Not bad, quite enjoyable in parts, a book to dip into. The trouble I found was that Bryson's comments mainly fall into three categories:
(1) statements of the bleeding obvious
(2) extremely complicated explanations which I've already forgotten
(3) areas where I disagree with him
The number of times I thought "Oh, that's really interesting and useful, I didn't know that" were sadly very few.
Being lectured on English usage by an American, even one whose been over here for a while, did not go down well!

A useful book with several interesting facts.

This book is very good at what it does - poking sharp holes in journalistic writing whenever there is redundancy, wherever there is rambling and in papers as successful as The Times and The Guardian. It has a very simple layout and could easily be used as a reference for those writing professionally, as well as being very simple to read casually.

Probably best received by total pedants (such as those who sneeringly inform you that 'advance planning' is the only possible sort, ha ha) and those in journalism, this was informative, sharp and very funny.

For someone who is as fascinated by the language as I am, and as interested in writing well, this book is useful and more entertaining than it might be expected to be; Bryson's writing is, as usual, stylistically enjoyable. But for anyone who enjoys his books describing his travels, or other less pedantic works, but who does not share my enthusiasm for correct usage of the language, this book might be considered tedious. Do not be fooled by the fact that it's written by Bryson, who tells an amusing story in most of his works. This is a reference book, not a collection of amusing anecdotes.

Mine is the 'New expanded edition' as published by Book Club Associates.

The book is a useful and amusing dictionary or words that people tend to use incorrectly or in place of each other, e.g. the difference between 'affect' and 'effect'. Another example is the difference between grisly and grizzly - do you know the difference? It also addresses regularly misspelt words and, overall, is very handy to have at your side when writing.

A neat little guide for writers. Organized well and concepts explained well. I like that he did throw some comparisons in there between American and British usage. Overall, good advice and I would recommend it for anyone who likes writing. He has an extensive bibliography and recommendations list for further reading as well.

This is not a book to sit down and read from beginning to end. It is more a reference book, and also very good for browsing. Bryson was a copy editor in England in the 1980’s and here he lists common mistakes in usage and spelling, with delightful paragraphs and examples of correct and incorrect sentences. Although I didn’t read it chronologically, I browsed enough to have read practically the whole book, and I enjoyed it. He has written other books about the English language and I will probably search them out at some later point.

Bill Bryson has a gift. He can make the prosaic interesting and give the everyday a wry slant. He is a writer who thinks about writing and enjoys analysing same. This book is both literate and entertaining. Some words I knew about, many others not, or at least not consciously.

Some entries are not likely to be used much: Orkney, as in the Scottish islands are to be referred to as ‘Orkney’, or ‘the Orkney Islands’, not ‘the Orkneys’. OK. On the other hand we all need to know that the Nullarbor Plain, which is in Western Australia, is spelled with two ‘r’s, and is not Nullabor. And another one dear to my heart: Qantas, the Australian Airline, is an acronym, which spelled out is Queensland and Northern Territory Ariel Service, not ‘Air’ and not ‘Services’. Bryson does not mention it, but Qantas is definitely not ‘Quantas’.

There are many others: ‘kudos’ (fame or glory) is singular, as in ‘received the kudos that was his due,’ not 'were his due’. Bryson can get quite grammatical at times, for example when talking about when to use ‘that’ and when to use ‘which’. It’s quite simple: use ‘that’ for a non-defining clause and ‘which’ for a defining one. I think that's pretty clear.

My favourite entry is a small essay on dangling modifiers, which I sort of knew about sub- consciously, but after reading Bryson I see them all the time. While ‘complicated and disagreeable…they provide some compensation by being frequently amusing.’ An example; ‘Although sixty-one years old when he wore the original suit, his waist was only thirty-five’ or ‘When dipped in melted butter or Hollandaise sauce, one truly deserves the food of the gods.’

It is also well worth reading Bryson’s charming introduction, where he refers to producing the first edition of The Penguin Dictionary of Troublesome Words, noting his sensitivity to points of usage and his impetuosity in suggesting to Penguin editor Donald McFarlan that he, Bryson, should produce such a guide. Much to Bryson’s surprise, McFarlan agrees and provides a financial incentive ‘by way of advance, a sum of money carefully gauged to not cause embarrassment or feelings of overworth’, which I feel strikes a note worthy of Olivia Manning, or William Trevor at their best.

I have an almost endless appreciation for both style guides, and Bill Bryson.

It continues to amaze me that Bryson can take any subject and make it at once humorous and educating. Bryson has done it yet again, but now with a dictionary.

Probably only an amazing book if you already have an interest in language, but it is a good book for anybody. Always fun to get a writer's hot take on their own tools.

I have always enjoyed reading dictionaries (no judging) and this one was fantastic! Bryson brings his wit and humor to the dictionary, just like his other books. I wish he had gone into more detail with some words and explain why it was right or wrong, but then the book would easily be 500+ pages.

This is definitely something for the grammar-nerds out there. I didn't finish it but there's really not a reason to. It's not a book to be read, per se, but a dictionary (as in the title). It has good humor and explanations but it's more of a one-off kind of book for someone who isn't a writer, like myself. But I didn't dislike it, so a solid 3.

Good. I find anything written by him is very readable and entertaining.