5 ms·

This writing advice -- recycled from newspaper house style guides -- to use only simple and common words in efficient sentences is becoming almost universal, an

This writing advice -- recycled from newspaper house style guides -- to use only simple and common words in efficient sentences is becoming almost universal, and yet "good writing" doesn't always obey these rules. Sometimes you need a certain obliqueness and sesquipedalianism to convey a certain effect that simple directness can't achieve. To paraphrase Mark Twain, sometimes you need the right word and not its second cousin; even if the right word happens to be polysyllabic and relatively obscure. Why should literary fiction have all the fun? Oh, and the author misspelt "sesquipedalian". edit (added): The Urdu humourist Mushtaq Ahmed Yousufi was often accused of using overly difficult words and obscure literary references from Pashto, Sanskritised Hindi, Persian and Arabic in his Urdu writing. He admitted to favouring "mushkil-pasandi" ('a preference for difficulty') and exhorted readers to raise their standards continuously. And IMO with this device he raised the quality of his own writing from what would have been only a series of somewhat funny observations and gag jokes to masterpieces of the genre.

blockwriter 5y ago
Alternating between single clause sentences and sentences with two clauses, as the author of the article mostly does, is also not an example of good writing. It is perfectly efficient, just not particularly good. The clauses themselves should patter, creating ventricles that, like the heart, comprise contrasting units through which the gist is substantiated. A lot of the reader's cognitive overhead can be offloaded to the interest of a sentence's construction.
- andrei_says_ 5y ago
  This sounds very interesting but I have trouble picturing it. Could you provide an example of text with this structure/rhythm?
- sidedishes 5y ago
  I agree -- that sort of rhythm may be to the point and good for some goals of technical writing, but is pretty sterile. My favourite quote about sentence pacing: > This sentence has five words. Here are five more words. Five-word sentences are fine. But several together become monotonous. Listen to what is happening. The writing is getting boring. The sound of it drones. It’s like a stuck record. The ear demands some variety. Now listen. I vary the sentence length, and I create music. Music. The writing sings. It has a pleasant rhythm, a lilt, a harmony. I use short sentences. And I use sentences of medium length. And sometimes, when I am certain the reader is rested, I will engage him with a sentence of considerable length, a sentence that burns with energy and builds with all the impetus of a crescendo, the roll of the drums, the crash of the cymbals–sounds that say listen to this, it is important. (Gary Provost)
  - vpavicic 5y ago
    I enjoyed reading this very much! Thank you!
  - AstralStorm 5y ago
    And then Google Translate is applied and it all turns to mush or worse.
- chrisweekly 5y ago
  Good point. Speaking of the art of writing good sentences, I heartily recommend "First You Write a Sentence" by Joe Moran.
rTX5CMRXIfFG 5y ago
I agree with the whole article though, except for the note about using sesquipedalian words. I agree that there are, in fact, creative usages of such words that make making a point achieve a stronger impact, and I enjoy learning a new word or two from whatever I'm reading. Expanding my vocabulary is one of my motivations for reading as a non-native English speaker.
hutzlibu 5y ago
"- to use only simple and common words in efficient sentences is becoming almost universal, and yet "good writing" doesn't always obey these rules." I would say it depends what you write and to whom. If your target is "the internet" where most people only speak simple english - you absolutely want to use simple english, if you want to reach more people. And also in everyday life I made an effort to value clarity and simplicity in speech way over complicated layered sentences that might have made my teachers proud - but would be cause for further missunderstanding with the people around me (my partner has a different first language than me). And I would say, the whole world is in a state of confusion caused by missunderstanding. If people would speak and write a bit more clean and clearly (like good code) I think everyone would benefit. That being said, if you want to reach a higher level of communication - and not just pass mere facts, but adress emotions and deep thoughts - than yes, there is the great art of poetry. Natural languages are not mathematical precise for a reason. But as long as basic simple communication is not working - I think it is seldom helpful to use even more complicated/vague language
- bryanrasmussen 5y ago
  >And I would say, the whole world is in a state of confusion caused by missunderstanding. If people would speak and write a bit more clean and clearly (like good code) I think everyone would benefit. many professions have concepts that are complicated to understand for people outside the profession and as such develop their own jargon. The development of jargon that is perceived as unfriendly and complicated to people outside the profession is often driven by the need for greater clarity inside the profession. Finally in the case of programming languages and clarity arguments, clarity relates to your expertise, the less expert phrasing is sometimes overly verbose and destructive to quick comprehension, while the expert phrasing may seem incomprehensible to the non-expert.
  - hutzlibu 5y ago
    "clarity relates to your expertise, the less expert phrasing is sometimes overly verbose and destructive to quick comprehension, while the expert phrasing may seem incomprehensible to the non-expert. " An expert programmer should write adequate code for the target audience - the people who will actually read and work with that code later. They need to understand it, so he or she should not use advanced constructs, when beginners will work with the codebase. Likewise with scientific language: If you speak to fellow scientists you can and must use your special language. Way more efficient. But if you give a press conference to present your findings, you have to use simpler terms, if you want people to understand you. Many great discoveries probably got lost that way, because scientific language was not translated adequately.
JamilD 5y ago
It's easier to hide bad writing with more difficult words. When writing in a way that's easily understandable, bad writing or arguments that don't make sense become much more evident. I see it as a progression. It's easy to lie to yourself and think you're a good writer by clouding your prose with difficult-to-understand sentences. I think once you've mastered writing simply, you can be confident that you're able to move on to more difficult prose without using it as a crutch to obscure bad writing.
- pbronez 5y ago
  I agree with this. Most people need to simply their writing and convey their ideas more clearly. Once you've mastered that, you can explore more sophisticated prose.
- tuatoru 5y ago
  Treat fancy words and constructions in your writing like seasoning on your food. A bit here and there makes it more interesting. Too much makes it indigestible.
strogonoff 5y ago
1) We tend to pay more attention to what is more difficult[0], and paying more attention is often how we become better at something. Successful teachers and instructors don’t “chew” everything out and explain in simplest possible terms but rather facilitate an involved process throughout which the student has to make own effort in order to arrive at an understanding and in the end experience an “aha!” rush that is stronger, more memorable and inspiring. If I am reading a piece of writing and a word takes a moment for me to understand or I’m redirected to a footnote for no obvious reason, that itself might just make me remember the idea better; if I suddenly notice a second layer of meaning, the feeling of connection with the author facilitates deeper understanding. (And if I stopped reading at that point due to insufficient motivation, perhaps that’s how the author intentionally made me self-select out.) 2) Not every idea can be directly verbalized. One could argue that whatever can be conveyed in writing by words in their direct literal meanings is only sufficient for communicating strictly technical information. Imparting a non-trivial concept, a feeling or emotion requires lateral, indirect approaches—and that’s where author’s choice of words, idioms, rhythm, connotations, anything can play a role. (Think of background music in a film and how it influences your impression; try watching a piece of dialogue while playing an uplifting/energizing piece of music and notice how the mood changes.) [0] In non-arbitrary ways; it’s a fine line between keeping readers on their toes and trying to be obscure for the sake of it.
munch117 5y ago
Also Mark Twain: "I never write metropolis for seven cents because I can get the same price for city."

