Read a dictionary of modern legal usage reviews, rating & opinions:Check all a dictionary of modern legal usage reviews below or publish your opinion.
100 Reviews Found
I have completed all tasks to be told more tasks to come soon. Its been days and still waiting. I have accrued over 250 dollars and nothing to spend it on. If i dont have any fresh tasks soon i am deleting the android game and certainly not recommending it for anyone.
As an editor of legal newsletters, I do not know what I would do without this absolutely important tool of the trade. Not only do I, a non-attorney, search it indispensible, but my colleagues who are members of the Bar are constantly borrowing my copy "just to check." And whatever they, or I, am checking--it's in rner has a method of condensing solid and often very intricate info into a few paragraphs so succinct, and so informative, that anyone can understand. When one is rushing versus a deadline, editing for and about attorneys and the law, reaching for Garner often makes the difference.I would give up my dictionary before I would part with this book, and I cannot recommend it highly enough. Garner has earned his put in the annals of legal writing and editing, and I keep him--and this book--in the highest esteem.
This is, by far, the single best resource on legal usage one can buy. I never cease to be amazed at how often I pull this book off of my shelf to search it giving me a clear and accurate respond to a usage question. I purchased this book several years ago after attending one of Garner's legal writing seminars. That seminar and this book have dramatically improved my legal writing skills. Those two tools positively influence my writing every single day. If you follow Garner's tip and guidance, you will eliminate deadening and condescending legalese from your legal writing and replace it with clear and concise prose. My clients appreciate receiving contracts that are actually readable and my contracts are less frequently topic to alternative interpretations because ambiguities are largely eliminated. As a lawyer or paralegal, do yourself a favor and this book. Better yet, this book and take Garner's Advanced Legal Drafting seminar. You won't regret it.
Garner should be carried shoulder-high for this work. Much expanded beyond the first edition, it provides intelligent, informed guidance on both individual terms and general topics. What does it really mean to "beg the question"? Is "struck" preferable to "stricken"? What's the plural of "cestui que trust"? Garner does not simply give thumbs up or down; he explains the pros and cons of different usages, with an outlook that is literate and, above all, practical. Time after time I search that he has anticipated my questions and has answered them with just the right level of detail.
A Dictionary of Modern Legal Usage (Oxford Dictionary of Modern Legal Usage)The book, A Dictionary of Modern Legal Usage by Bryan A. Garner is absolutely a must for lawyers or judges when writing briefs or opinions. The judges I know have a copy of this in their chambers to refer to as needed.
Delivered as expected - Amazon cant be beat!As to the book - it is the usual high quality Bryan Garner product and of course a must have for any Law Student/Lawyer! I also obtain his online "Garner's Usage Tips." Prof. Garner is not just an awesome author/editor - but a amazing human being. Worked with him in a couple of contexts and can't say enough amazing about him. Buy everything he touches - and of course read/use it - you will be edified for doing so!
There are a lot of terms that lawyers and law students must know, or at least be familiar with. Having a dictionary to remind you of exactly what a word is is very helpful. Some people may say "well that's what the internet is for", but unfortunately the internet gives you info overload. In a lot of cases, a easy 3 or 4 line explanation will be enough to jog your memory. Also, it is easier to remember a sentence long explanation compared to a wikipedia page.If you are even looking at this genre, this is a must buy.
For three generations, a single book dominated the shop as the authoritative reference in matters of grammar, style, and usage in the English language: "A Dictionary of Modern English Usage" by H.W. Fowler, first published in 1926, ably revised by Sir Ernest Gowers in 1965, and now in its third edition (published 1996). But by the century's latest quarter, the modern English language -- particularly its American dialect -- had begun outgrowing Fowler, and several newer tutorials began competing with it. The third (1996) edition of Fowler was a disappointment, and left the field without a clear leading at gap was filled in 1998, when Bryan A. Garner wrote "A Dictionary of Modern American Usage" (published by the Oxford University Press, which also published Fowler). Finally, someone had written a book that matched Fowler -- not only in its erudition, but also in its accessible style, and even its wry sense of humor. And Garner's book had the advantages of being written both in modern times for a modern audience, and in the United States by an American author about American English. The book is a gem, and as authoritative a reference as you will search in this field in the latest several decades (and probably the next several too)."DMAU" went into a second edition in 2003, under the title "Garner's Modern American Usage," renamed after its author in view of the acclaim that the first edition earned. A fresh edition was appearing after only five years because, as Garner explains in the second edition, "changing usage isn't really the basic basis for a fresh edition of a usage guide: it's really a question of having had five more years for research." The second edition builds upon the first: the first edition was a dictionary of words in usage, rather than words about usage, and therefore assumed that the reader possessed a certain working knowledge of primary grammatical terms and concepts. For example, the first edition didn't define such primary terms as "sentence," "phrase," "clause," "word," or "part of speech." The second edition appends a glossary that defines a lot of such primary concepts, in addition to a lot of fresh or expanded entries in the dictionary itself.
