Six rules for clear thinking and writing by George Orwell

Posted on July 29, 2016 | Leave a comment

One excellent yet pithy set of rules for writing well comes from 70 years ago by the British writer, George Orwell, author of 1984 and Animal Farm as well as numerous essays.  The rules are part of an essay called “Politics and the English Language” in which he argues that poorly written English results from bad habits of thought.  Get rid of the bad habits and clearer thinking emerges in the mind of the writer and on paper.

His six rules are

  • “Never use a metaphor, simile or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.
  • “Never use a long word where a short one will do.
  • “If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
  • “Never use the passive where you can use the active.
  • “Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
  • “Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.”

Leave a comment

Posted in clarity, Figures of speech, metaphors, passive verbs, research on writing, shibboleths

Four kinds of words, some good, some not so good

Posted on July 22, 2016 | Leave a comment

Words can be divided into four kinds, according to a popular business writing blogger.*   Let me paraphrase his four kinds of words:

  • Common words, or everyday words that you can expect your reading audience to know without explanation.
  • Jargon, or words specific to the field you are writing about.  If you are writing about math, for example, you might use “function” and “algorithm,” and expect your audience to understand.  But for new or unusual math words, or for children, you would offer definitions.
  • 50-cent words, usually with many syllables or from another language.  These words are intended to impress people or to act as shibboleths showing that the writer is an insider.  Such words could include “esprit de corps,” “modicum,” and “Neolithic.”
  • Unusual words which hook or delight a reader.  Such words might include “pique” and “hardscrabble,” or for a young child, “triceratops” or “tyrannosaurus.”

How often should you or your students use each type of word?  According to the business blogger,

  • Common words—90 percent of the time
  • Jargon—as needed for your topic, but be sure to define new or rarely heard words
  • 50-cent words—never
  • Unusual words—just a little bit

When teaching writing to children, I find that they stick to the commonest of common words unless they are prodded to try new words..  To expand their vocabularies, I suggest what to them seem like 50-cent words.  If they have heard a word before, they might try it out, but if they haven’t heard it, they prefer to stick to comfortable, overused words.

Children who come from enriched backgrounds have large common word vocabularies.  Children from impoverished backgrounds have small common word vocabularies.  What can seem like a common word to one kindergartener can bewilder another.  It’s important for children’s writing to sound like their own writing, not their teacher’s, so their backgrounds need to be considered if you attempt to stretch their vocabularies with new words.

However, when writing about a particular topic, children need to use the precise vocabulary of that topic.  Words like “pollution” and “predator” should be expected when talking about the environment. Even though these words might seem strange at first, their precision is what makes them useful.  Children need to use the correct names of concepts.

As for unusual words, I encourage children to use one or two to add sparkle to their writing.  Often their “unusual” is my “ordinary,” but if using a particular word delights a child, I encourage it.

*http://withoutbullshit.com/blog/sophisticated-writing-simple-words

Leave a comment

Posted in clarity, vocabulary building

A writing problem even Supreme Court justices disagree on

Posted on July 14, 2016 | Leave a comment

“You tell your scouts to find a defensive catcher, a quick-footed shortstop, or a pitcher from last year’s World Champion Kansas City Royals,” wrote Supreme Justice Sonia Sotomayor in a 2016 court decision.  The problem is, does “from last year’s World Champion Kansas City Royals” apply only to the pitcher, or do the catcher and shortstop need to come from that team as well?

I’ll get to the answer in a minute.  But the real problem is a grammar one.  Should a series of ideas followed by a limiting prepositional phrase or other modifier have that phrase apply to all the items in the series or to the last item only?

Here’s another example, this one from Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan.  “Imagine a friend told you that she hoped to meet ‘an actor, director, or producer involved with the new Star Wars movie.’”  Do the actor, director and producer all need to be involved with the Star Wars movie or just the producer?

The Supreme Court needed to consider this grammar problem during this past term when deciding Lockhart v. U.S.  The text of a law important to the case’s outcome stated that people convicted of a previous crime for “aggravated sexual abuse, sexual abuse, or abusive sexual conduct involving a minor or ward” needed to serve a mandatory 10-year sentence if convicted again.  But did “involving a minor or ward” apply to the whole series of crimes or only to the third one?

In the court decision, Justice Sotomayor’s opinion won:  the limiting prepositional phrase applied only to the last item in the series.  But a good case (no pun intended) can be made that all three items in the series are covered by the prepositional phrase.

Attorneys need to write laws clearly and precisely so that future attorneys and judges know exactly what the law means.  But the rest of us need to write clearly too.  How could the examples given above have been written to eliminate wiggle room?

