Index: A. Introduction: the term “journalese“ is a put-down, not a compliment; B. The continuing relevance of George Orwell’s 1946 six rules of good writing; C. Definitions, characteristics, and effects of “journalese”; D. Elements of “journalese”: (1) stock expressions — color, humor, clichés; (2) euphemisms; (3) novel ways journalists use words — conversions, attributives, reduplication, archaisms, neologisms, modifications; (4) immediacy of style — short, vernacular words; emotive and inflated expressions; quasi-illiterate usages; innuendo; allusive punning; E. Elements of journalese as a pejorative term: (1) words, phrases, expressions that have become clichés; (2) sentence constructions that lead to complexity and confusion; (3) style of expression that does not reflect the way that ordinary people speak or write; F. Elements of journalese from The News Manual, developed by The University of Papua, New Guinea with help from the UNESCO and designed for Asian-Pacific countries: (1) jargon; (2) unnecessary words; (3) clichés; G. Examples of “journalese” or words, phrases, expressions that have become clichés (The Washington Post; Journalese; A Dictionary for Deciphering the News; The Guardian); H. Some Plain English guidelines for effective writing; I. Interactive exercises on using Plain English instead of journalese
A. Introduction: the term “journalese” is a put-down, not a compliment
Although you may find some definitions of “journalese” that are positive, it’s generally viewed negatively. For example, William Zinsser said in his classic book “On Writing Well: The Classic Guide To Nonfiction” (1976):
There is a kind of writing that might be called journalese, and it’s the death of freshness in anybody’s style. It’s the common currency of newspapers and of magazines like People—a mixture of cheap words, made-up words and clichés that have become so pervasive that a writer can hardly help using them. You must fight these phrases or you’ll sound like every hack.
What is “journalese”? It’s a quilt of instant words patched together out of other parts of speech. Adjectives are used as nouns (“greats”, “notables“). Nouns are used as verbs (“to host”), or they are chopped off to form verbs (“enthuse”, “emote”), or they are padded to form verbs (“beef up”, “put teeth into”). This is a world where eminent people are “famed” and their associates are “staffers”, where the future is always “upcoming” and someone is forever “firing off” a note. Nobody in America has sent a note or a memo or a telegram in years.
Note: Zinsser was a former professor at the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism.
In “The Press Gang: The World in Journalese” (The Institute for Cultural Research, 2000), Philip Howard says that “the term is a put-down, not a compliment.” Howard then cites how Webster’s Dictionary defines the term:
“English of a style featured by use of colloquialisms, superficiality of thought or reasoning, clever or sensational presentation of material, and evidence of haste in composition, considered characteristic of newspaper writing.”
Note: Philip Howard was a distinguished British journalist and literary editor who worked for over fifty years at The Times.
From “Clichés & journalese” (The BBC News Style Guide):
Journalese comes from newspapers, which have developed a particular style to meet their own needs. Some of them have moved a very long way from standard English. Some journalists assume that newspaper English is the language of all journalism. It is not. Broadcast journalism, written for the ear, requires a different approach. Our writing has to be simpler, clearer and more natural.
Journalese is a specialist form of cliché writing. People who use it presumably want to sound urgent, to make an impact and to be, well, journalistic. Even though you are a journalist, whether in the field or in the office, try to avoid it.
From Journalese is like a poker player’s tell: it shows when a story is flimsy (New Statesman):
As George Orwell knew, the words we use shape the way we think. Perhaps all reporters should take a compilation of ’journalese’ words more seriously.
My worry with journalese is that lazy writing goes with lazy thought. If all we write about are “cabinet rifts” (two adults disagree on the solution to a complex problem – always mention that their departments are on a “collision course”) and ministerial “slapdowns” (a politician we like has been rude about a politician we dislike), we risk missing bigger stories.
Most of the strongest newspaper stories are free from journalese – they tell themselves. Journalese is like a poker player’s tell: it shows that the reporter knows the story is flimsy and he or she is trying to make it appear more solid.
