Over the past year and a half, I’ve really enjoyed sharing my thoughts on:

Which is good. Very good. And yet…

“A series of clear sentences can still be ]]> If you adhere to The First Two Principles of Clear Writing, which means, basically, using “obvious characters as your subjects and [using] verbs that identify the crucial actions those characters are taking,” you’re almost assured of writing clear and direct individual sentences.

Which is good. Very good. And yet…

“A series of clear sentences can still be confusing if we fail to design them to fit their context, to reflect a consistent point of view, to emphasize our most important ideas,” Joseph Williams cautioned in his book Style: Toward Clarity and Grace.

Rather than just writing clear individual sentences, we want all of our sentences and paragraphs to fit together well so that our entire article or blog post has a clear and cohesive meaning.

Cohesive means “exhibiting or producing cohesion or coherence,” according to the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, and cohesion means “the act or state of sticking together tightly….molecular attraction by which the particles of a body are united throughout the mass.”

In other words, when you write cohesively, all the parts of your prose (words, sentences, paragraphs, sections) stick together tightly, uniting to express one overarching, clear meaning.

Williams offers two principles of cohesion, two very simple yet profound ways to dramatically improve the odds of making your entire prose unite clearly. They are:

“Put at the beginning of a sentence those ideas that you have already mentioned, referred to, or implied, or concepts that you can reasonably assume your reader is already familiar with, and will readily recognize.”

And:

“Put at the end of your sentence the newest, the most surprising, the most significant information: information that you want to stress–perhaps the information that you will expand on in your next sentence.”

He explains why:

“As you begin a sentence, you have to prepare your readers for new and therefore important information. Give your readers a familiar context to help move from the more familiar to the less familiar, from the known to the unknown.

All of us recognize this principle when a good teacher tries to teach us something new. That teacher will always try to connect something we already know to whatever new we are trying to learn. Sentences work in the same way….To lead your reader to whatever will seem new to that reader, you have to begin that sentence with something that you can reasonably assume that reader already knows.”

Basically, put old or less important information at the beginning of your sentences and move new or more important information to the end of your sentences. Doing so will create a coherent flow of information, as each newly introduced idea is expounded upon in the following sentences.

Example Time

I’ll give a string of three sentences that violate Williams’ two principles of cohesion and then revise them according to the principles. Let’s see which version flows more smoothly and comes across clearer.

Ignoring Williams’ Principles Version

“Recently, a number of business bloggers have strongly criticized the business model known as freemium. When a business offers its basic services or products for free and charges a premium for its advanced services or products, freemium occurs. Despite such well-articulated concerns, freemium proponents continue to spread their message with enthusiasm.”

Embracing Williams’ Principles Version

“Recently, a number of business bloggers have strongly criticized the business model known as freemium. Freemium occurs when a business offers its basic services or products for free and charges a premium for its advanced services or products. Despite such well-articulated concerns, freemium proponents continue to spread their message with enthusiasm.”

To me, the second version definitely reads better. It was an easy revision process: I didn’t change a single word; instead, I simply moved the two words “freemium occurs” from the end of the second sentence in the original version to the beginning of the second sentence in the revised version.

Both versions correctly introduce the somewhat unfamiliar term “freemium” at the end of their first sentences. But the first version takes a long time to repeat that new word, thus potentially confusing the reader.

The second version repeats the newly introduced topic (it’s already been mentioned, even if just once, thus being “old” information), “freemium”, as soon as it’s been introduced, thus keeping it front and center, and quickly giving its definition.

Summing Up

I personally need to be much more conscious of how I begin and end sentences as I write. Just because ideas may flow out of our heads and seem natural to us doesn’t mean they come across that way to readers. We need to order our sentences in such ways that present our ideas logically to our readers.

I suggest simply writing your article or post, letting the ideas come out. Then, as you revise your work (and you should always revise your work before publishing it), look to make sure you’ve indeed put old information at the beginning of your sentences and put new information at the end of them.

If you haven’t, simply rearrange the order; often, no rewriting will be necessary. That doesn’t mean that you write every single sentence in such a rigid fashion, but rather you make sure you’re introducing and expounding upon your ideas logically and clearly–and following the two principles outlined here will greatly aid your task.

Doing so will absolutely increase the flow, cohesion, and clarity of your writing.

P.S.

Have you gotten a copy of Joseph M. Williams’ Style: Toward Clarity and Grace yet? The posts I’ve written here are just a taste of his ideas and really can’t do justice to the impressive scope of writing advice Williams lays out.

So get a copy, read it, do the exercises, and take your writing up a notch.

(1) the subjects of the sentences name the cast of characters,

and

(2) the verbs that go with those subjects name the crucial actions those characters are part of.”

