Live data from Hacker News

Please learn to write

randsinrepose.com

71–80 of 124 posts

Re: Please learn to write

#71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did I just end that sentence with a preposition? A preposition is a perfectly acceptable thing to end a sentence with. Seriously. If you find yourself re-writing it as "with which to end a sentence" you're going to come across as stilted and awkward.

Unless writing for a scientific journal, or some other such formal setting, your goal of clear communication will be best served by using a casual, conversational style that resonates as closely as possible with how you would talk to your reader in person. That means prepositions are very much something you can end a sentence with. And you can start one with a conjunctive too, if it feels right. The rules of grammar…

Agreed. Grammar's just norms of communication, and norms depend on context. So treat the violation of them as such - sometimes it matters, sometimes it don't.

Re: Please learn to write

#72
post #23

Source of my problems: design issues 5% architecture constraints 5% language shortcomings 1% mental blocks 5% personal time management 4% personal energy 5% communication with others 75% I waste more time just trying to figure out what others are trying to say, sometimes in person and by voice, but mostly in writing. For most emails, I have to click "reply" or call back simply because what you're trying to tell me is…

Did I just end that sentence with a preposition? A preposition is a perfectly acceptable thing to end a sentence with. Seriously. If you find yourself re-writing it as "with which to end a sentence" you're going to come across as stilted and awkward.

Eschewing trailing prepositions is a rule improperly inherited from Latin. It does not apply to Germanic tongues where prepositions are necessary to disambiguate verbs. For example, to ask about, to ask of, to ask to, and to ask in are very quite distinct. In Latin, the default position of the verb is the end of the sentence. Latin word order isn't fixed like English, so the ordering of words is a form of emphasis, and placing something in the final position, after the verb, is one of the strongest emphases possible. Putting a preposition in that position would be like someone screaming "WITH! WITH!" on a soapbox on the street corner.

It's a useful rule though: an English grammar book that proscribes trailing prepositions is one you needn't spend any more time with. Just put it down and forget that it exists.

Like so many other rules, it results from Latin-steeped scholars of the 19th century who were uncomfortable with the flexibility of their native tongue, and attempted to hem it round. It's understandable. These men knew they could use the full scope of expression of Latin. About the only person who's ever pushed English hard enough to make it creak was James Joyce.

Amusing aside: you can transform transitive verbs into nouns in English directly (to request, a request). You can't similarly transform intransitive verbs because they require a preposition. In German, you would say a for-ask or an of-ask, but we don't accept that in English. Verbs with both forms are an interesting grey area, such as to dig vs to dig for.

Re: Please learn to write

#73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've tried both, and for coding-related stuff, I really dislike phone (or Skype), ranking it just about the worst possible option. I'd much rather IRC or IM, where at least we can exchange code and links and there's a bit of a scrollback buffer. Twitter and FB status messages I put in a different category, because it's difficult to have a proper conversation with them. It's pretty easy to have a proper conversation o…

I hadn't considered the coding situation, but you're right: coding is something where you need a visual reference to make sure that you're both on the right page. But what about this compromise: Skype voice conversation + skype text-chat for showing each other code snippets.

> But what about this compromise: Skype voice conversation + skype text-chat for showing each other code snippets.

I've been using this combination for a few weeks now, working on a development project with a partner who is ~1000 miles away. Besides voice and text, Skype also has screen sharing. All three parts have become essential to how we work.

Re: Please learn to write

#75

"I tweeted Jeff Atwood’s piece because, well, I agree that it’s pretty silly to think that the world is going to be a better place if the Mayor of New York City learns how to code. I agree with Atwood that his valuable time would be better spent elsewhere." Oh yeah? And who the fuck are YOU, sir?? Or Mr. Atwood? For all you know, the world would be infinitely better if the Mayor of New York City learns how to code. B…

Fear change much?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_mentality

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_consciousness

http://imlookingattheworld.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/borg....

Re: Please learn to write

#76

Many people are commenting that writing improves with practice, and that's true, but it probably isn't enough. The 10,000 hours count only if they're done well. I'm not a writer but here are some basics I've found helpful. 1. Revise constantly. If you haven't revised it three times you almost surely haven't done enough. You don't need an outline, but as you write new thoughts will occur to you, previously open questi…

2. Edit ruthlessly

I would add one more piece to your excellent suggestions: find a skilled editor if at all possible. An editor will find things you won't and offer suggestions based on an entirely different reading history and pool of knowledge. You'll learn much vaster and write much better material with another person to help you than without.

Re: Please learn to write

#78
post #23

Source of my problems: design issues 5% architecture constraints 5% language shortcomings 1% mental blocks 5% personal time management 4% personal energy 5% communication with others 75% I waste more time just trying to figure out what others are trying to say, sometimes in person and by voice, but mostly in writing. For most emails, I have to click "reply" or call back simply because what you're trying to tell me is…

The way you learn to write well is by reading.

And of course it makes a difference what you read.

Learning how to do anything well takes practice.

But you will not become a good writer unless you read.

As for what you should read,

"Garbage in, garbage out."

What do you think are the effects on your writing from reading blogs like "codinghorror"?

If your aim is to be a better written communicator in business, then you should read business correspondence from good sources.

