Discussion on:

Five simple tips that will improve your writing a thousand percent

I am pleased that you offer this advice in a newsletter intended for IT professionals. I have seen some abysmal writing in the business world, and in IT in particular. I was particularly pleased by your tip about verbosity.

I also want to mention one of my pet peeves: the misuse of the word "majority." I notice this often in TV weather and traffic reports. Expressions such as "the majority of the rain" and "the majority of the traffic" are irritating. These journalists are supposed to be communications professionals. Surely they don't think that they are impressing us by using a 4-syllable word when the word "most" is more appropriate. Also, why do they say that the weather is "transitioning" instead of "changing?"

Language is being buffeted on all sides by a changing culture. On one hand, we have the stifling verbosity of the business world; on the other, we have the shorthand of texting. It is important that we consider our readers whenever we write; what might be appropriate for a close friend might not be appropriate for a manager, co-worker, or customer. We should know the difference.

You can improve someone's writing 1000%? Really?

for whom this is not hyperbole.

Some of them post on TR.

Your assignment: Rewrite this sentence in a form that's 1000% better, then in a form that's 557% better.

Rewrite this sentence to be perfect, then rewrite it to only be much better.

Not to be contentious here, but is there such a thing as "bogus hyperbole"? I would have said that bogusness (bogus-osity) is an intrinsic part of hyperbole -- that's its charm. What might "valid" or "authentic" hyperbole consist of? (Of what might it consist, I mean... )

--j

The bogusosity of my title was only 600%.

is 100% the correct word.

Hilarity

That was the whole point

They don't listen to their readers complaints.

Have you ever noticed that you can correct your own grammar, but it becomes personal for everyone else?

Excellent advice! In an earlier incarnation I was a newspaper reporter and editor. Then I went into a scientific field in academia, where length is often mistaken for strength. My last incarnation was teaching English as a second language in China for 11 years. Many of my native-English-speaker colleagues had not a clue about how to write a decent paragraph or even a correct sentence, much less the reasons for doing so.

So again, thanks for much-needed advice.

P.S. A "thousand percent" is a figment of our imagination. Try "ten fold" instead.

WHY, WHY, WHY to technical writers refer to companies in the plural tense? A company is SINGULAR! "Microsoft has done this or that"; not "Microsoft have done this or that". I so often see the statement such as "Whilst Microsoft were demonstrating their..."; should be "Whilst Microsoft was demonstrating their...". "Sony certainly look to be taking on...", should be "Sony certainly looks to be taking on". "Microsoft" is singular, "Sony" is singular. A company is singular. The people who make up a company are plural, but the company is singular! Technical writers, your technical expertise may be top shelf, but your English grammar is slipping badly.

That's my story, and I'm stickin' to it!

Then duck. As I understand it, the British English convention is that a company is made up of people and is not a person itself. Therefore, "[The people at] Microsoft have introduced their new operating system..."

And if companies are singular, shouldn't that be "Whilst Microsoft was demonstrating its..." whatever?

Words, such as Ford, herd, team, that cover a group of things are collective nouns. They can be considered singular or plural depending on context. Group acts as a unit - singular. Group acts as various units - plural. However, sometimes the answer isn't obvious or following the rule just doesn't sound right. In those cases use editorial discretion, rework the sentence until it does work.

Grouping all collective nouns into a single set is itself uneducated. And if following the rule doesn't sound right, you can reword it so that it does sound right, but still follows the rules. You don't get to break the rules just because you think it sounds better - that's why they're called "rules" and not "suggestions."

