Good writing is clear, concise, accurate and active.[/b]
What does active mean in this context?
Not using the passive voice, I think. Saying "I made a mistake" instead of the politician-preferred "Mistakes were made."
Exactly. But given the question, I guess that means that my previous phrasing was not clear.
Her friend requires her psychology students to never end a sentence with a preposition. They aint into that. This one has always struck me as an unnecessary artifact of over-zealous grammar enthusiasts. In most cases, ending sentences with prepositions isn't even ungrammatical, because most of the time the prepositions are still linked to an object earlier in the sentence. It only becomes ungrammatical when the preposition is linked to a non-object like an adverb, as in "Where is the remote at?"
hahaha nah man White's catalogue is pretty strong: Stuart Little, Charlotte's Web.
Is Sex Necessary written with James Thurber.
Stuart Little is a very strange and disturbing book. The book starts with a woman giving birth to a mouse. It is very unusual for an American family to have a mouse.
My sister is a counselor in a university setting and works with psychology majors. She could not get a student to understand why they had to use 'mother' not 'mommy' when writing (or talking) about a clients mother. The student said "I would never call my mommy "mother". A simple case of a student needing to make their writing more academic. Her friend requires her psychology students to never end a sentence with a preposition. They aint into that.
Let me be clear, I teach my students to write formally. Your sister and her friend seem to be requiring the same.
A few tips I give my students:
???Do not get lazy: no ???and/or??? or any other kinds of slashes in an essay. Pick one of the two words and stick to it. Keep your language formal: instead of ???like,??? use ???such as,??? and words such as ???bad,??? ???good,??? or ???sad??? are too simplistic and usually need to be expanded upon.
???Do not use expressions such as ???more and more,??? ???better and better,??? etc. They sound too juvenile, and besides, this is word repetition. Avoid the term ???even??? as a form of emphasis (ex. ???They were even more frustrated,??? or ???Indians were even desperate,???) for the same reason; it tends to sound unsophisticated when employed in an essay.
???Do not employ ???Another thing that African Americans did was?????? This is a very awkward sentence construction. Also avoid: ???As I explained on page 3?????? or ???As previously mentioned??????
???Avoid empty terms such as ???additionally,??? ???furthermore,??? ???in conclusion,??? ???moreover.??? There are better and more eloquent ways to make your argument without having to utilize these words.
Those are some very excellent words of advice. I recently learned that you should never qualify an absolute.
Good writing is clear, concise, accurate and active.[/b]
What does active mean in this context?
Not using the passive voice, I think. Saying "I made a mistake" instead of the politician-preferred "Mistakes were made."
Exactly. But given the question, I guess that means that my previous phrasing was not clear.
Her friend requires her psychology students to never end a sentence with a preposition. They aint into that.
This one has always struck me as an unnecessary artifact of over-zealous grammar enthusiasts. In most cases, ending sentences with prepositions isn't even ungrammatical, because most of the time the prepositions are still linked to an object earlier in the sentence. It only becomes ungrammatical when the preposition is linked to a non-object like an adverb, as in "Where is the remote at?" From now on, ending a sentence with a preposition is something up with which I will not put. Sir Winston Churchill
One of the most notoriously bad grammar books ever written. Perpetuates so many myths about grammar and the English language, it is unbelievably inept in describing real syntactic phenomena, as it lacks the terminology to do so. If you really want to know what's up with the English language, cop this:
This one has always struck me as an unnecessary artifact of over-zealous grammar enthusiasts. In most cases, ending sentences with prepositions isn't even ungrammatical, because most of the time the prepositions are still linked to an object earlier in the sentence. It only becomes ungrammatical when the preposition is linked to a non-object like an adverb, as in "Where is the remote at?"
From now on, ending a sentence with a preposition is something up with which I will not put. Sir Winston Churchill You are absolutley correct. This myth began in the 17th century as essayist John Dryden declared it as a mistake as part of a larger effort to make English resemble Latin more closely, despite the fact that preposition stranding was widely accepted as a grammatical alternative to preposition fronting, and had been for over two centuries. It was then adopted as fact by popular grammar textbooks in the late 19th century, and has continued to be taught for many years. There are a number of contexts in which preposition stranding is forced, a number in which it is prohibited (especially in cases where stranding the preposition from its relative pronoun creates a large noun phrase gap). However, preposition stranding is far more common throughout all spoken English today.
Always take prescriptive grammar rules with a grain of salt. If you hear it in your everyday life on a regular basis, spoken by speakers of standard English, then it is most likely grammatical. Whether you choose to use such a construction is simply a stylistic choice.
Good writing is clear, concise, accurate and active.[/b]
What does active mean in this context?
Not using the passive voice, I think. Saying "I made a mistake" instead of the politician-preferred "Mistakes were made."
Exactly. But given the question, I guess that means that my previous phrasing was not clear.
Her friend requires her psychology students to never end a sentence with a preposition. They aint into that.
This one has always struck me as an unnecessary artifact of over-zealous grammar enthusiasts. In most cases, ending sentences with prepositions isn't even ungrammatical, because most of the time the prepositions are still linked to an object earlier in the sentence. It only becomes ungrammatical when the preposition is linked to a non-object like an adverb, as in "Where is the remote at?"
From now on, ending a sentence with a preposition is something up with which I will not put. Sir Winston Churchill Hard to imagine a better illustration of my point
For those attending this year's grammar rodeo, Winston's intentionally convoluted quip achieves its level of awkwardness through the splitting of the 'phrasal verb' "put up with", which is meant to constitute an isolated syntactic unit.
Good writing is clear, concise, accurate and active.[/b]
What does active mean in this context?
Not using the passive voice, I think. Saying "I made a mistake" instead of the politician-preferred "Mistakes were made."
Exactly. But given the question, I guess that means that my previous phrasing was not clear.
I think "Good writing is clear and concise", Would have been clearer and more concise. Grammatically correct, accurate, in the active voice, well ordered.... you can deal with later.
My sister is a counselor in a university setting and works with psychology majors. She could not get a student to understand why they had to use 'mother' not 'mommy' when writing (or talking) about a clients mother. The student said "I would never call my mommy "mother". A simple case of a student needing to make their writing more academic. Her friend requires her psychology students to never end a sentence with a preposition. They aint into that. Editorial judgment call!
Also on the agenda: informal use of double negatives, a.k.a. is there really sunshine when she's gone? I remember a lingusitc class where the professor was explaining in some languages a double negative is a positive, and in some a negative. "But" he expounded "in no language is a double positive a negative". "Yeah, right" I said.
Also on the agenda: informal use of double negatives, a.k.a. is there really sunshine when she's gone?
I remember a lingusitc class where the professor was explaining in some languages a double negative is a positive, and in some a negative. "But" he expounded "in no language is a double positive a negative". "Yeah, right" I said. Awesome. Speaking in absolutes has a tendancy to come and haunt the speaker. [irony]There's always an exception somewhere.[/irony]
One of the most notoriously bad grammar books ever written. Perpetuates so many myths about grammar and the English language, it is unbelievably inept in describing real syntactic phenomena, as it lacks the terminology to do so. If you really want to know what's up with the English language, cop this:
Real linguists know the deal.
^^^^^^^^^^^UNBELIEVABLY INEPT IN DESCRIBING REAL SYNTACTIC PHENOMENA
for real, if you want to write like a linguist, cop spelunk's selection.
for normal people I still stuggest Strunk and White.
"Rules" for grammar and good writing are stupid and don't take into account the dynamic nature of language. I hate all these style guides and books. Just read a lot and write a lot if you want to be a good writer.
"Rules" for grammar and good writing are stupid and don't take into account the dynamic nature of language. I hate all these style guides and books. Just read a lot and write a lot if you want to be a good writer.
-e
Agreed. Everyone has his or her own style, which will be different for every succeeding generation of writers.
Punctuation rules are the only non-negotiable ones, IMO. Any others are stifling.
That's good advice. But it depends on whether you're talking about professional writing or creative writing. In the 9-5 world, your editor doesn't want to hear that you're not familiar with standard rules of grammer.
Comments
game over really.
well worth the $5.
Her friend requires her psychology students to never end a sentence with a preposition. They aint into that.