From “Fluent in Journalese” (The New York Times):
This week, a guest lament from my colleague Patrick LaForge, on the stubborn persistence of journalistic clichés:
Welcome to a parallel universe. It is a world of tired news language where the verb “stir” is bound to be followed by “debate,” where those debates are always “heated” or “bitter.” In this world, anything newsworthy is automatically “controversial,” and a “hike” involves taxes, not a trail up a mountain. It is often a “hardscrabble” place, sometimes “densely wooded,”sometimes graced with “manicured” lawns and “leafy” streets. “Landmark” agreements are “hammered out” there, while adversaries are “lambasted” and “assailed.”
Meet journalese: a strained and artificial voice more common to news reports than to natural conversation. (Indeed, this “meet” device is a prime example of journalese, as is the “welcome to” construction in the previous paragraph.)
On the other hand, “Plain English” (aka “Plain Language”) is writing in such a way that readers can find what they need, understand what they find the first time they read or hear it, and use what they find to meet their needs.
From “Plain language, symbols and forms” (Washington Post):
Writing in plain language makes our content more accessible to a wide variety of people, including those with cognitive disabilities, lower reading literacy and less background knowledge of the topic or concept being covered. This also matters in the design of user interfaces.
The U.S. federal government has detailed plain language guidelines and a checklist. These are based on the Plain Writing Act of 2010.
While we are an independent media organization, a lot of the guidance is relevant to us.
In particular, we strongly recommend the following:
- be concise
- use short sentences and clear structure
- use familiar, commonly understood words
- define any uncommon words or concepts
- avoid jargon, idioms and metaphors
- avoid excessive words and punctuation
- use the simplest tense possible
- use lists and tables to simplify complex material
The Economist (UK newspaper founded in 1843) is committed to plain English:
The Economist is a “British weekly newspaper printed in magazine format and published digitally.It focuses on current affairs, international business, politics, technology, and culture. Based in London, the newspaper is owned by the Economist Group, with its core editorial offices in the United States, as well as across major cities in continental Europe, Asia, and the Middle East.” In the study titled “Creating networks, creating in-groups: Choice of vocabulary in The Economist editorials,” when the author asked The Economist writers if they had any particular policy relating to the type of language preferred in their magazine, they replied that they did not, their only aim was to be “as clear as possible” and to “avoid jargon, and they are “committed to plain English.”
In “Journalese for the Lay Reader” (Time, 1985), the author says tongue-in-cheek:
Journalese, the native tongue of newsgatherers and pundits, retains a faint similarity to English but is actually closer to Latin. Like Latin, it is primarily a written language, prized for its incantatory powers, and is best learned early, while the mind is still supple. Every cub reporter, for instance, knows that fires rage out of control, minor mischief is perpetrated by Vandals (never Visigoths, Franks or a single Vandal working alone) and key labor accords are hammered out by weary negotiators in marathon, round-the- clock bargaining sessions, thus narrowly averting threatened walkouts.
B. George Orwell’s six rules for better writing from “Politics of the English Language” (1946)
From Wikipedia:
“Politics and the English Language” is an essay by George Orwell that criticised the “ugly and inaccurate” written English of his time and examined the connection between political orthodoxies and the debasement of language.
The essay focused on political language, which, according to Orwell, “is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.” Orwell believed that the language used was necessarily vague or meaningless because it was intended to hide the truth rather than express it. This unclear prose was a “contagion” which had spread to those who did not intend to hide the truth, and it concealed a writer’s thoughts from himself and others. Orwell encourages concreteness and clarity instead of vagueness, and individuality over political conformity.
In his essay, Orwell provided six rules or guidelines for better writing:
1. Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print. [Originality]
2. Never use a long word where a short one will do. [Simplicity]
3. If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out. [Brevity]
4. Never use the passive where you can use the active. [Active voice]
5. Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent. [Clarity]
6. Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous. [Flexibility]
Orwell wrote “Politics and the English Language” some 75-plus years ago, but his six rules for better writing have withstood the test of time. You will frequently come across these six rules as you read through various resources on writing
From “Have your say: guidelines for writers and contributors” (The Guardian):
Good writing is simple writing. Even when writing for a professional audience, avoid clichés and jargon. Read, re-read and strike out repetition, avoid or explain cultural references and any acronyms you use.
And always remember George Orwell’s six golden rules for effective writing.
The Economist’s “Style Guide” states in its introduction:
The first requirement of The Economist is that it should be readily understandable. Clarity of writing usually follows clarity of thought. So think what you want to say, then say it as simply as possible. Keep in mind George Orwell’s six elementary rules (“Politics and the English Language”, 1946).
