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

Common bugs in writing (2021)

cs.columbia.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 99 posts

Re: Common bugs in writing (2021)

#61

Post by spondylosaurus »

ape4 wrote: post #30
bradrn wrote: post #7

> Avoid use of passive tense if at all possible. Example: "In each reservation request message, a refresh interval used by the sender is included." reads better and shorter as "Each ... message includes ..." To which I submit the following article as a rebuttal: http://www.lel.ed.ac.uk/~gpullum/passive_loathing.html . Oh well, at least this person seems somewhat more consistent than most in following his own rule.

There must be places for reasonable use of the passive. Not everything is advertising copy.

There certainly are. The Google Developer Documentation Style Guide includes some (imo, non-exhaustive) examples of when to use the passive voice[1]:

> To emphasize an object over an action. > To de-emphasize a subject or actor. > If your readers don't need to know who's responsible for the action.

Sometimes you end up twisting yourself into knottier linguistic pretzels trying to make something active (for active's sake) instead of just using the passive voice deliberately.

https://developers.google.com/style/voice#exceptions

Re: Common bugs in writing (2021)

#62

Post by spondylosaurus »

bogtog wrote: post #18

On a somewhat different note, does anybody have suggestions on books/videos to help learn thoroughly grammar? My PhD advisor sometimes uses words like "past participle", and I just nod along as though I understand what he is referring to. I have an eBook of Strunk & White sitting around, but I figured it was more about general good writing than grammar specifically.

Check out Dreyer's English: An Utterly Correct Guide to Clarity and Style. The eponymous Dreyer is chief copyeditor at Random House, so he knows his way around a dependent clause (and isn't afraid to show it), but his writing style is engaging and not at all dry. At times, if you can believe it, he's even pretty funny.

Re: Common bugs in writing (2021)

#64

Post by joegahona »

bogtog wrote: post #18

On a somewhat different note, does anybody have suggestions on books/videos to help learn thoroughly grammar? My PhD advisor sometimes uses words like "past participle", and I just nod along as though I understand what he is referring to. I have an eBook of Strunk & White sitting around, but I figured it was more about general good writing than grammar specifically.

Readable and fun, but extremely useful:

• Lapsing into a Comma, Bill Walsh (RIP)

• The 10% Solution, Ken Rand (for editing down wordy text)

• Sin and Syntax, Constance Hale

• Woe Is I, Patricia T. O'Conner

More resource-like and grammar-heavy:

• Words Into Type, Marjorie E. Skillin (hard-core grammar rules, great section on redundancies)

• Chicago Manual of Style (in general, the core style of book and magazine writing)

• Associated Press Stylebook (in general, the core style of newspaper writing)

• Garner's Modern English Usage, Bryan A. Garner

• Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of English Usage

• Dictionary of American Idioms, Maxine Tull Makkai

Not about writing, but hilarious and snobby and awesome -- great airplane reading:

• The Big Book of Beastly Mispronunciations, Charles Harrington Elster

Re: Common bugs in writing (2021)

#65

Post by dllthomas »

brookst wrote: post #46
Errancer wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, often I write first sentence in technical language to introduce the reader to the existing discussion and then say "In other words" to paraphrase the technical language into more familiar but less precise vocabulary.

I agree, but even in those cases, “in other words” is just throat-clearing. Like “simply put” or “that is to say”, these are noise words that only hurt the clarity of writing. If two examples help, use two examples. There’s no need to call out that the second one is another example; people will get that. At least that’s how I see it after a lifetime of trying to stamp out this kind of filler language in my own writin…

If it's two examples, it's not the same thing presented again in other words. If you are presenting the same thing twice phrased differently, separating the two presentations is important, and "in other words" is a perfectly reasonable phrase to do that.

Re: Common bugs in writing (2021)

#66

Post by joegahona »

ape4 wrote: post #30
bradrn wrote: post #7

> Avoid use of passive tense if at all possible. Example: "In each reservation request message, a refresh interval used by the sender is included." reads better and shorter as "Each ... message includes ..." To which I submit the following article as a rebuttal: http://www.lel.ed.ac.uk/~gpullum/passive_loathing.html . Oh well, at least this person seems somewhat more consistent than most in following his own rule.

There must be places for reasonable use of the passive. Not everything is advertising copy.

There are. I worked as a copy editor in consumer publications and dreaded editing one particular guy’s stuff because he took the “no passive voice” thing as gospel and really went through contortions to observe it. His copy had a really harsh and jagged tone as a result. Other editors who were aware of the “rule” but weren’t strident about it had writing that was so much more enjoyable to read.

These days I’m working with engineers and product managers in a very technical environment, and the passive voice is everywhere, so I find myself rewriting a lot, and rewriting improves it. I’m not eradicating the passive voice, but people use it in a lot of places where it doesn’t work well.

Re: Common bugs in writing (2021)

#67

Post by tptacek »

This suffers from a pathology common to writing style guides: it starts with strong, reasonably universal advice, and descends into a subjective catalog of the author's pet peeves. There's no utility in advising technical writers not to begin sentences with the word "and".

Re: Common bugs in writing (2021)

#68

Post by cratermoon »

mo_42 wrote: post #11

When I was doing my PhD, I was really in love with such guides. There is also the book Bugs in Writing by Lyn Dupré. Looking back I'm not so sure about the utility in scientific writing. Every research community has its own jargon. If don't stick to it, you're going to have a hard time. Today, I very much enjoy these again because most writing happens in a blog. I would add to that list (not original from me): - Dang…

> When I was doing my PhD

What field, if I may ask?

There's an article titled "Writing higher education differently: a manifesto on style" by Helen Sword http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075070802597101> advocating for academic writers to "express complex ideas clearly and succinctly; write with originality, imagination and creative flair; convey enthusiasm, commitment and a strong sense of self; tap into a wide range of intellectual interests; avoid excessive jargon; employ plenty of concrete examples and illustrations; demonstrate care for their readers; and know how to tell a good story"

Also, academics may appreciate the book Writing for Social Scientists, by Howard S. Becker. This is true even if your field is is not social science. You can probably safely skim most of the chapter on "Writing With Computers", as it was first written in 1986 (back when typewriters were being replaced with "word processors") and revised in 2007.

Re: Common bugs in writing (2021)

#70

Post by blowski »

brookst wrote: post #46
Errancer wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, often I write first sentence in technical language to introduce the reader to the existing discussion and then say "In other words" to paraphrase the technical language into more familiar but less precise vocabulary.

I agree, but even in those cases, “in other words” is just throat-clearing. Like “simply put” or “that is to say”, these are noise words that only hurt the clarity of writing. If two examples help, use two examples. There’s no need to call out that the second one is another example; people will get that. At least that’s how I see it after a lifetime of trying to stamp out this kind of filler language in my own writin…

Without beating around the bush, what I’m trying to say is, in other words, unless I’m mistaken, it’s perhaps possible that maybe some writing just could be written in fewer words.
Post reply on HN