If you are reading this workbook for the “one right way” to write English, you may be in the wrong place. For many students, grammar means rules, or as one official source puts it, the “rules of a language governing the sounds, words, sentences, and other elements, as well as their combination and interpretation” (1). Grammar signals right and wrong; yes or no; do this, don’t do that. However, I do not believe there is one “right” or “perfect” way to write or speak English. I rather agree with the notion that there are many Englishes, used in various contexts and settings around the world, and that English speakers engage with and adapt to such language varieties with their own unique twists, styles, and grammars. No style is inherently better or worse than another. However, acknowledging the existence of “many Englishes” does not suggest that rules don’t apply or are meaningless. I would not have undertaken this workbook if that were true! Perhaps the better approach to grammar is that it is “the study of a language which deals with its inflectional forms or other means of indicating the relations of words in the sentence, and with the rules for employing these in accordance with established usage” (2). Reframing grammar as the study of language—even the study of rules—better situates grammar as an investigation into how language functions, on a day-to-day basis and in “established” contexts. Such a reframing also accounts for two important facts: first, that languages are created (and thus their rules are created, not innately right or wrong, so might be reconsidered, updated, revised, even ignored in some instances); and second that languages are constantly changing (which is a reason they require not just adaption but ongoing investigation). Grammar thus becomes less about orders to obey (as absolute rules) and more like style modes to recognize and coordinate alongside, as standards or ways of speaking. Holding a PhD in English, I often encounter folks (friends to strangers) who like to quiz me about some grammar tic. It’s maybe a quirk they don’t like or that confuses them, or a rule they complain all their friends break. They’re often surprised when I tell them I did not get a PhD in grammar; sometimes, they grimace when they hear my “grammar isn’t really about rules” philosophy. To non-English majors, the philosophy can seem heretical. But in the field of English, it’s much the norm. In 2012, the New York Times ran a “debate” series between two writers representing ideological ends of language instruction—to some degree, a debate between prescriptivism and descriptivism (3). Although the terms are rather imprecise and outdated, they aim to differentiate between approaches that would either “prescribe” how language should be or “describe” how language is. I tend toward the latter, believing that, on a macro-level, the way language should be is often the way it is. But in any case, very few experts or teachers are entirely one or the other, and one typically leans one way or the next in different settings. All this is to say that even if no style or grammar is inherently better than another, we should recognize that some styles or grammars work better in particular contexts. Essentially, a study of grammar requires a description of the linguistic situation; from there, worthwhile prescriptions can be offered moving forward. The two approaches taken together, often in turns, perhaps best reflects a happy grammar medium. The challenge for any writer—and indeed, the skill to develop—is to recognize when and why a standard, use, or rule might apply, and then if or how it should be employed given a variety of factors, including intended audience and personal style. Sarah Felber, a linguist at the University of Maryland, well observes that “for some of the most accomplished writers and speakers, grammar is a tool—one that allows them to achieve a variety of effects through the grammatical choices they make” (4). Moving through this book and beyond, try to remember that image, of grammar as both a choice and a tool to diversify and empower your language and writing. Ultimately, I do want you to learn the rules (or guidelines and advice) outlined in this workbook. “Learn the rules like a pro, so you can break them like an artist.” The quote is attributed to Pablo Picasso, a genre-defying, rules-breaking artist who helped reimagine and revolutionize how and what art could be. Picasso’s cubism is perhaps best remembered, but his early career involved patiently, deeply studying and then employing traditional techniques and rules. Moreover, many of his most abstracted works demonstrate a command or knowledge of art rules or forms. In this, I do want you to eventually realize and express your inner artist. But you should first learn the norms and guidelines; then adapt them to your own style and creativity. (1) “grammar.” Britannica.com, Encyclopaedia Britannica, https://www.britannica.com/topic/grammar. (2) “grammar.” OED.com, Oxford English Dictionary, https://www.oed.com/dictionary/grammar_n. (3) If a back-and-forth conversation about the meaning or rules of grammar interests you, start here: https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/09/27/which-language-and-grammar-rules-to-flout. The source is also a fine one to get an initial look at grammar debates over the past several decades. (4) Felber, Sarah. “Helping Students Use Grammar to Support Their Writing Goals.” MLA Style Center, Modern Language Association, 2 Jul. 2020, https://style.mla.org/grammar-to-support-writing-goals/?utm_campaign=sourcemay23&utm_medium=email&utm_source=mlaoutreach.