C. Definitions, characteristics, and effects of “journalese”
1. From “What Is Journalese (and What’s Wrong With It)?” by Richard Nordquist, Professor emeritus of Rhetoric and English at Georgia Southern University:
Journalese is an informal, often pejorative term for a style of writing and word choice found in many newspapers and magazines.
“In general,” said Wilson Follett in Modern American Usage, “journalese is the tone of contrived excitement.” William Zinnser calls it “the death of freshness in anybody’s style” (On Writing Well, 2006).
2. In their book “Journalese -- A Dictionary for Deciphering the News“ (2012), Paul Dickson and Robert Skole define journalese as “the particular code in which journalists report a story. It is a pattern of language — a jargon — that never appears in normal conversation.”
Citing from Dickson and Skole’s book in his article “Book strives to make journalese crystal clear” at https://archive.triblive.com/lifestyles/more-lifestyles/book-strives-to-make-journalese-crystal-clear/ defines journalese as a bland paste of buzzwords, jargon and overused words served up by newspapers, TV stations and websites every day.
3. From “Ease off the ‘journalese’” by Paula Larocque:
This is journalese: stock words and phrases that slip from the keyboard into a news story without engaging the brain of the writer. Because journalese requires so little thought, clogging a story with it can be quick and easy. But such stories don’t sound so much like stories as they do warmed-over reports. Nor do they sound like speech. They sound like what they are: a collection of clichés written to a template.
Note:
Paula LaRocque is a writing consultant for the Associated Press, the Drehscheibe Institute in Bonn, and the European Stars & Stripes in Germany.
For ten years, she taught technical communication at Western Michigan University’s School of Engineering, and journalism at Texas A&M, Southern Methodist, and Texas Christian universities. And for the following 20 years, she was assistant managing editor and writing coach at The Dallas Morning News.
She has been a columnist for the Society of Professional Journalists’ Quill magazine for more than than two decades.
4. From “Getting an inside look at reporters’s shorthand” (The Berkshire Eagle) by Andrew Amelinckx:
As a newspaper reporter, I’ve been guilty of using journalese — the definition given in the book is “the particular code in which journalists report a story a jargon that never appears in normal conversation.”
These words and phrases are so common because they are a type of shorthand, and can be a time saver when a reporter is trying to make deadline, but are also a lazy way of telling a story.
5. From “Wordplay: Columnist probes journalistic clichés” (The Sydney Morning Herald) by David Astle:
Journalese is the catchall term, a euphemism for hack-speak, the reflex clichés recycled by humble scribes, with humble scribe being high on the list. In newspaper land, pleas are usually heartfelt, mixes are heady, attacks are withering, while innocent bystanders are destined to look on in horror.
Cliche stems from the “click” that lead slugs made when placed into old printing presses. In press circles, those furtive cliches persist, as shockwaves emanate from bombshells, infernos blaze and rampages are always booze-fuelled.
6. From “Clichés & journalese” (The BBC News Style Guide):
Journalese comes from newspapers, which have developed a particular style to meet their own needs. Some of them have moved a very long way from standard English. Some journalists assume that newspaper English is the language of all journalism. It is not. Broadcast journalism, written for the ear, requires a different approach. Our writing has to be simpler, clearer and more natural.
Journalese is a specialist form of cliché writing. People who use it presumably want to sound urgent, to make an impact and to be, well, journalistic. Even though you are a journalist, whether in the field or in the office, try to avoid it.
7. From “Political clichés fill airwaves during conventions” by Christopher Jones-Cruise:
Writing in clichés is often faster than writing clearly and conversationally.
I get it. We’re dealing with time pressures. But this kind of writing puts up a barrier between us and our readers, listeners and viewers.
8. From “Avoiding fad, clichés and jargon” (Texas Center For Community Journalism) by Paula Larocque:
It gives us surprise moves and bizarre twists. It gives us drug lords and lone gunmen and grieving widows and bearded dictators and fugitive financiers.
Journalese also gives us an overworked vocabulary—verbs and nouns such as fueling or spurring or sparking or targeting or skyrocketing or spiraling or escalating . . . A storm dumps more than five inches of rain and spawns hurricane-force winds and golfball-sized hail.