blockwriter 5y ago

Alternating between single clause sentences and sentences with two clauses, as the author of the article mostly does, is also not an example of good writing. It is perfectly efficient, just not particularly good. The clauses themselves should patter, creating ventricles that, like the heart, comprise contrasting units through which the gist is substantiated. A lot of the reader's cognitive overhead can be offloaded to the interest of a sentence's construction.

andrei_says_ 5y ago
This sounds very interesting but I have trouble picturing it. Could you provide an example of text with this structure/rhythm?
sidedishes 5y ago
I agree -- that sort of rhythm may be to the point and good for some goals of technical writing, but is pretty sterile. My favourite quote about sentence pacing: > This sentence has five words. Here are five more words. Five-word sentences are fine. But several together become monotonous. Listen to what is happening. The writing is getting boring. The sound of it drones. It’s like a stuck record. The ear demands some variety. Now listen. I vary the sentence length, and I create music. Music. The writing sings. It has a pleasant rhythm, a lilt, a harmony. I use short sentences. And I use sentences of medium length. And sometimes, when I am certain the reader is rested, I will engage him with a sentence of considerable length, a sentence that burns with energy and builds with all the impetus of a crescendo, the roll of the drums, the crash of the cymbals–sounds that say listen to this, it is important. (Gary Provost)
- vpavicic 5y ago
  I enjoyed reading this very much! Thank you!
- AstralStorm 5y ago
  And then Google Translate is applied and it all turns to mush or worse.
chrisweekly 5y ago
Good point. Speaking of the art of writing good sentences, I heartily recommend "First You Write a Sentence" by Joe Moran.

