Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Write like you talk

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 282 posts

Re: Write like you talk

#41

Post by flashman »

stupidcar wrote: post #38

If you've ever read a verbatim transcript of an interview or conversation, you'll know that actual speech is anything but clear. When talking off the cuff, even the most clear minded people tend to ramble, um and ahh, double back, talk across each other, and jump between points and subjects. When listening to someone in person, our brains seem to edit what they say on the fly to make it comprehendible, focusing on th…

This is a very good point, because when you're talking, like you'd talk to another person I mean, your turn at speaking generally flows into a single large sentence, which is typical turn-taking behaviour, because in a conversation the other person is always looking for cues that it's their turn to speak, and so you ah have to keep going even if it means you've wandered away from your original point.

Re: Write like you talk

#42

Post by rcthompson »

stupidcar wrote: post #38

If you've ever read a verbatim transcript of an interview or conversation, you'll know that actual speech is anything but clear. When talking off the cuff, even the most clear minded people tend to ramble, um and ahh, double back, talk across each other, and jump between points and subjects. When listening to someone in person, our brains seem to edit what they say on the fly to make it comprehendible, focusing on th…

If you think of the "um"s, "uh"s, and doubling-back in speaking as the equivalent of pausing and pressing backspace in writing (or crossing-out in pen-and-paper writing), then I think the advice to "write how you talk" becomes even more direct.

Re: Write like you talk

#43

Post by setpatchaddress »

dannylandau wrote: post #24
jmduke wrote: post #9

This is fairly popular advice, and I heard it at least a half dozen times at my (liberal arts) college. That's not to dismiss this post because its takeaway is commonplace: I agree with the sentiment. However, I think it's important to embrace the full implication of its thesis: Informal language is the athletic clothing of ideas. Athletic clothing is comfortable, it is functional, and it traffics in convenience. But…

I remember reading one of Isaac Isimov's biographies, where he mentions that one of the critiques of his writing is that it is too simple. His response -- that's the way it is supposed to be!

Beautiful quote on writing style from I, Asimov here:

https://books.google.com/books?id=mATFyeVI7IUC&lpg=PT324&ots...

Re: Write like you talk

#44

Post by charlysisto »

stupidcar wrote: post #38

If you've ever read a verbatim transcript of an interview or conversation, you'll know that actual speech is anything but clear. When talking off the cuff, even the most clear minded people tend to ramble, um and ahh, double back, talk across each other, and jump between points and subjects. When listening to someone in person, our brains seem to edit what they say on the fly to make it comprehendible, focusing on th…

What you just wrote illustrates perfectly your point.

Re: Write like you talk

#45

Post by _delirium »

urs2102 wrote: post #5

I've always written essays on ideas, but it wasn't until when I wanted to start publishing my writing on a blog that I found this idea true. Often times flowery language can sacrifice the clarity of your prose for attempting to appear more thoughtful than you are. It's a lot like the Richard Feynman idea that if you can't distill something to a freshman lecture, you don't really understand it.[1] [1]: Feynman, Six No…

Opposite to you, I'm often wary of conversational writing for exactly that reason: "Attempting to appear more thoughtful than you are". Especially a certain style of very breezy, self-assured conversational writing, that doesn't have any nuance or caveats, and hand-waves over anything too technical or specific.

Writers use that style to lay things out "like they really are". Let's boil down all this egghead complexity and get to what matters. No Harvard footnotes and overcomplicating things here, just straight talk. Malcolm Gladwell and David Brooks are effective users of that style of writing. Quite a few bloggers are, too. It produces this strange style that on the surface seems thoughtful, but doesn't really have much there.

Re: Write like you talk

#46

Post by benjiweber »

bbarn wrote: post #27

I had to look up "abstruse". I understood it's meaning from context, but wasn't sure if it was a portmanteau of abstract and obtuse, or an actual word. I've honestly never heard it in my life, and wouldn't stop someone saying it in a sentence, but it did stop my reading. That made me wonder, does the fact that you sometimes have to listen to the spoken word over-estimate the impact the same words will have when writt…

Never read http://abstrusegoose.com/ ?

Re: Write like you talk

#47

Post by singhrac »

jmduke wrote: post #9

This is fairly popular advice, and I heard it at least a half dozen times at my (liberal arts) college. That's not to dismiss this post because its takeaway is commonplace: I agree with the sentiment. However, I think it's important to embrace the full implication of its thesis: Informal language is the athletic clothing of ideas. Athletic clothing is comfortable, it is functional, and it traffics in convenience. But…

In the same vein, if it helps your reader understand your point, use the most precise word that means what you mean to say and is easily understandable.

Synonyms have differences, and the additional depth is helpful in many circumstances - this is the whole point of scientific 'jargon'.

However, I don't think that conflicts with pg's overall point, perhaps just nitpicking his example. I do think that 'mercurial' has its uses.

Re: Write like you talk

#48

Post by cousin_it »

stupidcar wrote: post #38

If you've ever read a verbatim transcript of an interview or conversation, you'll know that actual speech is anything but clear. When talking off the cuff, even the most clear minded people tend to ramble, um and ahh, double back, talk across each other, and jump between points and subjects. When listening to someone in person, our brains seem to edit what they say on the fly to make it comprehendible, focusing on th…

So, "write like you want to talk"?

Re: Write like you talk

#50

Post by reirob »

"It seems to be hard for most people to write in spoken language. So perhaps the best solution is to write your first draft the way you usually would, then afterward look at each sentence and ask "Is this the way I'd say this if I were talking to a friend?" ..."

The trick that works for me is setting the font-color to be the same as the background color, blak on black for example. Then you can write without being able to go back and correct what you've written. With the result, that you will write almost the way as you speak. Requires touch typing though.

I even made a colorscheme for Vim for this and using it when writing in my diary or personal emails. Does wonders.

Post reply on HN