Williams demonstrates what he ]]> Joseph Williams, author of Style: Toward Clarity and Grace, wrote “Readers are likely to feel that they are reading prose that is clear and direct when:

(1) the subjects of the sentences name the cast of characters,

and

(2) the verbs that go with those subjects name the crucial actions those characters are part of.”

Williams demonstrates what he means by first, writing a sentence that violates both of those principles (and is thus unclear and vague), and then revising it according to his first two principles of clear writing.

Vague Sentence

“Our lack of knowledge about local conditions precluded determination of committee action effectiveness in fund allocation to those areas in greatest need of assistance.”

The subject in this sentence is the abstract phrase Our lack of knowledge and its verb is the vague precluded. No clear characters or definitive actions are given. Contrast that sentence with its revised version.

Revised Clear Sentence

“Because we knew nothing about local conditions, we could not determine how effectively the committee had allocated funds to areas that most needed assistance.”

Williams writes, “We is the subject of both knew and could not determine.”

and

“The committee is [the] subject of the verb had allocated.”

and

“area is…the subject of needed.”

The revised sentence has clearly stated characters as its subjects.

Looking at the verbs:

“In the first [sentence], the actions are not verbs but rather abstract nouns: lack, knowledge, determination, action, allocation, assistance, need. The second consistently names those actions in verbs: we knew nothing, we could not determine, the committee allocated, areas needed.”

Williams says “the real difference between those sentences…lies…in where the writer placed the characters and expressed their actions.”

A Simpler, Shorter Example

Here’s another example, taken from Williams.

When a writer is trying not to irritate people, he may make it hard for them to immediately and clearly pinpoint who is responsible for an action causing negative consequences. He may also try to minimize the direct, immediate harshness of the action by being vague.

Say you’ve been given a letter from your university informing you that your tennis club or Japanese club will no longer be allowed to exist on campus with the use of campus funds.

It might read like this:

“There has been an affirmative decision for program termination.”

You understand what that means, but it fails to name who made the decision, and it also puts the focus on some “decision” rather than what the decision was about: your club is being shut down.

Rather, the authors of the statement should have the courage of their convictions and state who is responsible for the decision and put the focus on what the decision is. The clear and respectable version would be:

“The director decided to terminate the program.”

This version clearly states who made a decision, and that his decision is to terminate your club. It has a character, the director, as its obvious subject, and a strong, clearly stated action, decided, as its verb. You immediately know who is doing what.

So, if you want to write clearly, follow Joseph Williams’ first two principles of clear writing: one, use obvious characters as your subjects (and characters could be individuals, governments, businesses, sports teams–any clearly defined entity), and two, use verbs that identify the crucial actions those characters are taking.

And, of course, get and read Style: Toward Clarity and Grace. If you truly absorb its material, I believe you will take your writing to a much higher level.

Why? Well it’s been the most influential on my writing development, having provided me with two principal techniques (both related to larger philosophical writing issues) that have stuck with me ever since I first ]]> The best book on writing I’ve ever read, as I mentioned recently, is Style: Toward Clarity and Grace by Joseph M. Williams.

Why? Well it’s been the most influential on my writing development, having provided me with two principal techniques (both related to larger philosophical writing issues) that have stuck with me ever since I first read it for a prose writing course in college.

The subtitle: Toward Clarity and Grace, says it all–good writing is both clear and graceful. Some people are obsessed with writing clearly (as they should be), but that emphasis alone can leave one’s writing fairly bland.

Others are so caught up with writing majestically and attractively that they neglect clarity, leaving their readers scratching their heads as they try to make clear sense of what the writer is saying.

Style: Toward Clarity and Grace relentlessly upholds both aspects of writing.

Metadiscourse

The first technique I learned was to cut out most metadiscourse, which is writing about writing, adding words to comment on your own writing, as in “to sum up”; “more importantly”; “I believe”; “note that”; “it has become clear”; “I would like to point out.”

Note: Some metadisourse is necessary to qualify one’s writing to prevent sounding like an arrogant, know-nothing who makes declarative proclamations. It’s probably better to write, “I believe the free market is better at bringing costs down than government price controls,” than to simply declare, “The free market is better at bringing costs down than government price controls.”

By using metadiscourse in the above sentence, you make it clear that you’re arguing your belief, not stating an indisputable fact that applies in all cases.

Nevertheless, the less metadiscourse you use, the stronger and clearer your writing tends to be.

Listen to Williams on this subject:

“The problem is to recognize when metadiscourse is useful and then to control it. Some writers use so much metadiscourse that they bury their ideas. For example:

‘The last point I would like to make here is that in regard to men-women relationships, it is important to keep in mind that the greatest changes have probably occurred in the way men and women seem to be working next to one another.’

Only part of that sentence addresses men-women relationships:

…greatest changes have…occurred in the way men and women…working next to one another.