9. “There is no ease in journalese” (Detroit Free Press) by Joe Grimm:
We write journalese out of habit, sometimes from misguided training, and to sound urgent, authoritative and, well, journalistic. But it doesn’t do any of that. Part of journalese is in the words; part is in the construction.
D. Elements of “journalese”:
(1) stock expressions — color, humor, clichés; (2) euphemisms; (3) novel ways journalists use words — conversions, attributives, reduplication, archaisms, neologisms, modifications; (4) immediacy of style — short, vernacular words; emotive and inflated expressions; quasi-illiterate usages; innuendo; allusive punning
1. From “What Is Journalese (and What’s Wrong With It)?” by Richard Nordquist, Professor emeritus of Rhetoric and English at Georgia Southern University:
A general, usually non-technical term for the way in which journalists write (and speak), or are thought to write (and speak).
It is used both neutrally (referring to newspaper style at large) and more often pejoratively (implying that such a style is stereotyped, vulgar, and inclined to debase the language).
2. From “Legalese” (Concise Oxford Companion to the English Language) by Tom McArthur:
The Random House Dictionary (1987) defines journalese as
(a) a manner of writing or speaking characterized by cliches occasional neologism, archness, sensationalizing adjectives, unusual or faulty syntax, etc., used by some journalists, esp. certain columnists, and regarded as typical journalistic style
(b) writing or expression in this manner: “Get that journalese out of your copy! ... That word’s not English — it’s journalese.”
The article cites the following as the elements of journalese:
- stock expressions: color; humor; clichés
- euphemisms
- use of words in novel ways: conversions; attributives; reduplications; archaisms; neologisms; modification
- immediacy of style: short, vernacular words; emotive and inflated expressions; quasi-illiterate usages; innuendo
Examples of stock expressions: bored housewife, devout Catholic, distinguished surgeon, grieving widow
Examples of color (striking words or graphic details that attract interest): “White-haired granny Mrs. X was yesterday found savagely beaten.”
Examples of clichés: the ivory tower (for the academic world: often concrete and plate glass), the rat race (competitive business), the party faithful (for loyal workers and voters for a political party), mecca (for any location attracting a particular group, other than for religious purposes, as in fabulous, surfing mecca).
Novel ways that journalists use words:
- Conversions (using nouns as verbs)
- Attributives (using nouns to qualify other nouns such as “rescue” as in rescue worker, rescue party, rescue team)
- Reduplication (coinages that often rhyme, lodge easily in the memory, and sometimes become catch-phrases such as the “jet set,” “brain drain,” and “culture vulture.”
- Archaisms (such as “agog,” “foe,” “hustings,” “scribe,” and “slay”)
- Neologisms (nonce and stunt forms such as “new-look,” “lookalike,” and “lensman”)
- Modifications (word combination that often leads to strings of adjectives and attributive nouns such as “Zsa Zsa Gabor, seventyish, eight-times-married, Hungarian-born celebrity”)
Immediacy of style:
- Short, vernacular words (such as poll for “election and blast for “explosion”)
- Emotive and inflated expressions (such as storm and row for “controversy” as in “storm over price-hikes” and “Cabinet row over inflation”)
- Quasi-illiterate usages (such as “gonna” and “wanna”)
- Innuendo (especially in the tabloids, hints that are more or less explicitly muscular or sexual innuendo are often employed)
- Allusive punning (such as “Drapes of things to come” and “A test of skull on the Thames” from The Times, 26 July 1988)
E. Elements of journalese as a pejorative term:
(1) words, phrases, expressions that have become clichés;
(2) sentence constructions that lead to complexity and confusion; and
(3) style of expression that does not reflect the way that ordinary people speak or write.
F. Elements of journalese
From The News Manual, developed by The University of Papua, New Guinea with help from the UNESCO and designed for Asian-Pacific countries: (1) jargon; (2) unnecessary words; (3) clichés
(1) Jargon
“They were invited to participate in the development of that mineral resource and they are obligated to honour their agreement to participate.”
Plain English
“They agreed to take part in mining and must stick to that agreement."
Examples of jargon and their Plain English alternatives:
| Jargon | Plain English |
|
absence of accommodate adequate anticipate approximately ascertain assistance attempt at the present time | no hold or seat enough expect about find out help try now |
(2) Unnecessary words:
People frequently put in extra words or phrases which do not add to understanding. As a journalist, you should judge which words help your reader or listener and which only make the sentence longer.
Example:
Instead of “waiting for a period of two years two years,” you should simply say “waiting for two years.”
Another common fault, particularly in the spoken word, is to add adjectives or adverbs to nouns or verbs which should not have them. In grammar, this is called redundancy.
It usually happens where the noun or verb is an absolute; that is, where something either is or is not, with no half measures. Examples: very pregnant, utterly dead.
Examples of unnecessary words and phrases:
absolute perfection
absolutely necessary
accidentally stumble
acute crisis
adequate enough
advance planning
a distance of two metres
all-time record
a number of examples
a period of two years
appear on the scene
ask the question
assemble together
at a later date
attach together
(3) Clichés: phrases which have been used so often in such a variety of situations that they have lost most of their meaning and force. They become boring to regular readers or listeners and should be avoided.
Examples of clichés in most of the developed English-speaking nations:
a bee in his bonnet
all walks of life
all-out effort
armed to the teeth
as luck would have it
at a loss for words
bated breath
beaming smile
behind closed doors
benefit of the doubt
bigger and better
bitter end
blessing in disguise
blunt instruments
brutally murdered
budding genius
G. Examples of “journalese” or words, phrases, expressions that have become clichés
Examples from “200 journalism cliches — and counting” (Washington Post)
At first glance (or worse, “at first blush”)
As a nation (or worse, “as a society”)
Upon deeper reflection (why not reflect deeply from the start?)
Observers (unless referring to people actually sitting around watching something)
[Person] is not alone (from anecdote to generalization, we get it)
And [someone/something] is no exception
Critics say (or “critics are quick to point out”)
The narrative (unless referring to a style of writing)
Probe (an uncomfortable substitute for “investigation”)
Opens/offers a rare window (unless it is a real window that is in fact unusual)
Begs the question (unless used properly – and so rarely used properly that it’s not worth the trouble)
Pundits say
Be that as it may
If you will (actually, I won’t)
A cautionary tale
Cautiously optimistic
Needless to say (then don’t say it)
Suffice it to say (if it suffices, then just say it)
Examples from “Journalese; A Dictionary for Deciphering the News” by Dickson and Skole:
Claim: We don’t believe what the person says, but here it is. A person who likes a source, never says he or she ``claims’’ something. Instead, it is ``firmly stated.’’
Compelling: Book reviewer already used riveting.
Cycles of Violence: At least two crimes in two days.
Embattled: the term applied to almost anyone or anything that is under attack, and generally when it’s the media doing the attacking.
Eerily: streets that are dark or deserted are always eerily silent.
Essentially: Choice TV news term meaning absolutely nothing, although the reporter may think it’s important.
Firestorm: At least two people protest or complain.
Fledgling: A young and inexperienced person, but often used by fledgling reporters to mean faltering.
Frantic Search: The kind of search that people conduct when children are missing. A level-headed search won’t do.
Frenzy: At least three guys arguing.
Hero: Just about anyone in uniform or someone who gets a cat down from a tree
High-speed chase: All police chases are at high-speed. It would be big news, such as O.J. Simpson, if the chase stayed within speed limits.
Highly respected: One degree above highly regarded. His mother and father both boast about him.
Jockeying: what politicians do when they’re busy elbowing out an opponent.
Machiavellian: Any actions by politicians the paper does not support. Politicians the paper does support are wise, savvy, strategic, shrewd or astute players of the political game.
Motion Picture: A very serious film the reviewer likes, and is often described as a “major motion picture.’” Otherwise, it’s a movie or film or flick.
Noted Authority: Said of anyone on a reporter’s speed-dial or Twitter feed.
Presumably: Codeword that the writer is about to take a wild-assed guess.
Punishing: Any storm, hurricane, tornado, flood, or other natural disaster. Also a military operation that the reporter doesn’t approve of.
Raw Data: Data that has not yet been cooked.
Sketchy: Reporter doesn’t know what the heck is going on.
Unconfirmed: It may not be true, but we want to print this before the opposition did.
From “Stuck in amid hell with you” (The Guardian) by Andy Bodle:
“The word ’amid’ is scarcely used at all in spoken or written English. Why, then, is it so popular with journalists?”