Here's something that should create language lovers sit up and take notice: a thorough, gently entertaining but always informative book about the American language, written by a lawyer, in plain r those who love the language, those who revere H.W. Fowler, John Bremner or Theodore Bernstein, but don't need the posturing or pomposity that sometimes accompanies columns or books on language, or those who simply have fun wandering through the pages of a book that examines and comments upon commas, virgules, variants, Bryan A. Garner's Dictionary of Modern American Usage is the book to rner takes on all manner of problems, from the proper method to use the word each, to Hobson's Choice, to ordinance vs. ordnance and hundreds of other misuses and misunderstandings about American st entries are quite short, as in the notation that "meld together" is a redundancy, while others, such as the entry on mendacity/mendicity/mendicancy, detail the distinctions that should be created in using these similar-sounding words. Most entries are accompanied by good, contemporary examples, but are sometimes explained through citations of older e book is quite long,707 pages of entries in the hardcover edition, but worth the time of anyone who wants to brush up language skills, rediscover old rules, dispose of some other old rules, or broaden understanding of the differences between American and British rner frequently cites newspapers and magazines when pointing out correct usage or mistakes, which makes the material new and relevant:Comprise and compose: If the whole comprises the parts, the reverse can't be true, e.g., "Of the 50 stocks that comprise the index, 40 had gains...", From Florida Today, June 15, other words, comprise is not synonymous with "make up", no matter how a lot of times people use it incorrectly.extradite, indict, the former meaning to surrender or deliver a fugitive to another jurisdiction, the latter from the Latin to "write down" but some write as if the words are related, e.g., Ventura has a court hearing Thursday in San Juan, where she is expected to waive her right to war extradiction (read extradition)..." From the Boston Herald, Oct.4, 1994.andProsecutors argued that..he had jumped bail after a 1984 federal mail-fraud conviction and disappeared for nine years until being found and extradicted (read extradited)..." From The Fresh York Times, Oct.7, ceptive, deceptious. The latter is a needless variant. Or, if we have a perfectly amazing word, we don't need the invented alternative, which just causes readers to pause wonder about its meaning.He also provides some useful definitions I've not encountered before, for example: dysphemism, the substitution of a disagreeable word or phrase for a neutral or even positive one. It is the opposite of euphemism. Some examples:bean counter for accountantjock for athletejarhead for Marinebleeding heart for liberalsawbones for surgeonmouthpiece for lawyernerd for intellectualstiff for cadaverfascist for conservativeThis book serves as a ready reference and a tutorial to those who love [email protected]#$%!&'s worth its hefty price.
What am I becoming? A usage snob?? Not cool. (Or is it??)Like some other reviewers, I was inspired to pick up this manual after reading David Foster Wallace's glowing review called Authority and American Usage. Anyone whom DFW calls a genius deserves a careful look. So I gave Garner one, and I'm beautiful glad I 's not a book I am prepared to recommend to my friends, and I don't have enough context to know how this compares to other usage manuals, but if you are a lay non-grammar-snob like me, my tip would be this: Read DFW's essay first. It will heighten your appreciation by orders of magnitude, giving it a human element that it's otherwise sure to miss. And then pick it up and just give it a browse. Check out the table of contents to see if anything inspires you, flip to some random pages and see what you find. I learned a amazing amount in the few hours I spent with this book, not just about grammar but about what it means to write well, and why we should care. I was also delighted to search small nuggets of humor throughout--not something I expected from a grammar snob.
Here's the with Fowler's.1926: First irascible ver of Fowler's "Dictionary of Modern English Usage" published. Owing to the author's idiosyncrasies and clear-headed prescriptions, it earns a put on every writer's shelf.1965: An fresh edition comes out, edited by Sir Ernest Gowers. Most people believe Gowers only brought the language up-to-date where absolutely necessary, keeping the spirit of the original intact. In other words, this revision was hailed as welcome and necessary.1996: Heavy overhaul of the text published, edited by the popular Robert W. Burchfield. Burchfield thoroughly changes the language and even the spirit of Fowler's original, resulting in a book that is much more observational than prescriptional. Much of what created the original beloved was excised.2009: David Crystal digs up the 1926 edition, reprints it, and writes a huge honkin' essay at the end, (almost needlessly) justifying the resuscitation of the us what we have is generally thought to be superior to the 1996 edition, but I think most writers and editors would have been satisfied to do without Crystal's contributions and simply had Oxford University Press flood the globe with a bunch of reprints of the 1965 edition, which, since that's the one everybody seems to want, is becoming danged hard to find.