Re: Please learn to write

#79
1. Read "Politics and the English Language", Orwell

2. Goto http://andromeda.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Writing/

3. Read http://www.amazon.com/English-Language-Users-Guide/dp/158510... by Jack Lynch (as well)

4. Understand Paul Grice's Conversational Maxim's: http://www.sas.upenn.edu/~haroldfs/dravling/grice.html (Understand that they are, as proffered by Grice, descriptive, partly anthropological heuristics for analysis of certain ways of talking, or façon de parler; but they _may_ also be developed as normative principles which may be used to constructively guide all talk exchanges.)

Fig. 1, Grice's Maxims:

❝ The maxim of quantity, where one tries to be as informative as one possibly can, and gives as much information as is needed, and no more.

The maxim of quality, where one tries to be truthful, and does not give information that is false or that is not supported by evidence.

The maxim of relation, where one tries to be relevant, and says things that are pertinent to the discussion.

The maxim of manner, when one tries to be as clear, as brief, and as orderly as one can in what one says, and where one avoids obscurity and ambiguity.

Fig. 2, an excerpt from J. Lynch:

❝ ##Prepositions.

Prepositions are usually little words that indicate direction, position, location, and so forth. Some examples: to, with, from, at, in, near, by, beside, and above.

A quick-and-dirty rule of thumb: you can usually recognize a preposition by putting it before the word he. If your ear tells you he should be him, the word might be a preposition. Thus to plus he becomes to him, so to is a preposition. (This doesn't help with verbs of action; show + he becomes show him. Still, it might help in some doubtful cases.)

##Prepositions at the End.

Along with split infinitives, a favorite bugbear of the traditionalists. Whatever the merit of the rule — and both historically and logically, there's not much — there's a substantial body of opinion against end-of-sentence prepositions; if you want to keep the crusty old-timers happy, try to avoid ending written sentences (and clauses) with prepositions, such as to, with, from, at, and in. Instead of writing “The topics we want to write on,” where the preposition on ends the clause, consider “The topics on which we want to write.” Prepositions should usually go before (pre-position) the words they modify.

On the other hand — and it's a big other hand — old-timers shouldn't always dictate your writing, and you don't deserve your writing license if you elevate this rough guideline into a superstition. Don't let it make your writing clumsy or obscure; if a sentence is more graceful with a final preposition, let it stand. For instance, “He gave the public what it longed for” is clear and idiomatic, even though it ends with a preposition; “He gave the public that for which it longed” avoids the problem but doesn't look like English. A sentence becomes unnecessarily obscure when it's filled with from whoms and with whiches. According to a widely circulated (and often mutated) story, Winston Churchill, reprimanded for ending a sentence with a preposition, put it best: “This is the sort of thing up with which I will not put.” [Revised 12 Jan. 2007.] ❞

Write and talk appropriate to your audience. Your audience in some cases might be your self. Determine what criteria you demand for a successful "talk exchange" such that shared knowledge may be produced, rather than actionable results (we should ignore implementation details).

Re: Please learn to write

#80
They mayor of NYC wants to learn to code? Awesome!

And yet detractors think he should spend more time off, "doing mayor things." Leave it to the professionals. We don't need to teach everyone to be a master carpenter, right?

"Learning to code," isn't just about teaching people another vocation. We don't teach kids to be carpenters because we know that with a little math, some reading, and advice from a carpenter that kid could figure it out. If you give them a rule in the imperial system and blueprints in metric they should be able to figure it out. Mathematics and literacy give them tools to solve other problems. We consider them fundamental tools.

The reason why teaching people to compute or "code" as some are putting it is to teach them a kind of literacy. You can't take the fundamental math and reading skills you're taught in school and write a computer program to classify your email for you or scrape the sports scores off your favorite site to track your bets. Without understanding the fundamental concepts of computation there are a whole categories of problems and inefficiencies that persist unaddressed.

So what's wrong with teaching people the basics? Most people can figure out how to unclog a drain or bang together a decent shed without investing their lives into becoming master plumbers and architects. It may be easy to think that today there just aren't the prevalence of problems in peoples' lives where a rudimentary understanding of what a program is and what a process is can solve, but I dare you to keep hold of that notion for the next ten years. Programming to those who are experienced practitioners is a skill that is easily taken for granted. You may think that programming involves sitting in front of a computer noodling with compilers while life passes you by but you'd be wrong. With enough of a basic understanding, the fundamentals, that we can give someone an intuition about what a program is and how it can be used to spin off processes that can do work for you and apply the things you learned in your maths classes or automate tedious work in your research... we can really make the world a much better place.

How would software patent reform still be an issue today if we had been educating people on the fundamentals of computer science for the past few decades instead of hiding it in the upper eschalons of academia? Would phishing scams still be profitable with fewer rubes? How much inefficiency could be saved in research, finance, design, journalism, and so forth if everyone had at least a basic understanding of what a program is? Sadly most people don't it seems. They use computers all day long but if you get talking with them about it they don't understand what the machine is doing... they're just merrily typing in and clicking on the things they're told to and wouldn't have the faintest idea if there was a better way to do things. Such is the way the world is when people are ignorant of the tools they use.

It's simple to dismiss now and maybe in ten years time your friends and family will still throw their hands up at computers and marvel at how the hell they work. Perhaps as many people do now with math. But that's a poor reason to suggest people shouldn't be taught these things and should remain ignorant.

Post reply on HN