“But [amid] also turns up with exasperating regularity in the body of the text, often as a sort of universal connector, a one-stop shop for all your prepositional needs. When a word has come to mean everything, it arguably no longer means anything. And words, in journalism more than in any other form, should be chosen where possible for their accuracy, not their expediency.”
“I don’t want, much less expect, all use of amid to cease forthwith. But I wouldn’t mind if people started applying it a little more judiciously; if we started to see one or two fewer amids, and one or two more afters, durings, because ofs, ins, at the peak ofs, in the heart ofs, in the face ofs, despites, givens, in a climate ofs, in the context ofs, in the light ofs, as part ofs and as a result ofs in their place.”
From “Political clichés fill the airwaves during conventions”:
front-runner
it’s all over but the shouting
an idea whose time has come
the right stuff
campaign trail
Warhorse
neck and neck
homestretch
beauty contest
dark horse
political animal
stem winder
warts and all
political litmus test
open secret
bandwagon
From “Thirty words journalists should stop using … and a simple test to make people reconnect with our work” by David Higgerson:
Probe
Eatery
Slammed
Mystery surrounds
Council chiefs
Blasted
Miracle
Nightspot (nitespot)
Revellers
Down booze
Wrecking spree
Provincial
Tzar
Cold snap
Bids
Breaks down (unless in a car)
Drama
Pot of cash
Plumped
Coffers
Best ever
Completely destroyed
Fracas
Up in arms
Quizzed
From “Words Journalists Use That People Never Say” by Bob Ingrassia (adjunct instructor at the University of Minnesota School of Journalism and Mass Communication):
fled on foot = ran away
high rate of speed = speeding
physical altercation = fight
verbal altercation = argument
reduce expenditures = cut costs
terminate employment = fire
reduction in service = layoff
blunt force trauma = injury
discharged the weapon = shot
transport the victim = take him/her
lower extremities = legs
officers observed = police saw
at this point in time = now
express concerns = complain
incendiary device = bomb
obtain information = ask or interview
deceased = dead
sexual relations = sex
roadway = road
commence = begin
emergency personnel = police, firefighters
from fled on foot
utilize = use
complainant = victim
fatally injured = killed
motorist = driver
juvenile male/female = teen boy or girl
respond to the scene = arrive
precipitation = rain, snow
purchase = buy
intoxicated = drunk
controlled substances = drugs
appendages = arms, legs
contusion = bruise
head trauma = head injury
laceration = cut
provide leadership = lead
obstruct = block, get in the way
came to the conclusion that = decided, figured out
arrived at a decision = decided
reside = live
H. Some Plain English guidelines for effective writing
Index: Use short and clear sentences; Avoid nominalizations, dummy subjects or expletive constructions, unnecessary preambles, and interruptive phrases; Use the active voice, minimize the passive; Parallelism; Intra-paragraph organization; principles of readability
1. Use short and clear sentences
Rachel McAlpine in her book “Global English for Global Business” (page 38) says:
“Short sentences are a supreme advantage when communicating with people from a non-English speaking background. If you want your English to be understood worldwide—write short sentences. If you want to avoid embarrassing grammar mistakes and excruciating international misunderstandings—use short sentences. If you want your international clients to read your documents easily, confidently and accurately—use short sentences.”
Ann Wylie in her article “How to Make Your Copy More Readable: Make Sentences Shorter” explains:
The longer your sentences, the less your readers will understand, according to research by the American Press Institute. The study shows that:
- When the average sentence length in a piece was fewer than eight words long, readers understood 100 percent of the story.
- Even at 14 words, they could comprehend more than 90 percent of the information.
- But move up to 43-word sentences, and comprehension dropped below 10 percent.
Bottom line: To improve understanding, break sentences up or condense them.
The modern English sentence is short, averaging below 20 words per sentence.
(a) From “The Principles of readability” by William DuBay:
In 1880, a professor of English Literature at the University of Nebraska, Lucius Adelno Sherman, began to teach literature from a historical and statistical point of view.
He compared the older prose writers with more popular modern writers such as Macaulay (The History of England) and Ralph Waldo Emerson. He noticed a progressive shortening of sentences over time.
He decided to look at this statistically and began by counting average sentence length per 100 periods. In his book (1893), Analytics of Literature, A Manual for the Objective Study of English Prose and Poetry, he showed how sentence length averages shortened over time:
Pre-Elizabethan times: 50 words per sentence
Elizabethan times: 45 words per sentence
Victorian times: 29 words per sentence
Sherman’s time: 23 words per sentence.