General nouns like herd and team are singular. To refer to a set of individuals, you should preface them with a plural, as in "the animals in the herd" or "the players on the team." Proper names of families are singular, so to refer to them requires their being pluralized - "all of the Steeles were generals - West Point grads." Names of bands and music groups can be either singular or plural, depending on usage - "the Brooklyn Tabernacle Choir is one of the best groups I've heard" or "the Brooklyn Tabernacle Choir are some of the best singers I've heard." Names of sports teams are always plural, regardless of the apparent form of the words - "Detroit Tigers" or "Utah Jazz." Company names are singular, regardless of their apparent form - "General Motors" or "Ford" - so to refer to a plural set of people, they too need to be prefaced with a plural - "the creative minds at Lamborghini have just released their latest acheivement." And as Nick pointed out above, in the singular, the entire sentence has to match the singular, not just the verb - "Lamborghini has just released its latest acheivement." (And Nick, I know several well-educated Brits, and I've never heard any of them use a company name as a plural, but I'm not a Brit myself, so I can't speak firsthand on what the formal or informal British grammar dictates.) The exception with company names is names composed of a series of names - "Dewey, Cheetum, and Howe are moving to their new building today" and "Dewey, Cheetum, and Howe is moving to its new building today" are both proper forms of the same sentence. The same exception applies to names ending in "Associates," as in "Johnson and Associates."

Before one decides how to write it, it is a good idea to think about how it would sound if read aloud. The plural treatment (D, C, and H are moving) sounds fine, but the singluar treatment (D, C, and H is moving) sounds awkward. If it will be read aloud, and it is necessary to treat the company name as a singular entity, I preface it with "The firm of" or "The company" or something similar. Example: The firm of Dewey, Cheetum, and How is moving to its new building today.

then use a reference noun afterward:

Accounting firm Dewey, Cheetum, and Howe announced today that the partnership will be moving its offices from the current location to a newly constructed building on Goa Way.

"Whilst Microsoft was demonstrating their...".

Thanks excellent

I've been looking for a band name for a while. I'm gonna suggest "Interminable Preamble". Thanks Jody!

Stop using the word 'however'. It's the new hallmark of abominable prose. For some telling examples, look at almost every Wikipedia article.

Can you please provide better alternatives?

By the way, is it because of too frequent use of the word?

(Please note, I'm not a native speaker, but sometimes play a role of tech. writer)

Thanks.

P.S. A joke from Russia - "Chukchi is not a reader, chukchi is a writer"... means chukchi does not read what he/she writes, believe you or not, but it's funny when said in the right moment

The word "however" is not in itself a bad word to use, so yes, it would be the overuse of the word that makes it bad. Much the same atrocity is starting every sentence with the same word.

There are many times "however" is used when it just isn't necessary. Other times the wording could be changed to get the same effect without using it. It is also often used when it is simply the wrong word for the thought the author is trying to convey. It's a little difficult to give examples, since each situation is unique, but you can take a couple ideas from this very paragraph. The first two sentences could have (and would have, by poor writers) been separated by the word "however" instead of a period, but it would have actually muddled the meaning. Again, the fourth sentence could have used "however" instead of "but" with the same effect. While it's a good practice to avoid "however" in order to avoid its overuse, it is also a good practice to avoid the overuse of any other word - such as "but" - in the process.

The phrase "on the other hand" can be used to separate very dissimilar ideas. When those ideas take several sentences to convey, you can precede the first idea with "On one hand", and start a new paragraph for the second idea with "On the other hand", following each of the two phrases with a comma. Using both phrases helps give distinct boundaries to each of the author's thoughts.

"However" is good for separating similar but different ideas when there are lengthy sentences involved. Instead of using a comma and "but", which is preferable for shorter sentences, you can use a semicolon for medium length sentences, followed by "however" and a comma. For very long sentences, use a period followed by "However" and a comma. Also note that very lengthy sentences should also be avoided unless absolutely necessary, as they can make the reader weary and likely to turn the page. There are often more effective ways to word compound sentences - even shorter ones separated with "but" - into multiple shorter ones.

Another alternative to "however" is the phrase "at any rate". Use it to bring the focus back to center when you have deviated slightly from the core concept of the writing.

One of the best ways to learn good writing techniques is to read good writing. This rules out the vast majority of anything written for the internet. Wikipedia, while a wealth of data, is quite often very poorly written. Blog posts can be even worse. Yes, there are good authors who write for the web, but they are relatively rare.

Even news sites are victims of atrocious writing. I started to read a news article about Michael Jackson shortly after his death, and it was so terribly written that I simply could not finish reading it. I had had to go back and re-read passages several times just to figure out what the author was trying to say, and even then I wasn't very confident that I had gotten the idea. It was a lengthy article, and I had barely made it halfway through when I had to stop.

