Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Feanor of the Peredhil
No need for Bethberry to assure you of your correctness, I can confidently inform you that you have successfully avoided splitting that infinitive.
|
Actually, that gives rise to a pertinent point. I have become "conditioned" (by one of my previous bosses) not to split the infinitive. But the rule was, I believe, originally established so as to avoid clumsy sentence construction and there are many cases where splitting the infinitive will not give rise to a clumsy sentence (even though it might seem wrong to our "conditioned" grammatical sensibilities). So there will often be no real reason to
not split the infinitive.
And I don't really see anything wrong with starting sentences with "and" either. Taking my cue from Tolkien (and disregarding what I learned at school), I do it all the time in my (very limited) creative writing. And in my posts here too. It makes for shorter sentences. Which is, I think, desirable. Or so the Plain English Campaign tells us. But then again, as Tolkien himself once again illustrates on many occasions, it is sometimes appropriate to have incredibly lengthy sentences, sentences which are perhaps heavy with descriptive words, or those where complex and related ideas are best grouped together, or even where that is the manner in which a particular character speaks - and so the length of his sentences enhance the credibility of his dialogue; and in such cases I see no reason not to indulge oneself in a nice lengthy sentence.
The point being that many of these rules (structural, grammatical etc) are there to be challenged. Sometimes there is no real purpose served in following them. And, occasionally, breaking them will even enhance the quality of the work in question.
EDIT: Just to be clear, I am most certainly not saying that these rules should not be taught (double negative, anyone
). But it should also be acknowledged in doing so that there is scope for flexibility in their application.