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

Sentence Structure for Writers (2017)

blog.oup.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 38 posts

Re: Sentence Structure for Writers (2017)

#21

Post by [deleted] »

motohagiography wrote: post #17
dahart wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 dr…

[deleted]

Re: Sentence Structure for Writers (2017)

#22

Post by o11c »

Grammar and style are ultimately just two ends of a spectrum. The greatest writing sin is ambiguity (including partial ambiguity due to the possibility of mishearing or similarity to common errors); improper placement of weight means having ambiguity until the reader completes the sentence.

Weight is harmed by the widespread "rule" against using the passive voice (which is as bad a rule as "said is dead"). I'd say that topic (vs comment) is most important, then agent (vs action/patient), with subject (vs predicate/object) last and thus not sensible to make rules about.

Re: Sentence Structure for Writers (2017)

#24

Post by HWR_14 »

0xEF wrote: post #20
HWR_14 wrote: post #18

The entire article's advice strikes me as biased towards one type of reader at the expense of all others.

Can you elaborate for plebes like myself?

I mean, I can try to elaborate. I don't see why you referenced plebes. I wasn't trying to be elitist

The advice assumes that people process information the same way that the author does. I'm sure a great many people do. But I'm also sure other people do not. After all, specialized and scientific writing did not evolve into a difficult to understand sentence structure for no reason.

Consider the last point. The author thinks that the description of the person dying/playing for Real Madrid is too long because he spends the entire time waiting for a verb. That's subjective. I would not have minded more information about the person before finding out that whatever happened happened.

Re: Sentence Structure for Writers (2017)

#26

Post by canjobear »

The principle of end weight is a special case of a more general principle: sentences are usually easier to understand when syntactically related words are close to each other, all else being equal. A more precise version of Strunk and White's "keep related words together".

The interesting thing is that in English this generally pushes you to put short phrases before long phrases, as described in the article, but in languages with other word orders you can get the opposite effect. For example in Japanese the verb is always the last thing in a sentence, and so the way to keep related words together is actually to put long phrases before short phrases. So you'll often get sentences with structures like [[very long object] [short subject] verb].

Re: Sentence Structure for Writers (2017)

#27

Post by yshui »

canjobear wrote: post #26

The principle of end weight is a special case of a more general principle: sentences are usually easier to understand when syntactically related words are close to each other, all else being equal. A more precise version of Strunk and White's "keep related words together". The interesting thing is that in English this generally pushes you to put short phrases before long phrases, as described in the article, but in l…

I (kind of) know multiple languages and they all have different word orders. I find it interesting that my brain is able to switch from expecting information to be received in one order to another. Each word order feels normal to me in its respective language, mix them and they will feel weird. It's like my brain is able to process information in different orders, but there are feature flags to enable them based on the language used.

Re: Sentence Structure for Writers (2017)

#28

Post by rawgabbit »

BoostandEthanol wrote: post #4

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…

The intent is that something was nice.

English speakers prefer to say it was nice of . Instead of was nice. The is John and Mary to come and visit us the other day.

My theory is that by keeping the subject and verb short, it has less cognitive load on the listener as they know early where the conversation is going. In other words bottom line up front.

For example, this sounds strange to my ear. The right honorable gentleman who had served in the US House of Representatives and had just been floated for an even higher ranking office has been dogged by accusations of sexual impropriety.

I would phrase it as. Although dogged by accusations of sexual impropriety, the right honorable gentleman has just been floated for an even higher ranking office after serving in the US House of Representatives.

Re: Sentence Structure for Writers (2017)

#29

Post by rawgabbit »

yesfitz wrote: post #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 w…

My attempt ... On the table was a big red jug maybe full of milk but it was screaming BIG HEAVY DO NOT TOUCH and if you break it lashings by tongue and angry voices will be followed by lashings by a heavy leather belt and tears streaming down not so much due to pain but the needless humiliation of it all.

Re: Sentence Structure for Writers (2017)

#30

Post by rawgabbit »

phillc73 wrote: post #7
BoostandEthanol wrote: post #4

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”

I believe it is for emphasis. Instead of a big deal. It is a big ginormous deal that John and Mary would come all the way from their country estate to visit us their poor relations in our humble house.
Post reply on HN