This review is for the Kindle ver of the book. This is a classic text and, while I prefer Garner's Modern American Usage, it is still a book that I have fun wler's was from the "prescriptive" school of linguistics, telling us what is and what is not acceptable. Even if your preference is for a "descriptive" approach, you may still have fun someone who, with wit and erudition, proclaims a "one right way" of approaching something (although, to be fair, Fowler ripped into a lot of of the so-called rules such as never splitting an infinitive or ending a sentence with a preposition, thus giving writers more than one method to write).The Kindle ver has a hyperlinked Table of Contents, but it is harder to search something than in the printed ver which is much easier to flip through. You can find for a word, but the find results give you every occurrence of that word in the book; not terribly any rate, I like having a copy that is portable. If Garner's Modern American Usage had a hyperlinked index, I would own a Kindle ver of it as well. Alas, it does not.
An absolutely unreadable kindle edition. Format (spacing between lines, font size, width of column, italics, text appearing as an exponent would (moved halfway up, or sometimes down, the horizontal line), strange characters such as british pound sign, etc.) varies maybe 20 times on a given screen. Also, the word "aetat" appears repeatedly in front of numbers. Here's Example rb-construe A!N$nene 14 ALBINO tion (at with the gerund not being the-way word is dear for its own even mentioned) after aim. sake, or rather is welcome as giving rry, in the Amazon comment box I couldn't reproduce the two words, at and aim, that are in italics, or the word aine that was half a line under the rest and in smaller font. Also, the $ was a British pound sign but I can't reproduce that either, so I picked the $ sign. Here's example 2:The normal use, & sense,.ALMIGHTY 16 ALONEhowever, are same as those of tion. Allude to has the same admit of. limitationsExamples of the spelt; see -u>, -L,te use are:--We looked at each all e words should always other wondering which of MS he was be written separate ; there are no alluding to ;Sorry, I couldn't reproduce the italics in 17 of these words or the 12 words in smaller fonts and below the line of the other words. Maybe some italics are good, such as for Allude to and admit of, but there is so much inconsistency you go crazy trying to figure out what is going on. And here's another example: Jvortin is tvillingNot convinced yet? Then how about another example: procity Bill was passed; but by perfectly & then written them with pressing it through Congress Presithe FORMAL WORD anticipate ; ANA dent Taft antagonized both the StandLOGY has duped them into supposing pattersAgain, I couldn't replicate the italics and 5 words below the line or 6 words above the line.I double checked my typing. So sorry whoever place Fowler's into Kindle didn't check out what they thought they had done.
This book is very resourceful for both writers and students or anyone who would like to know more about proper usage of English Language. The paperback edition is published on 2009 by Oxford University Press’s Oxford Globe Classics Series. The main part of this book is the original edition of A Dictionary of Modern English Usage by Fowlers. I have read from a previous comment stating that the latest page of the dictionary is missing, however, when I opened my book delivered to me just now, I found that the latest page is completely printed in the book(on page 742).There are just some very little printing errors of head letters in the latest part of List of Articles and List of Abbreviations, starting from -ved to Wh- and from a.(adjective) to ind.obj.(indirect object), for example, the hyphen - in -ved is missing and a in a.(adjective) is missing, but these little missed letters will not affect your usage of the dictionary, because these missing head letters could be very easily guessed and there are just a few of these missing head letters. I have not yet read the whole book, as far as I could see, the rest of the book, except a few missing head letters in front of the main part of the Dictionary, is perfectly printed.If you are curious about English Usage in the contemporary period of Henry Watson Fowler’s and how the English Usage has changed over time, you should this book.
I'm so happy to search this book on Amazon. It is a delight to read - sensible and well-thought out comments. This books represents a kind of unbelievable English scholarship that has sadly disappeared. Fowler is literate, personal, and amazing fun. Crystal's introduction, on the other hand, is the usual post-modern analysis - not helpful and not interesting.
I was delighted to search a reprint of the first edition of this book published with interesting commentary by David Crystal. My chief complaint about the book is the production value of the e-copy. I've only looked at a few pages and I'm already noticing OCR errors, e.g., "denning" instead of "defining," and words that are stuck together with no zone between them, e.g., "to shrink with horror from endingwith a prepositionis no more than foolish superstition." These errors not only create the book harder to read, they impair the "find" function, which is one of the chief advantages of this format for a reference this price, from this publisher, I expected better.
A small disappointing as it turns out to be an exact reprint of the Oxford University Press edition of 1926 (the US edition was in 1944). Granted it has added a useful historical 26 page introduction and some 50 pages of interesting notes at the end by David Crystal. These additions actually create this edition worth buying. Even if you own a copy of the earlier printing as I do. Alas, as is all to often these days, I can begin my 1950 edition and it STAYS us making it simple to read and refer to ... I begin this fresh edition and it shuts - closes on its own. Poor binding? Pages chop too tight. To thick a paper stock? Aggravating in the extreme. Particularly in a reference book! Shame on you, Oxford University Press!Richard CadyRichard Cady Rare Books
Well some people wrote the hyperlinks of this dictionary are not working right. I bought this today and checked several words but I did not search any flaw. They are working fine on Mac, iPhone and Kindle. I found this dictionary very handy.
Since the previous review was written Merriam-Webster has obviously created changes. The book has amazing navigation tools. The table of contents is hyperlinked as is an A-Z list to take you easily to the section you want. The book is also searchable which is probably the fastest method to search your method around. The explanations of word usage are clear and simple to use. All in all an perfect tool.
I just bought this and returned today. Navigation is very, very poor and the table of contents is just a easy A, B, C, etc. This was very poorly conceived and executed....but this is real of too a lot of eBooks I've bought of late. I'm no longer putting up with this. From this point on I'll return any book which is not well conceived and executed structurally.
This books is a unbelievable reference book for all of those rules you might hear. When should you say "further" vs. "farther"? Is it ever ok to split an infinitive? And is it really real that "cakes are done; people are finished"? This book gives the history of these rules and explains whether amazing writers ever follow the rule. (You'd be surprised how a lot of rules are completely specious.)
Yes, I bough this. Despite the warnings. I required to reference this specific title; and ebook was faster than physical dead tree format.I required one specific section of it; which I ultimately found after going through page by page by painful page. The table of contents was about 6 lines long. Nothing linked. Your only alternative is a keyword find - but that only works if the keyword is ere is no method in heck I'd use this as a dictionary for casual use. Honestly, they should take this out of the catalog entirely, until they create a proper reference out of this for the ebook format.
Ever obtain irritated over shifting locutions and their increasing acceptability, from "ain't" to "in regards to"? This tome might soothe your soul. It is not a dictionary of "correct usage" but an insightful, historical accounting of how we speak and how our speech patterns and favored locutions change over time. Language ain't what it used to be. But, of course, it never was. This concise ver of the larger work is helpful enough, unless you are a linguist or particularly obsessive in regards to (sic!) certain abuses of linguistic traditions.
This is NOT an ebook ver of the Merriam-Webster's excellent Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of English Usage, which would be well worth owning in Kindle format...IF Merriam-Webster went to the problem of providing a reasonable hyperlinked navigation system for moving around the complex text. This volume has no navigational aids at all for the main body of the book, rendering it almost worthless. Merriam-Webster should know better. Big, sophisticated reference works of the kind it regularly produces really need to create the transition to ebook format, but this sorry attempt is worse than useless and should be withdrawn from the marketplace.
Much better than most style guides; this book historical and grammatical context about each entry that allows for a better understanding of prescribed usage than regular style guides, which don't much more in explanation than "don't do it because it's wrong".
This is a amazing reference tutorial for students studying law or for those who work in it. Easy definitions create it amazing even for those with no legal training. This is a amazing and handy tutorial for a amazing price.I own two copies, one I hold at work and the other as a home or travel reference.
I bought the book because I'm taking a legal secretary course online. The book has the legal word, definitions, how to pronounce the word, and examples of how to use the word. It's very useful. There's only one flaw I found to the book, and that is, strangely enough, that a few legal words I learned from my legal secetary course aren't in the dictionary. The book just needs to add a few more legal words to it and it would be perfect.
This was really helpful for me while taking some legal courses in college. It is helpful for just every day terminology as well. I highly recommend it for anyone who is just interested to someone who is looking for a reference for the university setting.
I'm an airport manager who reviews and signs countless legal documents. This book is an simple way to look up some of the more obscure terms. I especially found the definition/explanation of Latin terms helpful. I think most lay persons will have occasional need to refer to this book in the course of life today.
This is a amazing "little" book. I'm a process server, and file alot of documents, speak to alot of people about documents, and although not being an attorney I can't assist, but it sure is helpful to understand what people are speaking about, this book helps me understand. The explanations of the words is a plus. Obtain it!
This is obviously a unbelievable resource. However, I cannot recommend the application as a means to access it. A lot of of the links in the application are broken. As a result, there are some passages you simply cannot view using the app. For $25+ application that's a breaker, in my opinion.
The application is functional when it works. To obtain it to work you have to enter the Redeem Code every day - and when you need to look something up, launching the app, seeing a prompt asking you to enter a code that you had entered the day before, finding it (preferably on your phone), launching the text editor to copy it then finally switching back and pasting it - is cumbersome. And again, you have to repeat this - every - single - day. The bug's been there for several months. Not good, not amazing at all.