rTX5CMRXIfFG 5y ago

I agree with the whole article though, except for the note about using sesquipedalian words. I agree that there are, in fact, creative usages of such words that make making a point achieve a stronger impact, and I enjoy learning a new word or two from whatever I'm reading. Expanding my vocabulary is one of my motivations for reading as a non-native English speaker.

hutzlibu 5y ago

"- to use only simple and common words in efficient sentences is becoming almost universal, and yet "good writing" doesn't always obey these rules." I would say it depends what you write and to whom. If your target is "the internet" where most people only speak simple english - you absolutely want to use simple english, if you want to reach more people. And also in everyday life I made an effort to value clarity and simplicity in speech way over complicated layered sentences that might have made my teachers proud - but would be cause for further missunderstanding with the people around me (my partner has a different first language than me). And I would say, the whole world is in a state of confusion caused by missunderstanding. If people would speak and write a bit more clean and clearly (like good code) I think everyone would benefit. That being said, if you want to reach a higher level of communication - and not just pass mere facts, but adress emotions and deep thoughts - than yes, there is the great art of poetry. Natural languages are not mathematical precise for a reason. But as long as basic simple communication is not working - I think it is seldom helpful to use even more complicated/vague language

bryanrasmussen 5y ago
>And I would say, the whole world is in a state of confusion caused by missunderstanding. If people would speak and write a bit more clean and clearly (like good code) I think everyone would benefit. many professions have concepts that are complicated to understand for people outside the profession and as such develop their own jargon. The development of jargon that is perceived as unfriendly and complicated to people outside the profession is often driven by the need for greater clarity inside the profession. Finally in the case of programming languages and clarity arguments, clarity relates to your expertise, the less expert phrasing is sometimes overly verbose and destructive to quick comprehension, while the expert phrasing may seem incomprehensible to the non-expert.
- hutzlibu 5y ago
  "clarity relates to your expertise, the less expert phrasing is sometimes overly verbose and destructive to quick comprehension, while the expert phrasing may seem incomprehensible to the non-expert. " An expert programmer should write adequate code for the target audience - the people who will actually read and work with that code later. They need to understand it, so he or she should not use advanced constructs, when beginners will work with the codebase. Likewise with scientific language: If you speak to fellow scientists you can and must use your special language. Way more efficient. But if you give a press conference to present your findings, you have to use simpler terms, if you want people to understand you. Many great discoveries probably got lost that way, because scientific language was not translated adequately.

JamilD 5y ago

It's easier to hide bad writing with more difficult words. When writing in a way that's easily understandable, bad writing or arguments that don't make sense become much more evident. I see it as a progression. It's easy to lie to yourself and think you're a good writer by clouding your prose with difficult-to-understand sentences. I think once you've mastered writing simply, you can be confident that you're able to move on to more difficult prose without using it as a crutch to obscure bad writing.

pbronez 5y ago
I agree with this. Most people need to simply their writing and convey their ideas more clearly. Once you've mastered that, you can explore more sophisticated prose.
tuatoru 5y ago
Treat fancy words and constructions in your writing like seasoning on your food. A bit here and there makes it more interesting. Too much makes it indigestible.

strogonoff 5y ago

1) We tend to pay more attention to what is more difficult[0], and paying more attention is often how we become better at something. Successful teachers and instructors don’t “chew” everything out and explain in simplest possible terms but rather facilitate an involved process throughout which the student has to make own effort in order to arrive at an understanding and in the end experience an “aha!” rush that is stronger, more memorable and inspiring. If I am reading a piece of writing and a word takes a moment for me to understand or I’m redirected to a footnote for no obvious reason, that itself might just make me remember the idea better; if I suddenly notice a second layer of meaning, the feeling of connection with the author facilitates deeper understanding. (And if I stopped reading at that point due to insufficient motivation, perhaps that’s how the author intentionally made me self-select out.) 2) Not every idea can be directly verbalized. One could argue that whatever can be conveyed in writing by words in their direct literal meanings is only sufficient for communicating strictly technical information. Imparting a non-trivial concept, a feeling or emotion requires lateral, indirect approaches—and that’s where author’s choice of words, idioms, rhythm, connotations, anything can play a role. (Think of background music in a film and how it influences your impression; try watching a piece of dialogue while playing an uplifting/energizing piece of music and notice how the mood changes.) [0] In non-arbitrary ways; it’s a fine line between keeping readers on their toes and trying to be obscure for the sake of it.

munch117 5y ago

Also Mark Twain: "I never write metropolis for seven cents because I can get the same price for city."