable.

 

A linking verb agrees with the number of its subject.