I am only endeavouring to explain by reference to the great master the condition of literary production which he attained.

Whatever Thackeray says, the reader cannot fail to understand; and whatever Thackeray attempts to communicate, he succeeds in conveying.
That he is grammatical I must leave to my readers' judgment, with a simple assertion in his favour.

There are some who say that grammar,--by which I mean accuracy of composition, in accordance with certain acknowledged rules,--is only a means to an end; and that, if a writer can absolutely achieve the end by some other mode of his own, he need not regard the prescribed means.

If a man can so write as to be easily understood, and to convey lucidly that which he has to convey without accuracy of grammar, why should he subject himself to unnecessary trammels?
Why not make a path for himself, if the path so made will certainly lead him whither he wishes to go?
The answer is, that no other path will lead others whither he wishes to carry them but that which is common to him and to those others.

It is necessary that there should be a ground equally familiar to the writer and to his readers.