In our time, the average is down to 20 words per sentence.
(b) Ellegard Norm: The modern English sentence has an average of 17.6 words per sentence. (From 1978 study by Swedish researcher Alvar Ellegard of 1 million words corpus of 20th century American English writing called the Brown Corpus collected by Brown University in 1964)
(c) “What is Happening to Written English?”
Essentially, the sentence has become shorter – quite dramatically. In a study by Brock Haussamen (1994) using text from a variety of sources, the average sentence length was shown to have reduced from 40-70 in the period 1600-1700 to the low 20s in the 1990s.
Year 1600 - 1700: Sentence length 40 - 70 words
Year 1800 - 1900: Sentence length 30 - 40 words
Year 1990s: Sentence length 20s
(d) Comparison of average sentence length of several writers
Jane Austen: 42
John Steinbeck: 18.4
D. H. Lawrence: 13.5
(e) “Editing Tip: Sentence Length”
" ... the average sentence length for Harry Potter author JK Rowling, who can be considered representative of a modern English writer with a general audience, is 12 words ..."
(f) “The long sentence: A disservice to science in the Internet age”
If we want the fullness of science in necessarily long papers to be appreciated, it must increasingly be written in short sentences.
(g) From “Elements of Style” by Strunk and White: “Vigorous writing is concise. A sentence should contain no unnecessary words, a paragraph no unnecessary sentences, for the same reason that a drawing should have no unnecessary lines and a machine no unnecessary parts. This requires not that the writer make all his sentences short, or that he avoid all detail and treat his subjects only in outline, but that every word tell.”(h) “Techniques in creating clear, concise, and direct sentences” (The Writing Center, University Wisconsin – Madison):
- Unless you have a reason not to, use the active voice. Put the action of the sentence in the verb.
- Reduce wordy verbs.
- Use expletive constructions (“It is,” “There is,” “There are”) sparingly.
- Try to avoid using vague, all-purpose nouns, which often lead to wordiness.
- Unless your readers are familiar with your terminology, avoid writing strings of nouns.
- Eliminate unnecessary prepositional phrases.
- Avoid unnecessarily inflated words
- Put wordy phrases on a diet.
(i) “Writing Concise Sentences” (from The Guide to Grammar and Writing, sponsored by the Capital Community College Foundation in Hartford, Connecticut)
- Pruning the Redundant
- Abbreviated Redundancies
- Reducing Clauses to Phrases, Phrases to Single Words
- Intensifiers that Don't Intensify
- Avoiding Expletive Constructions
- Phrases You Can Omit
- Eliminating Clichés and Euphemisms
- Writing Concise Sentences (exercises)
- Eliminating Wordiness (exercises)
- Rewriting Bloated Sentences (exercises)
(j) “Identifying and addressing wordiness in sentences” (from The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)
- Eliminate redundant pairs
- Delete unnecessary qualifiers
- Identify and reduce prepositional phrases
- Locate and delete unnecessary modifiers
- Replace a phrase with a word
- Identify negatives and change them to affirmatives
2. Use the active voice, minimize the passive.
(a) Passive voice is one of the biggest problems with government documents. From US National Archives and Records Administration Style Guide:
Active voice is the best way to identify who is responsible for what action.
In an active sentence, the person or organization that’s acting is the subject of the sentence. In a passive sentence, the person or item that is acted upon is the subject of the sentence. Passive voice obscures who is responsible for what and is one of the biggest problems with government documents.
(b) A sentence is in the active voice if the subject performs the action expressed in the verb. For example:
The dog bit the boy. (Active voice)
The boy was bitten by the dog. (Passive voice)
3. Avoid nominalizations (hidden verbs)
(a) A hidden verb is a verb converted into a noun. It often needs an extra verb to make sense. So we write, “Please make an application for a personal loan” rather than “Please apply for a personal loan.” (US SEC “A Plain English Handbook” 1998)
(b) Two signals of nominalization
| A. Distinct endings | B. Weak helping verbs |
| - ance - ence - ant - ity - ant - ment - ness - sion - tion | be conduct do effect get give have hold make perform provide put |
(c) What Is Nominalization in English Grammar?
