Which one is as acceptable as the original?

Question

It is necessary to know grammar, and it is better to write grammatically than not, but it is well to remember that grammar is common speech formulated.      ---- William Somerset MaughamI put the original version in the following ways. Which one is as acceptable as the original? Thanks for your help!1: It is necessary to know grammar. It is better to write grammatically than not. But it is well to remember that grammar is common speech formulated.(The original is one sentence only. can I divide it into three parts? Is it ok to leave out the conjunction'and'?)2: It is necessary to know grammar. And it is better to write grammatically than not. But it is well to remember that grammar is common speech formulated.(Is it ok for the second sentence to  start with a conjunction'and'? )3: It is necessary to know grammar and it is better to write grammatically than not. But it is well to remember that grammar is common speech formulated.(Is there any change to the meaning with leaving out the comma before'and'?)

Clive · Accepted Answer

Hi,

It is necessary to know grammar, and it is better to write grammatically than not, but it is well to remember that grammar is common speech formulated.

What a great thought!
---- William Somerset Maugham

I put the original version in the following ways. Which one is as acceptable as the original?

To me , the original is the best. It presents a tight, well-balanced comment in which the three parts are nicely connected.

Consider that Maugham was a very, very succesful writer while you and I are just a couple of guys chatting online.

Thanks for your help!

1: It is necessary to know grammar. It is better to write grammatically than not. But it is well to remember that grammar is common speech formulated.
(The original is one sentence only. can I divide it into three parts? Yes

Is it ok to leave out the conjunction'and'?) Yes. However, the 'and' very subtly suggests a closer connection betwen the two thoughts.

The period before 'But' makes it slightly harder to be sure what the 'but' relates to. Does it relate to the prceding sentence only, or to both preceding sentences? That's why writers are usually advised not to start a sentence with 'but'.

2: It is necessary to know grammar. And it is better to write grammatically than not. But it is well to remember that grammar is common speech formulated.

(Is it ok for the second sentence to start with a conjunction'and'? ) To my mind, it adds a it of emphasis or drama to what follows the 'and'. It says to the reader , 'pay attention here'. So, it's OK. But if you do it a lot, you will start to irritate the reader in my opinion.

In addition, it often makes it hard to know if the 'and' relates only to the preceding sentence.

eg Yesterday Mary received a phone call. Today she received a letter. And she was surprised.

It's not completely clear what the 'and' relates to.

3: It is necessary to know grammar and it is better to write grammatically than not. But it is well to remember that grammar is common speech formulated.

(Is there any change to the meaning with leaving out the comma before'and'?)

The comma invites the reader to pause a little and think about what has just been said.

Best wishes, Clive

Bob2010 · Answer

Clive,thank you very very much.<img class='emoticon' style='Width:19px;Height:19px;' data-delaysrc='https://uat-englishforward-forums-backend.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/Emoticons/1.gif' src='https://uat-englishforward-forums-backend.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/Emoticons/1.gif' alt='Emotion: smile'/>

Anonymous · Answer

hi

i did not undersrtand the quote. can someone please explain it? particiuarly the last part. what does it meen common speech formulated?

Clive · Answer

Hi,

3: It is necessary to know grammar and it is better to write grammatically than not. But it is well to remember that grammar is common speech formulated.

It's good to have good grammar. But grammar just explains how ordinary people speak. Grammar is an explanation, not a set of language laws,

Clive

Anonymous · Answer

actually it is. granmar sets the rules for the language. so if you dont use the language corresponding rules and laws(which it is exactly what grammar means) then you might as well call it a new language. we wont have a language if anyone could just incent new rules and laws. we need conventions, rules and laws that constitue.the grammar.
please if someone think i am wrong. explain.

Clive · Answer

Hi,

I was just explaining the meaning of the sentence. I wasn't offering my opinion about the topic.

Clive

Which one is as acceptable as the original?

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions