The indefatigable Bryan Garner, not content with bringing out a fourth edition of his book on English usage, has now published a book on English grammar: The Chicago Guide to Grammar, Usage, and Punctuation (University of Chicago Press, 583 pages, $45).
The first question from those who use The Chicago Manual of Style will be how much this volume differs from his entries there on grammar. The answer: more, much more.
But before discussing what it is, I want to mention what it is not. Though conservative, it is not sclerotic. Through prescriptivist, it is not narrow-minded. This is not Gwynne's Grammar. Mr. Garner says that the outset that grammar "should be an attempt to describe the English language as it is actually used." He recognizes that grammar and usage are a set of conventions subject to alteration over time, and he makes clear which version of English he is writing about: "standard literary English shorn of dialect and idioms that typify the language of uneducated speakers." Though the existence of those dialects and idioms makes "culture more varied and interesting," his explicit focus is "the type of English … that marks its user as an educated speaker or writer."
The grammar presented in sections on the parts of speech and syntax, is the traditional English grammar as it has been taught, amplified, with examples. As a practical matter, it pretty much has to be, because most educated speakers and writers who have had any instruction in English grammar at all have had the traditional version.
That said, he includes a section on transformational grammar, the version linguists use. Its explanation of the basic terminology and the tree diagrams linguists use to describe syntax. This introduction should be of considerable use to readers approaching linguistic analysis for the first time. He also includes texts on transformational grammar in his bibliography.
There is a chapter on traditional sentence diagramming, about which I admit to misgivings. My own experience is that people who already grasp English grammar enjoy diagramming and that those who do not find it of little utility. When former English majors rhapsodize about sentence diagramming, most people react as they would to expressions of nostalgia about algebra.
The section on usage naturally has overlap with Garner's Modern English Usage. In some entries, however, he has included charts with disputed usages to show the patterns found in corpora, principally Google ngrams. As I have said before, Mr. Garner is a prescriptivist, but an informed prescriptivist. He says, "Good usage should make only reasonable demands—not setting outlandishly high standards."
He presents an extensive glossary of technical terms, there is an index of individual words treated, and the sources of the illustrative quotations. In all, few readers could ask for more, and most will not.
The scope and intent of Garner on Usage and Garner on Grammar should be taken into account, because that explains their conservatism. Though they lean on literary models of English, they do not purport to instruct in the writing of fiction or poetry. They are manuals for those of us laboring to produce expository prose: nonfiction books, journalistic articles, memorandums, business letters. The conservatism of his advice pushes you to consider audience and occasion, so that you will understand when to follow convention and when you can safely break it.
When someone offers you good advice, you would do well to take it.