This one has always struck me as an unnecessary artifact of over-zealous grammar enthusiasts. In most cases, ending sentences with prepositions isn't even ungrammatical, because most of the time the prepositions are still linked to an object earlier in the sentence. It only becomes ungrammatical when the preposition is linked to a non-object like an adverb, as in "Where is the remote at?"
Faux is a bad influence on me...
At first glance I thought the above book was written by ...
"He. B. White"
Is Sex Necessary written with James Thurber.
Stuart Little is a very strange and disturbing book. The book starts with a woman giving birth to a mouse. It is very unusual for an American family to have a mouse.
Those are some very excellent words of advice. I recently learned that you should never qualify an absolute.
This one has always struck me as an unnecessary artifact of over-zealous grammar enthusiasts. In most cases, ending sentences with prepositions isn't even ungrammatical, because most of the time the prepositions are still linked to an object earlier in the sentence. It only becomes ungrammatical when the preposition is linked to a non-object like an adverb, as in "Where is the remote at?"
From now on, ending a sentence with a preposition is something up with which I will not put.
Sir Winston Churchill
One of the most notoriously bad grammar books ever written. Perpetuates so many myths about grammar and the English language, it is unbelievably inept in describing real syntactic phenomena, as it lacks the terminology to do so. If you really want to know what's up with the English language, cop this:
Real linguists know the deal.
From now on, ending a sentence with a preposition is something up with which I will not put.
Sir Winston Churchill
You are absolutley correct. This myth began in the 17th century as essayist John Dryden declared it as a mistake as part of a larger effort to make English resemble Latin more closely, despite the fact that preposition stranding was widely accepted as a grammatical alternative to preposition fronting, and had been for over two centuries. It was then adopted as fact by popular grammar textbooks in the late 19th century, and has continued to be taught for many years. There are a number of contexts in which preposition stranding is forced, a number in which it is prohibited (especially in cases where stranding the preposition from its relative pronoun creates a large noun phrase gap). However, preposition stranding is far more common throughout all spoken English today.
Always take prescriptive grammar rules with a grain of salt. If you hear it in your everyday life on a regular basis, spoken by speakers of standard English, then it is most likely grammatical. Whether you choose to use such a construction is simply a stylistic choice.
From now on, ending a sentence with a preposition is something up with which I will not put.
Sir Winston Churchill
Hard to imagine a better illustration of my point
For those attending this year's grammar rodeo, Winston's intentionally convoluted quip achieves its level of awkwardness through the splitting of the 'phrasal verb' "put up with", which is meant to constitute an isolated syntactic unit.
I think "Good writing is clear and concise", Would have been clearer and more concise. Grammatically correct, accurate, in the active voice, well ordered.... you can deal with later.
My sister is a counselor in a university setting and works with psychology majors. She could not get a student to understand why they had to use 'mother' not 'mommy' when writing (or talking) about a clients mother. The student said "I would never call my mommy "mother". A simple case of a student needing to make their writing more academic. Her friend requires her psychology students to never end a sentence with a preposition. They aint into that.
Also on the agenda: informal use of double negatives, a.k.a. is there really sunshine when she's gone?
Also on the agenda: informal use of double negatives, a.k.a. is there really sunshine when she's gone?
I remember a lingusitc class where the professor was explaining in some languages a double negative is a positive, and in some a negative.
"But" he expounded "in no language is a double positive a negative".
"Yeah, right" I said.
I remember a lingusitc class where the professor was explaining in some languages a double negative is a positive, and in some a negative.
"But" he expounded "in no language is a double positive a negative".
"Yeah, right" I said.
Awesome. Speaking in absolutes has a tendancy to come and haunt the speaker. [irony]There's always an exception somewhere.[/irony]
^^^^^^^^^^^UNBELIEVABLY INEPT IN DESCRIBING REAL SYNTACTIC PHENOMENA
for real, if you want to write like a linguist, cop spelunk's selection.
for normal people I still stuggest Strunk and White.
and PS I believe it's "inept at describing...."
-e
Agreed. Everyone has his or her own style, which will be different for every succeeding generation of writers.
Punctuation rules are the only non-negotiable ones, IMO. Any others are stifling.