The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language Reprint of 2002 Edition

Great.

This excellent descriptive grammar is currently the most comprehensive and up-to-date account of English grammar available. For someone familiar with an older generation of English grammars, even grammars written by linguists, this work represents a significant rethinking of they way English is described. It incorporates a large body of research that has occurred since the last major grammar of English, A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language by Quirk et al.Unlike that earlier book, Huddleston and Pullum are more explicitly theoretical, but they are not wedded to any particular school of syntax and the writing is always accessible to the interested non-specialist. You don't need advanced training in linguistics to understand what the authors are saying. Their analysis explicitly challenges many older ideas about English grammar, and in almost every case they provide clearly reasoned arguments in favor of their position. For example, they argue that many words which have traditionally been understood as adverbs or subordinating conjunctions are better explained as prepositions.The most detailed arguments, intended for specialists, are clearly set off in blue boxes, so you can avoid the minutiae unless you're interested.I have noticed a handful of cases where the analysis or terminology seems arbitrary, but in these cases, the authors' decisions are internally consistent. There is only a problem if you are comparing this work to other grammars. For example, Huddleston and Pullum use the terms "determiner" and "determinative" in exactly the opposite way that Quirk et al. do, and do not give any reasons for their switch. Similarly, they treat the perfect as a secondary tense rather than an aspect (the approach taken in many earlier linguistically-based grammars) without explaining why one should prefer one analysis to another.But such problems are minor in comparison to the vast insight that the work brings to the structure of English. Even if you think you have a good understanding of English grammar, this work will likely open your eyes.I highly recommend this work if you need a thorough reference grammar and can afford the price. Indeed, if you plan to write a textbook on English, this work is required reading. If you are a student looking for a good introduction, I instead recommend A Student's Introduction to English Grammar by the same authors.

Providing critical or additional information to'A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language' by Quirk et al., I use it for further study and justification of grammar's proper role in English and explore some more relevant in-depth linguistic knowledge and interpretation.

I wanted to buy a comprehensive dictionary for reference and bought this one due to its ratings buy others. However, I traded it in because this dictionay says that English does not have future tense, which I think does not make sense. The trade-in price of this dictionary is $169. I sent the dictionay with well-cushioned package by UPS to Amazon.com and now received an email confirmation from Amazon.com that the dictionay is in Unacceptable Condition and the value is $0 (zero). I selected the trade-in choice as not-returning-to-me-if-condition-is-lower because I have not used this dictionary and have not marked or highlighted it at all and it is just like brand-new. In my school studies from elementary school all the way up, I have a habit not to mark or highlight any books except signing it and one correction of an error in a calculus text book (this habit probably helped keeping me on the very top rankings in all the classes I attended). This dictionary does not have my signature because I don't like to put signatures on references. So now I will not receive either the dictionay back or any payment.

This is not a grammar text for the faint of heart. I keep mine at the office as a research reference next to my copy of the Longman Grammar by Biber et al. In addition to being a handy improvised murder weapon, this text serves as a grammar reference for linguists. While not exclusively "for us by us," one has to consider the perspectives involved, and descriptive linguists are very much at the helm. Strunk & White would turn over in their respective graves. I'd recommend it for any graduate students who enjoy passing the time arguing over increased specificity of negation or the scope of ellipsis.In all seriousness, this is the grammar reference book I'd recommend. Not everyone needs a $200+ grammar reference book. For those who do (or at least believe that they do), This text is it. Huddleston and Pullum include whatever approaches necessary to get the job done, though they lean towards the theoretical. One needn't be a grammar expert to use this text, though being familiar with the metalanguage would be helpful in negotiating this comprehensive (read: huge) text.

Excellent Book. The first eight chapters span nouns, adjectives, adverbs, propositions, and a couple chapters about sentence structure - complements and adjuncts and other syntax. The book is wonderful, for example, in the preposition chapters or the adjective chapters, he compares these parts of speech with other parts of speech. It really helps ensure you fully understand by that method alone. Who would compare a preposition to an adverbs? And break it down in detail what is similar and what is different? It's a wonderfully approachable book. Perfect Hull of the Ship for a Self-Study of a Classical Education. And to improve reading comprehension and probably promotes clear thinking. I'm an accountant. This is part of my goals for improving my analytical skills. It's beyond that though. It's probably the cornerstone of a good education I missed when I branched right into the Business School. If this is important topic for you, you'll appreciate having this book!