Write Like You Talk (2015) • Hacker News Board

Re: Write Like You Talk (2015)

#21

Post by indus » Sun, Oct 23, 2022, 6:01 PM UTC

Three core mediums that transfer human knowledge:

- spoken words (live events, political speeches, etc)

- recorded words

- written words (blogs, books, papers)

Spoken words have the highest activation energy. Hence, the value that we expect is very very high. There is commitment of time.

Recorded words are speeches, discussions, lectures. Lower than listening something live.

Written words have the highest volume in today’s society. Also the lowest activation energy for the writer.

If written words are not edited, thought through, the increasing volume adds to the noise rather than a better signal.

Re: Write Like You Talk (2015)

#22

Post by r_hoods_ghost » Sun, Oct 23, 2022, 6:02 PM UTC

This is mistitled. What it should be is "Write like I talk." Sorry mate but not everyone limits themselves to the stripped back, limited vocabulary of Silicon Valley demotic, even in speech.

Re: Write Like You Talk (2015)

#23

Post by marginalia_nu » Sun, Oct 23, 2022, 6:04 PM UTC

Eh so like I think this maybe is primarily good advice for people who are good, like naturally good advice, no I mean speakers, not people like me who like can barely keep the tail end of a thought in my head... co- uh co- coherenty ... like.

Re: Write Like You Talk (2015)

#24

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Oct 23, 2022, 6:05 PM UTC

[deleted]

Re: Write Like You Talk (2015)

#25

Post by elevenoh » Sun, Oct 23, 2022, 6:05 PM UTC

paulpauper wrote: post #20

texaslonghorn5 wrote: post #4

> But perhaps worst of all, the complex sentences and fancy words give you, the writer, the false impression that you're saying more than you actually are. Disagree. When you're writing / reading, it's much easier to parse complex sentences. It's also much easier to express a cohesive, complex thought this way compared to a meandering, directionless sentence. And the whole point of "fancy words" are to succinctly con…

Agree. Fancy' words can add flavor to the writing and help avoid repetition, and also are more precise. If you are writing warning labels or instructions, then maybe simpler is better. But otherwise, I don't think it is a problem..

When I avoid fancy word use, I find myself using slashes [/] between simpler words to paint a precise picture

Re: Write Like You Talk (2015)

#26

Post by legendofbrando » Sun, Oct 23, 2022, 6:11 PM UTC

This is all true and I think mercurial is an excellent word. Spoken and written.

Re: Write Like You Talk (2015)

#27

Post by nmilo » Sun, Oct 23, 2022, 6:13 PM UTC

I don't like this viewpoint at all. Spoken English and written English are different languages, full-stop. You can see this in effect when someone is giving a fully-scripted presentation or talk---it just doesn't sound like speaking, no matter how conversational the text is. This is in large part due to the issue of word choice: speakers must choose their words quickly, so they must transmit their idea using lots of small, common words, while writers have time to think about word choice and select the one that transmits the exact connotation the writer is going for. And that's not to mention the nonverbal cues which add a ton of richness to spoken English. Writing allows you to take time to look over your words which lets you re-gain that richness with poetic devices which really allow your words to flow in a way that would sound unnatural and forced in spoken language. I would go as far as to say that if your writing sounds good spoken, it is not very good writing at all.

Re: Write Like You Talk (2015)

#28

Post by kayodelycaon » Sun, Oct 23, 2022, 6:15 PM UTC

The better than 95% of writers bit bugs me. It feels like looking at all of written history and saying everyone else was doing this wrong because they don't write simply enough.

Re: Write Like You Talk (2015)

#29

Post by glenstein » Sun, Oct 23, 2022, 6:16 PM UTC

paulpauper wrote: post #20

texaslonghorn5 wrote: post #4

> But perhaps worst of all, the complex sentences and fancy words give you, the writer, the false impression that you're saying more than you actually are. Disagree. When you're writing / reading, it's much easier to parse complex sentences. It's also much easier to express a cohesive, complex thought this way compared to a meandering, directionless sentence. And the whole point of "fancy words" are to succinctly con…

Agree. Fancy' words can add flavor to the writing and help avoid repetition, and also are more precise. If you are writing warning labels or instructions, then maybe simpler is better. But otherwise, I don't think it is a problem..

And to make a point that perhaps is restating yours, or overlaps with yours, I think some good writing is "dense" the way that certain foods are calorie dense.

You can intentionally write in a way that's different from your natural voice if your goal is, say, information density, or expressiveness that conveys personality or that makes the experience of reading more enjoyable, or to allow writing to shimmer with all of its contextual entanglements.

Of course people can attempt to do this and make a reading experience worse, and I think writing how you talk can be a helpful rule of thumb for certain use cases.

Re: Write Like You Talk (2015)

#30

Post by kayodelycaon » Sun, Oct 23, 2022, 6:18 PM UTC

samatman wrote: post #15

This is good advice if we ignore the headline completely. If you want to see what I mean, record yourself talking sometime, a few minutes is fine. Make a transcript, and read that. Ideally, if there's someone around who can do the favor, have that someone edit the errors in transcription and punctuation first, so that part isn't conflated. It's not going to look anything like good conversational writing. The flip sid…

I think the advice could easily be summed up as "write at an 8th grade reading level".