In English grammar, nominalization is a type of word formation in which a verb or an adjective (or another part of speech) is used as (or transformed into) a noun. The verb form is nominalize. It is also called nouning.
In transformational grammar, nominalization refers to the derivation of a noun phrase from an underlying clause. In this sense, an “example of nominalization is the destruction of the city, where the noun destruction corresponds to the main verb of a clause and the city to its object.” (Geoffrey Leech, A Glossary of English Grammar, 2006).
(d) The Dark Side of Verbs-as-Nouns (New York Times)
It’s not just that nominalization can sap the vitality of one’s speech or prose; it can also eliminate context and mask any sense of agency. Furthermore, it can make something that is nebulous or fuzzy seem stable, mechanical and precisely defined. . . .
Nominalizations give priority to actions rather than to the people responsible for them. Sometimes this is apt, perhaps because we don’t know who is responsible or because responsibility isn’t relevant. But often they conceal power relationships and reduce our sense of what’s truly involved in a transaction. As such, they are an instrument of manipulation, in politics and in business. They emphasize products and results, rather than the processes by which products and results are achieved.
4. Avoid dummy subjects (expletive constructions) and unnecessary preambles
(a) “It” as a Dummy Subject in Grammar
The word “it” can be a subject (or dummy subject) in sentences about times, dates, and the weather (such as, It's raining) and in certain idioms (It's OK). Also known as ambient “it” or empty “it.”
Unlike the ordinary pronoun it, dummy it refers to nothing at all; it simply serves a grammatical function. In other words, dummy it has a grammatical meaning but no lexical meaning.
Related discussion: “Dummy Words” Have No Meaning
(b) Avoid dummy subjects or expletive constructions such as
- It is ...
- It appears ...
- There is ...
- There are ...
- It will be ...
| Dummy or false subjects | Plain Language revision |
| It is argued in the report that it is essential to simplify the tax code. | The report argues that simplifying the tax code is essential. |
| There was no consideration given to the suggestion by the committee. | The committee failed to consider the suggestion. |
| It is her opinion that there are several issues that need to be resolved. | She believes that several issues need to be resolved. |
(c) Avoid unnecessary preambles or pompous phrases such as
- It is important to add that...
- It may be recalled that...
- In this regard it is of significance that...
- It is interesting to note that...
- I would like to point out ...
- I would argue that ...
- It should be noted that ...
- It has been determined that ...
- It is obvious that ...
From “Parallelism” (University of Lynchburg):
Parallelism refers to using similar words, clauses, phrases, sentence structure, or other grammatical elements to emphasize similar ideas in a sentence. It makes the sentence concise, clear, and easy to read. Parallel structure is important especially in items in a series, paired items, and items in an outline or list.
Parallelism in Sentence Structure
A shorter definition: “Parallelism is a literary device that repeats grammatical elements to emphasize and create memorable phrases.”
From “Parallelism Examples — Writing, Speeches, Shakespeare & More” (Studio Binder):
Parallelism isn’t just a grammar style reserved for literature – it’s a tool we use in everyday conversation as well.
Here are some popular parallel phrases:
- “Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.”
- “What you see is what you get.”
- “If the shoe fits, wear it.”
- “You can’t have your cake and eat it too.”
- “You can’t judge a book by its cover.”
Parallel phrases often use “it” or “their” to match the syntax to the secondary noun.
6. Intra-paragraph organization; principles of readability
I. Interactive exercises on using Plain English instead of journalese
In my website “Plain English — Plain Language — Clear Writing for journalism, law, business, science, academic, technical and general writing; with resources and interactive exercises in Plain English, grammar, vocabulary, reading comprehension, etc.” you can find numerous interactive exercises on using Plain English instead of journalese (jargon, clichés, wordiness, pompous words and phrases).
Examples:
Plain English Words and Phrases 1 (with time limit)
Plain English Words and Phrases 16 (with time limit)
Plain Language / Plain English exercises on avoiding wordiness, formalism,redundancy, and nominalization (45 seconds time limit) Part 1
Avoid pretentiousness, wordiness, and jargon (1)
Avoid wordiness (basis, manner, fashion, and way)
Use short, simple words or phrases (1)
Wordy words and phrases vs. simpler words and phrases (1) with time limit
No comments:
Post a Comment