When is it proper to substitute an ampersand (&) for the word and? Dan Santow of Word Wise provides these rules:
[T]hough an ampersand is the symbol form of the word “and,” it is not a substitute for the written-out word except in these very specific cases:
• where it is part of a company name (Abercrombie & Fitch)
• if space is very limited (such as in a small advertisement or headline)
• for artistic reasons (such as in a logo)
• in some computer languages (such as in JavaScript)
• in some academic references (Burke & Edison, 2002)Other than for the reasons above, always write out the word “and.”
I would add that, for legal citations, check your Bluebook or ALWD manual.
I’ve posted before that it’s okay to start a sentence with a conjunction. In case anyone out there is thinking, “That’s fine for colloquial writing but not for dignified legal writing,” I offer a few selections from the United States Constitution:
So if it’s good enough for the U.S. Constitution, it’s good enough for that brief you’re working on.
Language Corner, featured on the Columbia Journalism Review, addresses "[v]arious rules of the language, including rules of thumb ... (with as little jargon as possible)[,] because we need to know the rules to know when to follow them, when to bend them, even when to break them." It's written by Evan Jenkins, whose résumé includes a stint as senior editor of the Racing Times. Evan "claims infallibility only in matters concerning 'who' and 'whom,' and even there opposes following the rules out the window."
Hat tip to Celia Elwell.
Jack Lynch, an English professor for Rutgers University, describes his Guide to Grammar & Style as follows:
These notes are a miscellany of grammatical rules and explanations, comments on style, and suggestions on usage I put together for my classes. Nothing here is carved in stone, and many comments are matters of personal preference — feel free to psychoanalyze me by examining my particular hangups and bêtes noires. Anyone who can resist turning my own preferences into dogma is welcome to use this HTML edition. Feedback is always welcome.
As this syllabus suggests, Jack brings a welcome dose of humor to grammar-and-usage business. So check out his site; you'll be edified and entertained. (Hat tips to Evan Schaeffer and Celia Elwell.)
Here's something I didn't know until I read today's installment of Garner's Usage Tip of the Day:
"Et al." ... is used only in reference to people, whereas "etc." is used in reference to things.
If you'd like to sign up for Garner's daily tips, click here and check the box that says "Garner's Usage Tip of the Day."
"This book is designed to inform you about current
problems in English usage so you can make intelligent decisions when
communicating." Included are chapters on grammar, style, word choice, and gender (sexist language and assumptions). It even has a chapter on e-mail, which includes tables of commonly used abbreviations and emoticons.
This site, maintained by Capital Community College, covers everything from abbreviations to zero articles.
English professor Paul Brians maintains this site, where he catalogs "deviations from the standard use of English as judged by sophisticated users such as professional writers, editors, teachers, and literate executives and personnel officers. The aim of this site is to help you avoid low grades, lost employment opportunities, lost business, and titters of amusement at the way you write or speak."