Live data from Hacker News

Sentence Structure for Writers (2017)

blog.oup.com

11–20 of 38 posts

Re: Sentence Structure for Writers (2017)

#11

In the comparison of these two, they say the former is more natural: > The trouble began suddenly on the thirty-first of October 1998. > The trouble began on the thirty-first of October 1998 suddenly. sure, but natural isn't what a writer who is trying to persuade is going for. 'suddenly' in this example has a polarized value. as an adverb observation it inserts the writer into the story, which either has tremendous…

Really interesting points. Also, I find most or even any absolute determinations of what makes 'good' writing less a signal of 'good writing', but more so a 'style' of writing that you can choose to take elements from or not. Just like any piece of writing. There is an implied "to me" with all of these things... to me at least.

Re: Sentence Structure for Writers (2017)

#12
post #7

Am I missing something here or does the very first example break this article’s own point? “It was nice of John and Mary to come and visit us the other day,” is 8 words before the verb come. “For John and Mary to come and visit us the other day was nice,” is only five, focused solely on the subject with no additional information (how the author felt about their visit) Yet personally the second one reads easier for me…

Why is the clunky construct “to come and visit” even used? “It was nice of John and Mary to visit us the other day”

Come and visit makes it sound like they traveled to be there, where just visit might be the neighbor stopping by. It’s subtle and ambiguous, but I do see valid use for come and visit.

Re: Sentence Structure for Writers (2017)

#13

In the comparison of these two, they say the former is more natural: > The trouble began suddenly on the thirty-first of October 1998. > The trouble began on the thirty-first of October 1998 suddenly. sure, but natural isn't what a writer who is trying to persuade is going for. 'suddenly' in this example has a polarized value. as an adverb observation it inserts the writer into the story, which either has tremendous…

You do need the comma, though -- otherwise it just seems weird. And the article does say it "could easily turn up in a novel". I think the reason it works to surprise the reader in the right context is exactly because the first word order is the normal, non-marked, way to say things. If you don't intend the special effect then using the non-natural word order isn't good writing, it's just unclear.

Re: Sentence Structure for Writers (2017)

#14

In the comparison of these two, they say the former is more natural: > The trouble began suddenly on the thirty-first of October 1998. > The trouble began on the thirty-first of October 1998 suddenly. sure, but natural isn't what a writer who is trying to persuade is going for. 'suddenly' in this example has a polarized value. as an adverb observation it inserts the writer into the story, which either has tremendous…

You can get the stack effect in your story, if that’s what you want, without imposing it on your sentences. There is a strong and not always correct belief that saving surprises to the end is both fun and clear to the reader, that everything should be written as though it’s the big reveal climax of a mystery. However, unless you’re a professional writer, that easily can (and often does) come off as muddy and forced.

I used to feel the same way, that surprises should be saved to the end, for general non-mystery-thriller writing — including technical writing. I’ve changed my mind and agree with the author now. I think it’s better, in both writing and conversation, to put what you want to say up front, to start with the punchline, and let the reader drill down rather than pulling them down. It’s better to use fewer clauses, and make sentences more straightforward. I often don’t succeed at this, so don’t take my comment as an example of practicing what I preach. ;)

Forcing little surprises everywhere to me feels like one of those curved sidewalks in a park. They’re maybe cute once, the first time, and then forever after, especially when you’re trying to get somewhere, they are obnoxious and slow me down.

Personally I prefer ‘the trouble began suddenly’ because putting suddenly at the end is splitting the verb and adverb apart and shoving a long subject in the middle. To me it feels much better to place suddenly next to the verb began that it applies to. I do not agree with the claim that either sentence feels more meaningful or that there’s a gendered voice. That’s completely subjective and power of suggestion. You could argue exactly the opposite, and it wouldn’t be any more right or wrong.

Re: Sentence Structure for Writers (2017)

#15

In the comparison of these two, they say the former is more natural: > The trouble began suddenly on the thirty-first of October 1998. > The trouble began on the thirty-first of October 1998 suddenly. sure, but natural isn't what a writer who is trying to persuade is going for. 'suddenly' in this example has a polarized value. as an adverb observation it inserts the writer into the story, which either has tremendous…

"suddenly' in this example has a polarized value. as an adverb observation it inserts the writer into the story, which either has tremendous meaning, or literally none at all. I would even say that the second example has a more masculine voice than the first because the "trouble began suddenly" usage is careless, non-commital, and low risk."

It does not sound masculine to me whatsoever.

It just sounds awkward.

Suddenly, the trouble began... The trouble suddenly began...

Each sound more normal to me with the second one being the more natural

Re: Sentence Structure for Writers (2017)

#16

Am I missing something here or does the very first example break this article’s own point? “It was nice of John and Mary to come and visit us the other day,” is 8 words before the verb come. “For John and Mary to come and visit us the other day was nice,” is only five, focused solely on the subject with no additional information (how the author felt about their visit) Yet personally the second one reads easier for me…

You can drill down more. The come in "come and visit" is a colloquial redundancy and the other day is mostly redundant, unless they had another visit that was more recent. "It was nice of john and mary to visit/john and mary's visit was nice."

This makes the difference between the two sentences very pronounced.

Re: Sentence Structure for Writers (2017)

#17
post #14

In the comparison of these two, they say the former is more natural: > The trouble began suddenly on the thirty-first of October 1998. > The trouble began on the thirty-first of October 1998 suddenly. sure, but natural isn't what a writer who is trying to persuade is going for. 'suddenly' in this example has a polarized value. as an adverb observation it inserts the writer into the story, which either has tremendous…

You can get the stack effect in your story, if that’s what you want, without imposing it on your sentences. There is a strong and not always correct belief that saving surprises to the end is both fun and clear to the reader, that everything should be written as though it’s the big reveal climax of a mystery. However, unless you’re a professional writer, that easily can (and often does) come off as muddy and forced.…

using the adverb at all is weak, as either it contains a critical idea or it doesn't, and I'd never use one in a business context because it's bargaining. the aesthetic qualities of a masculine voice aren't zero sum either, and we know it when we read it. many men write and speak effeminately or like boys, and some women use a more masculine voice beautifully. sex absolutely yields an aesthetic value. people can't draw a little heart above it when they dot an 'i' anymore so they use an exclamation point. instead of bubble letters they use rote phrases that signal their in-group status. e.g. someone who uses the word problematic may be nominally, but is probably not persuasively a heterosexual man as the jargon is an artifact of academic polari. these are aesthetic effects that are downstream of the writers experience.

otherwise, I agree with you for anything that isn't fictional or witful.

Re: Sentence Structure for Writers (2017)

#19
I often try to break out complex ideas into multiple sentences, ordered by importance.

Modifying the author’s last example: “A jug was on the table. The jug was big, red, and full of milk.”

It might sound like a children’s book, but since I mostly write emails, I can expect the recipients to read the subject line, one question or request, and one sentence of context. Any more context is for the interested reader.

I was taught to write that way in journalism classes (inverted pyramid), but it looks like “Bottom Line Up-Front” is a better fit for 2-way communications.

Post reply on HN