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…
Sentence Structure for Writers (2017)
11–20 of 38 posts
Re: Sentence Structure for Writers (2017)
#12Am 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”
Re: Sentence Structure for Writers (2017)
#13In 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…
Re: Sentence Structure for Writers (2017)
#14In 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…
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)
#15In 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…
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)
#16Am 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…
This makes the difference between the two sentences very pronounced.
Re: Sentence Structure for Writers (2017)
#17In 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.…
otherwise, I agree with you for anything that isn't fictional or witful.
Re: Sentence Structure for Writers (2017)
#18Re: Sentence Structure for Writers (2017)
#19Modifying 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.
Re: Sentence Structure for Writers (2017)
#20The entire article's advice strikes me as biased towards one type of reader at the expense of all others.