The rest tells readers how to understand what they are reading:

The last point I would like to make here is that in regard to…it is important to keep in mind that…probably…seem too…

Pruned of the writing about reading, the sentence becomes more direct:

The greatest changes in men-women relationships have occurred in the way men and women work next to one another.

And now that we can see what this sentence really says, we can make it more direct:

Men and women have changed their relationships most in the way they work together.

In deciding how much metadiscourse to include, we can’t rely on broad generalizations. Some entirely successful writers use a good deal; others equally successful, very little.”

Modifiers

I actually wrote a guest post for Copyblogger on the subject of modifiers, three in particular: resumptive, summative, and free, as elucidated by Williams. Here’s an excerpt, focusing on the resumptive modifier:

“Resumptive Modifiers

Williams says, ‘To create a resumptive modifier, repeat a key word close to the end of a clause and then resume the line of thought with a relative clause, elaborating on what went before.’

Essentially, this means repeating the key word for emphasis.

Original version:

He finally faced his biggest fear that had plagued him since he joined the team.

Resumptive modifier version:

He finally faced his biggest fear, a fear that had plagued him since he joined the team.”

These kinds of modifiers can extend sentences, imbuing them with emphasis, emphasis that can help drive home a point, adding variety and style to your writing.

How It Helped Me

I was already a pretty good writer when I began that prose writing course, able to passionately and clearly express my ideas in a flowing manner. But, my writing was bogged down with way too much metadiscourse; eliminating much of it made my writing crisper and smoother and more forceful.

Occasionally working in the modifiers Williams suggests added some (I like to think anyway) grace to my writing as well.

By the end of that class, I had improved my grades from B’s to A’s, if I remember correctly–that professor was the toughest grader I ever had.

Be Warned, Though

Style: Toward Clarity and Grace is not an easy book; it’s not a book for beginning writers looking for simple rules that always apply. Williams admits in the preface that “this book is not an easy afternoon read.”

Rather, he suggests “you read this book a short section at a time….Under no circumstances try to devour this book in a sitting.”

I strongly agree. I’m reading several pages at a time, intensely focusing on Williams’ many examples and exercises. That’s how this book will transform your writing: learn the principles by doing the exercises.

Williams says his central objective is “to show how a writer quickly and efficiently transforms a rough first draft into a version crafted for the reader.”

Now, you do revise, don’t you?

Right now, she’s accepting nominations, with voting on whichever books are nominated to come later.

One book that’s sure to get a lot of votes is The Elements of Style by Strunk & White, deservedly so, I ]]> Meryl at Meryl’s Notes Blog is running a poll to compile a list of the Top 25 Books for Writers.

Right now, she’s accepting nominations, with voting on whichever books are nominated to come later.

One book that’s sure to get a lot of votes is The Elements of Style by Strunk & White, deservedly so, I think. It does contain some helpful advice for beginning writers, and serves as a nice simple reference guide.

And yet, I have to agree somewhat with Geoffrey Pullum, Professor of General Linguistics at the University of Edinburgh, as quoted at the Between Two Worlds blog:

“The Elements of Style does not deserve the enormous esteem in which it is held by American college graduates. Its advice ranges from limp platitudes to inconsistent nonsense. Its enormous influence has not improved American students’ grasp of English grammar; it has significantly degraded it.”

And:

“English syntax is a deep and interesting subject. It is much too important to be reduced to a bunch of trivial don’t-do-this prescriptions by a pair of idiosyncratic bumblers who can’t even tell when they’ve broken their own misbegotten rules.”

Justin Taylor, who runs Between Two Worlds, asked Professor Pullum what he would recommend in place of Elements. Pullum suggests four books. This one leapt out at me:

“The best book of the relevant type that I have seen is Joseph Williams’ book Style: Toward Clarity and Grace, which is excellent. Try that. It doesn’t try to do a lot of grammar description, and it doesn’t offer a long list of commonly-misused constructions, but it is very sensible on how to write and what the role of grammar facts should be.”

I loved this suggestion because it coincides with my own experience: Style: Toward Clarity and Grace is hands down the best book on writing I’ve ever read. I became familiar with it in college, as it was a principle textbook for my prose writing course.

While we only looked at a few parts of the book, the bits that I learned from it have significantly improved my writing ever since. I’m currently reading it from beginning to end this time, and will likely immediately reread it as soon as I finish, because the information therein is so good that I want to deeply internalize it.

In the preface, Williams hints at what he himself may have seen as a flaw with the Elements, although he never mentions that book by name. He writes:

“[T]he standard books on style don’t go much beyond high mindedness. They are all for accuracy, brevity, clarity, and so forth, but beyond offering good and bad examples, none of them explains how to achieve those ends….We offer detailed ways to put into specific practice the clichés of style: “Be clear,” “Omit unnecessary words,” Devise a plan and stick to it.”

