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

Writing Clear, Concise, Sentences

writing.wisc.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 75 posts

Re: Writing Clear, Concise, Sentences

#61

Post by deadbadger »

telemachos wrote: post #34
bdesimone wrote: post #26

If you get the chance, read Orwell's "Politics and the English Language." Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print. Never us 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…

And then please read this essay from the Language Log in reply (or as a counter-point, at least): http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=992 .

I only wish I could up-vote this more. See also this earlier Language Log essay (http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/003366.h...), in which Pullum points out that passives occur in "Politics and the English Language" at a considerably higher rate than was typical in contemporary periodicals - Orwell couldn't follow his own advice, even as he was dispensing it.

The same goes for Strunk and White, who in the very passage instructing writers to abjure the passive, say:

"Many a tame sentence of description or exposition can _be made_ lively and emphatic by substituting a transitive in the active voice for some such perfunctory expression as /there is/ or /could be heard/."

Still, at least the guide linked in the OP has picked actual examples of the passive voice as illustrations, and concedes that there are times when it can be reasonably used (sorry, "writers can reasonably use it"). This makes it something of a rarity, even if the advice is still poor.

Re: Writing Clear, Concise, Sentences

#63

Post by anghyflawn »

NHQ wrote: post #32

You have to break rule number one to be a politician, corporation, or spokesperson for either. Passive voice is what you use to acknowledge that something fucked up, without placing the responsibility. "There was a failure of communication."

>There was a failure of communication.

This sentence is not in the passive voice.

Re: Writing Clear, Concise, Sentences

#64

Post by billybob »

Clear writing is difficult because it requires clear thought. This makes it worthwhile, even if no one reads it, because it shows the writer whether he or she understands the subject matter.

Muddy writing, by contrast, is generally meant to impress and not convey information. The intended reaction is "I don't understand what you said, so you must be smart." This, unfortunately, seems to work for businesspeople and academics. But I hope that geeks can see through it.

Re: Writing Clear, Concise, Sentences

#65

Post by billybob »

billybob wrote: post #64

Clear writing is difficult because it requires clear thought. This makes it worthwhile, even if no one reads it, because it shows the writer whether he or she understands the subject matter. Muddy writing, by contrast, is generally meant to impress and not convey information. The intended reaction is "I don't understand what you said, so you must be smart." This, unfortunately, seems to work for businesspeople and ac…

This subject reminds me of a quote by CS Lewis about students being afraid to read classic works, and going instead to modern, unintelligible commentaries on them.

"But if [the student] only knew, the great man, just because of his greatness, is much more intelligible than his modern commentator. The simplest student will be able to understand, if not all, yet a very great deal of what Plato said; but hardly anyone can understand some modern books on Platonism. It has always therefore been one of my main endeavours as a teacher to persuade the young that firsthand knowledge is not only more worth acquiring than secondhand knowledge, but is usually much easier and more delightful to acquire."

The rest of his essay: http://silouanthompson.net/library/early-church/on-the-incar...

Re: Writing Clear, Concise, Sentences

#66

Post by telemachos »

davidmathers wrote: post #44
tptacek wrote: post #19

This advice seems to mimic much of what's in _Style: Towards Clarity and Grace_, which I found out about from Richard Gabriel ( achievement unlocked: LISP connection ) and which is probably the most hacker-friendly writing book ever written.

Note, Joseph M. Williams now has 3 different 'Style' books: Style: Toward Clarity and Grace Style: Lessons in Clarity and Grace Style: The Basics of Clarity and Grace I can't speak to the first 2, but I purchased the 3rd and found it to be excellent.

When I was a TA, this book was in very heavy use across departments as a recommended add-on for undergrad classes. (Say you're teaching Roman Civilization. You plan to assign at least 2 papers and probably also some short writing assignments. Recommend the Williams, prod them towards it, and discuss it a little - even if you don't have tons of time in your class to teach writing.)

All great, and I liked the book quite a lot. However, the publisher decided to max out on the book's popularity. First, there were quickly about 4-6 (slightly different) versions of it in print, all at the same time. Second, they would release a new version of the main edition (Style: Toward Clarity and Grace) every year. Once they realized it was a textbook, the price leapt up and up. I suppose it's just supply and demand, but it made it very hard to get students to buy the book (once it went from $10 or $12 to $35), if it was recommended and not required.

tl;dr Buy the 1995 edition for $8.93 on Amazon, not the 10th edition for $35. I'm reasonably confident that the essential advice and meat of the book is the same.

Re: Writing Clear, Concise, Sentences

#67

Post by telemachos »

This topic seems to have legs, so I'll recommend another book in this area: Clear and Simple as the Truth: Writing Classic Prose[1] (by Francis-Noel Thomas and Mark Turner).

They are far more thoughtful about style (what it is and how to teach it) than most writing guides. They acknowledge that there is not one best or ideal style for all occasions and that the style they describe and teach is one among many. It's an eye opening book in many ways. (Note: I see that there's a second edition just out. I haven't read that. I read the original in the late 90s. I doubt they've ruined it, but just in case.)

[1] http://classicprose.com/ with excerpts from the book here: http://classicprose.com/csx.html

Re: Writing Clear, Concise, Sentences

#68

Post by telemachos »

tptacek wrote: post #46
davidmathers wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note, Joseph M. Williams now has 3 different 'Style' books: Style: Toward Clarity and Grace Style: Lessons in Clarity and Grace Style: The Basics of Clarity and Grace I can't speak to the first 2, but I purchased the 3rd and found it to be excellent.

... Toward ... is the one I have, and every time I reread it I feel like I should find a way to transcribe it into emacs lisp.

Have you seen the post 3 shell scripts to improve your writing, or "My Ph.D. advisor rewrote himself in bash."? It's Bash, not Emacs Lisp, but you might still enjoy it.

Post: http://matt.might.net/articles/shell-scripts-for-passive-voi...

HN discussion: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1529166

Re: Writing Clear, Concise, Sentences

#70

Post by abraxasz »

telemachos wrote: post #8
SlyShy wrote: post #7

Some of the comments I've read seem to misunderstand the purpose of this page. This isn't the objectively best writing style, this is a concise writing style. No, it might not be the most pleasant to read, because extremely to-the-point short sentences sound blunt. The guidelines provided for writing short and concise sentences are very useful, if that's the style you are aiming for.

From the site: Follow the principles below to write sentences that are clear, to the point, and easier to read. I think they're claiming a lot more than "here's how to write concise sentences, if that's the style you're aiming for." Note also that this section ("Clear, Concise, Sentences" [sic]) falls under the heading "Improving Your Writing Style."

> "Clear, Concise, Sentences" [sic]) falls under the heading "Improving Your Writing Style."

Well I don't see the problem here. It is true that many righting concise sentences can help many people improve their writing style (it's the case for foreigners like me).

I think the site targets two types of audience:

- Those with very poor style who want to improve

- People with good style who just want to learn how to write concise sentences.

I'll give an example illustrating the second point. For some of my school projects, I had to review a lot of "science project reports", and similar stuff. Well trust me, it is painful to read a report with long, convoluted sentences expressing a simple idea..

Post reply on HN