  • You tell your scouts to find a defensive catcher or a quick-footed shortstop, or you tell them to find a pitcher from last years’ World Champion Kansas City Royals.
  • You tell your scouts that from last year’s World Champion Kansas City Royals they are to find a defensive catcher, a quick-footed shortstop, or a pitcher.
  • Imagine a friend told you that she hoped to meet an actor, director, or producer, and she hoped the producer was involved with the new Star Wars movie.
  • Imagine a friend told you that she hoped to meet an actor, director, or producer, any one of whom was involved with the new Star Wars movie.

For more on writing clear legal language, see an article in the July 9-10 issue of The Wall Street Journal on page A9.  “How to Write Like Antonin Scalia” discusses other textual considerations as well.

Leave a comment

Posted in clarity, grammar

How to gain or lose readers: Use shibboleths

Posted on July 6, 2016 | Leave a comment

A shibboleth is a word or phrase whose use or pronunciation shows you belong to a certain group or class.  For example, if you sprinkle your writing with OMG, you identify yourself as a texter—perhaps young, perhaps a user of Twitter.  Or if you sprinkle quotes from Shakespeare when you speak, you announce yourself as an English major.

The problem is, not everyone belongs to those groups.  And those who don’t belong can become turned off by your shibboleths just as those who do belong feel drawn to you.

  • Would you know what was going on if a character in a novel says, “Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa” after spilling coffee on a client’s suit? What does that tell you about that character?  (She studied Latin?  She is an older Catholic who remembers those words from the Latin mass?)
  • Or what if you’re reading a mystery and the detective asks himself, “Now what would Philip Marlowe do?”  Would you know who Philip Marlowe is?   (He a fictional character master detective.)
  • If someone pronounces “suite” as “sweet,” what does that tell you? What if he pronounces “suite” as “suit”?  (“Sweet” is a northern US pronunciation; “suit” is a southern and Midwestern pronunciation.)

If you are writing for an audience with similar backgrounds (same culture, same education, same age), you can use shibboleths confidently, knowing your readers will appreciate your clever use of insider terms.  Using shibboleths identifies you as one of them, as someone they can trust.

But if you are writing for an internet audience (various cultures, often English as a second language), you will distance readers who don’t get your insider meanings.  Your readers will feel like people who don’t get the joke.  They may stop reading or continue grudgingly.

Know your audience.  And know your purpose in writing.  Both will inform you about whether you should use shibboleths.

Leave a comment

Posted in clarity, shibboleths

Use a thesaurus to write better

Posted on June 26, 2016 | Leave a comment

A thesaurus is a book or online source for finding synonyms and antonyms of words.  Here is how a thesaurus can improve your writing.

  • A thesaurus can suggest a variety of words to replace a generic or overused word. For example, the word “ran” can mean “raced,” “rushed” and “hurried.”
  • A thesaurus can offer a more precise word to replace a general word. For example, “ran” can mean “sprinted,” “loped” or “leaped.”
  • A thesaurus can offer nuances for words which have shades of meaning. For example, “to run” a business can mean “to regulate,” “to manage” or to “carry on.”
  • A thesaurus can jump start your brain with words you might not have considered. For example, “to run into debt” can mean “to incur” or “to acquire” debt.

But using a thesaurus can lead to problems.

  • Since not all synonyms for the same word are synonyms for each other, you must be sure of the meaning of a suggested word before you use it. Using a dictionary to find the precise meaning of a thesaurus-suggested word is a way to avoid this problem.
  • Some synonyms can sound pretentious when you want to write simply, or some synonyms can sound casual or even childlike when you want to write seriously. If you are writing fiction, a long word in the mouth of a child can sound ridiculous.  So can a slang word in the mouth of a courtroom attorney.
  • Some synonyms can sound unnatural for you, the writer. For example, I tend to write using short words of Anglo-Saxon origin, so long Latinate words sound wrong for my writing style.  Sometimes I look up a synonym and decide that the simple word I started out with is the best choice.

One more word on thesauruses.  (Or is it thesauri?)  Different kinds exist, ranging from a children’s thesaurus with pictures and limited words (meant for a beginning reader and writer) to an adult thesaurus (meant for fourth or fifth graders and older).

For serious writers, I recommend the Roget’s International Thesaurus.  This thesaurus is a two-part version, requiring you to look up a word (such as run) and then decide on the general meaning you are seeking.  When you find that meaning, you go to a different part of the book for a more detailed list of synonyms.  Compared to a one-step thesaurus, the results of this two-step thesaurus—precision, nuances and sheer number of synonyms—are superior but more time-consuming.

Leave a comment

Posted in thesaurus, vocabulary building