This book is so good, in my opinion, that I plan on writing two or three posts looking at some of the specific advice it contains.

Meanwhile, read Professor Pullum’s full essay on the Elements of Style here.

And don’t forget to nominate your favorite writing book at Meryl’s Notes Blog.

And, go ahead and get yourself a copy of Style: Toward Clarity and Grace by Joseph M. Williams.

Of course, simply declaring “omit needless words,” and “be concise,” doesn’t really help you to do that. It lets you know you should write that way, but that’s about as far as it goes.

So, how to ]]> Writing concisely is a key to writing clearly, and writing clearly is a key to getting your message across effectively.

Of course, simply declaring “omit needless words,” and “be concise,” doesn’t really help you to do that. It lets you know you should write that way, but that’s about as far as it goes.

So, how to write concisely, so that you can write clearly, so that you can get your message across effectively?

One of the best ways to learn anything is to see clear examples of it.

Thus, here are three fun and helpful resources offering clear, concise, and effective examples of how to write clearly, concisely, and effectively:

• 22 Words: A blog by Abraham Piper. Piper’s posts are almost always exactly 22 words. And those posts usually express a clear and substantive message. Example: “A person’s intelligence stops feeling relevant to friendship with them when I remember all the wonderful dunces (and insufferable polymaths) I’ve known.”

• 22 Letters: Also by Abraham Piper, 22 Letters is one of his Twitter accounts; on this one, he posts tweets in only 22 letters or less. Example: “Baby’s staying in PJs today.”

• Six Word Stories: Simply put, this site posts stories, submitted by anyone willing to participate, written in exactly six words. Usually, the stories are entertaining and make sense. Six Word Stories is also on Twitter. Example: “Tiger chasing. Man tripping. Breakfast served.”

If you really want to sharpen your ability to write concisely, I encourage you to sign up for email subscriptions to the 22 Words blog, and follow 22 Letters and Six Word Stories on Twitter.

Yeah, you’ll have to learn how to use Twitter, but it’s easy and it doesn’t have to take much time (I can easily go several days without using it). Plus, it can be a Fun Way to Develop [a] Concise Writing Style as long as you don’t succumb to the Twouble with Twitters.

I keep up with all of the aforementioned blogs and tweets, and they’re simple, fun, recurring reminders to me on how to write both concisely and substantively.

Also, set such limits for yourself: write posts in 22 words or six words or even 22 letters or 5 paragraphs or whatever. Forcing yourself to write something meaningful in such short space will encourage you to focus only on the most crucial information, which will make you into a more concise writer over time.

P.S.

Looks like Copyblogger is doing some posts on just this topic. In today’s post, Do Long Blog Posts Scare Away Readers? Jon Morrow writes,

“Tight writing isn’t just another one of those things that you should do. It’s becoming a matter of survival.

If you want to see your blog grow and flourish over the coming years, you’ll need to come to the blank page not with a mouse and keyboard, but also with a knife . . . and the courage to use it.

More on how to do this tomorrow.”

Good stuff. Check it out.

My favorite “secrets” on her list are #2 and #3:

2. “I” ]]> All writers can use a reminder of how to properly use grammar–for example, that split infinitive right there is actually acceptable, despite the rumors to the contrary. Read Martha Brockenbrough’s MSN Encarta article 10 Easy Secrets of Good Grammar to find out why.

My favorite “secrets” on her list are #2 and #3:

2. “I” isn’t always the more educated choice

“Use ‘I’ when you’re the subject of the sentence. Use ‘me’ when you’re not. If someone is doing something with you, to you, or for you, for example, use ‘me.’ ‘The teacher was talking with Susan and me about our test scores.’”

and

3. Semicolons are easy to use

“Semicolons are the Rodney Dangerfield of punctuation. They’re called bad names. They’re avoided by professional writers and scared students alike. But they’re easy to use and so fun to write; no one should feel intimidated. Use them to separate two closely related sentences if you don’t want the full stop of a period. Or, use them to separate a list of items that already has commas in it. For example: ‘I have a lot of favorite book characters: Harry Potter, who has a scarred forehead; Hazel the bunny, who is the bravest character in ‘Watership Down;’ and Eugenidies, the title character in ‘The Thief,’ because he is sarcastic and clever.’”

Also, for #8, Brockenbrough writes, “In American English, punctuation usually goes inside the quotation marks.” However, there are exceptions. This is probably the one item on this list that trips me up the most frequently, although I think I generally have it down.

Read Brockenbrough’s article for the entire list. It’s worth bookmarking for future reference.

]]> http://robustwriting.com/10-grammar-tips/feed http://robustwriting.com/10-grammar-tips