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

Seven Sins of Writing

hamilton.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 119 posts

Re: Seven Sins of Writing

#41

Post by martinjacobd »

readthenotes1 wrote: post #16
martinjacobd wrote: post #6

I wish I understood what "wordiness" means. Perhaps it's restating the same simple point three times in as many loose sentences. People who harp on this point usually point to the writing of Hemingway and similar writers (Carver comes to mind). All of these men are better writers than I am, but I still prefer to read Nabokov. Could Nabokov have "made his point" in fewer words? Almost certainly, but I wouldn't have en…

Wordiness, in the fantasticly useful advice I am quite frequently accustomed to receiving in the rare and unusual (I cannot go so far as to say unique though that is nearly as a tick to a dog true) circumstances that have led me to receiving others thoughts on my quite elegant prose might be characterized as inserting too many brilliantly (to the astute author) descriptive adverbs and adjectives that somehow impede t…

I guess I just don't see sentences like this, even from novice writers.

Re: Seven Sins of Writing

#42

Post by jrockway »

I like how one of the rules is basically about "its" and "it's". I think English made a big mistake by making this irregular; both forms should have been "it's". I hope it's issues are fixed in English v2. (You just read the first sentence in English v2!)

Re: Seven Sins of Writing

#43

Post by martinjacobd »

weaksauce wrote: post #37
martinjacobd wrote: post #6

I wish I understood what "wordiness" means. Perhaps it's restating the same simple point three times in as many loose sentences. People who harp on this point usually point to the writing of Hemingway and similar writers (Carver comes to mind). All of these men are better writers than I am, but I still prefer to read Nabokov. Could Nabokov have "made his point" in fewer words? Almost certainly, but I wouldn't have en…

https://www.hamilton.edu/academics/centers/writing/seven-sin... provides a bit more context and example. remove the words that don't add to the meaning of the sentence. that aside, this is in an academic setting and not prose where the rules are not hard and fast.

I can get behind this. Interesting that all three examples provided are improved by removing a "to be" verb. Reminds me of: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-Prime

Re: Seven Sins of Writing

#44

Post by jprete »

fasterik wrote: post #14
martinjacobd wrote: post #6

I wish I understood what "wordiness" means. Perhaps it's restating the same simple point three times in as many loose sentences. People who harp on this point usually point to the writing of Hemingway and similar writers (Carver comes to mind). All of these men are better writers than I am, but I still prefer to read Nabokov. Could Nabokov have "made his point" in fewer words? Almost certainly, but I wouldn't have en…

It's a lot more obvious in academic writing and other non-fiction. Using a lot of big words to make a simple point is often a sign that the writer is trying to signal intelligence rather than convey information. In literature the goals are different, but I still think the rule applies in most cases. Nabokov is the exception that proves the rule. Great writers have earned the right to be wordy. When an average writer…

I mostly agree with you. But I think great writers have, instead, earned the skill of when and how to be wordy for desired effect.

Re: Seven Sins of Writing

#45

Post by PakG1 »

martinjacobd wrote: post #6

I wish I understood what "wordiness" means. Perhaps it's restating the same simple point three times in as many loose sentences. People who harp on this point usually point to the writing of Hemingway and similar writers (Carver comes to mind). All of these men are better writers than I am, but I still prefer to read Nabokov. Could Nabokov have "made his point" in fewer words? Almost certainly, but I wouldn't have en…

Writing tips in OP seem great for certain types of nonfiction writing. Are the most prominent works of Hemingway and Nabokov (and Carver) fiction or nonfiction? Why are we treating fiction and nonfiction writing styles as having similar goals or needing similar advice?

Re: Seven Sins of Writing

#46

Post by PakG1 »

jrockway wrote: post #42

I like how one of the rules is basically about "its" and "it's". I think English made a big mistake by making this irregular; both forms should have been "it's". I hope it's issues are fixed in English v2. (You just read the first sentence in English v2!)

I presume this is a joke. Languages evolve over time (centuries in the case of English), there are very few examples of designed languages. English is especially complicated because it emerges from a melting pot of germanic, Latin, Greek, French, etc. The form of the word its emerged through a linguistic process that took a long, long time. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/its#

Re: Seven Sins of Writing

#47

Post by PakG1 »

cebert wrote: post #5

I’ve always seen recommendations to avoid passive voice in writing. However, when I encounter passive voice it doesn’t bother me. It also is one of my more frequent writing mistakes. Is this still considered bad practice?

The interesting question is if passive voice is so bad, how did it come about in the English language and why did it survive? That directly contradicts a lot of this advice.

Though I try to use primarily active voice because it helps me save on word/page count when I'm trying to submit papers to conferences.

Re: Seven Sins of Writing

#48

Post by abathur »

Since it's a theme in more than one comment thread:

If you're a contrarian, I'd soften rules to constraints.

Their utility is less in what they do to your results than in what working within them does to you.

Constraints force you to be attentive and mindful, and this helps you understand the tools, materials, and techniques at your disposal.

It someone scolding you about passive voice is offputting, talk yourself into writing pair of stories or posts or journal entries in entirely passive and entirely active voice.

Be fastidious about both. Learn your materials.

Re: Seven Sins of Writing

#49

Post by spartanatreyu »

mabbo wrote: post #32

> Passive voice produces a sentence in which the subject receives an action. In contrast, active voice produces a sentence in which the subject performs an action. Setting aside whether the passive or active voice is better, I'm delighted by this description of what each is.

I can't grok "receives an action".

What does "receives" mean?

Looking at the example, I can only see that the active voice variations have:

- The action after the subject - The action closer to the subject than the passive voice variation - The subject earlier in the sentence than the passive voice variation

Can a sentence specifically be active or passive voice, or are active and passive on opposite ends of a spectrum where one sentence is said to be more active or more passive than another sentence?

Re: Seven Sins of Writing

#50

Post by louthy »

jay_kyburz wrote: post #20
kens wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Number seven is miscellaneous issues; you need to click through to see them. One of the complaints is "treating data as singular". My view is that "data" is obviously a mass noun and treating it as plural is pointlessly pedantic.

Should be called The 6 Deadly Sins and a Myriad of Minor Mistakes.

Or, ‘The 6 Deadly Sins and Myriad Minor Mistakes’
Post reply on HN