Books are by far the best source of good writing, since publishers tend to be a lot more particular about the writing they accept. Even though the author is ultimately responsible for the content of the book, it still reflects directly on the publisher. My sister-in-law, who just received her Masters degree with honors, enjoys Dean Koontz. Her daughter, who was the valedictorian of her graduating class two years ago, also likes Koontz, as well as John Grisham. Personally, I read a lot of Frank Peretti. Look up BBC's top 100 list of must-read books for some great ideas.

My habit has been to use 'but' to introduce a phrase that qualifies or limits the original phrase: "Practice makes perfect, but only if your practice is perfect."

I use 'however' when I wish to introduce a negative connotation related to the original subject. "The murals in Pompei are beautiful; however, the walls behind them are falling down."

That's just me. You may choose differently.

Choose differently.

Gets me earned the label, "cryptic", from those out in the open, scrambling to be "correct" and confined in their own way.

"One of the best ways to learn good writing techniques is to read good writing." Yes! If you want an example of good technical writing look at one of Topher Kessler's articles (blogs.) He may throw in a few superfluous "that"'s but they in no way impede the reading, only serve to clarify. All in all, his writing is lucid.
Another good technical writer is Fred Langa, who writes for "Windows Secrets" these days.
Disclaimer: I don't know either man, I only admire their writing.

You may have to search for the answers to your questions, but I'm willing to bet that any question you have has been answered by one of them. I like John McIntyre's blog, You Don't Say.

There are many others. If you page down, John provides links to several other interesting grammar and editing blogs in the right column.

When it comes to writing, English is like most other languages. The more you write, the easier it gets. (I was going to say the more you write, the better it gets, but I've been writing for over 50 years and my "Great American novel" still suckx! )

Elements could have been quicker the the point and less wordy.

I have said for years that the internet - and more recently texting - is making idiots of our youth. I would say without hesitation that today's teens spend a lot more time texting, tweeting, and chatting than they do any other kind of writing. And I have seen more than one "about me" page on which the owner said, "I don't read" under the "favourite book" category. Little to no reading or real writing pretty much limits people's input and output to things that really require very little brain activity.

And since the internet has been creating idiots for so many years, those same people are now working in and maybe even running business offices that demand better writing skills than they possess.

A few additions:

confused words: to/too/two; a/an; cord/chord/cored
That last one was misused where I used to work. It was painted on a wall next to the charger for an electric forklift - "Hang up cored." I cringed every time I looked at it.

apostrophe usage: It should be mentioned that "the 90's" should be written "the '90s".
The apostrophe takes the place of the "19". While putting it in the wrong place is the greater atrocity, it's still not proper if it's omitted entirely.

correct pronoun usage: he/him; she/her; me/I; etc.
For example, "Me and her went to the movie." should be "She and I went to the movie."

correct phrase pairing: either/or; neither/nor; not only/but also

ending a sentence with a preposition: While not a flaming mistake, you should never end a sentence with a preposition. For instance, my above sentence, "...better writing skills than they possess." started out as "...better writing skills than they are capable of." I felt it was worth correcting, so I felt it was worth mentioning.

From what I've seen and read, ending a sentence with a preposition can be correct. The rule is discredited by many. For example:
http://ethnicity.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Writing/p.html
(scroll down to preposition) and
http://grammar.about.com/od/grammarfaq/f/terminalprepositionmyth.htm

I do agree that many sentences that end with a preposition can be written better.

There are now different rules for what is acceptable grammar in written and in spoken English. Such as "If I were" vs "If I was". I guess I could be considered one of the "crusty old timers" Lynch mentioned in his book, but I was taught that grammar is grammar, and if a person's grammar makes him look unprofessional or unlearned in his writing, then it also has the same effect in his speech. It has also been my personal experience that people who abuse the little trivial rules generally abuse the more important rules as well.

While I concede that some sentences sound perfectly normal when using a preposition at the end, the excessive practice of doing so can easily make an author sound uneducated. Since this article is about improving your writing, and targeted at professionals, it is an advantage to consider the rule sound, regardless of its origins or its disputed validity. By forcing yourself to reword a sentence you have ended with a preposition, you will expand your vocabulary and improve your writing. I'm not saying your writing should be peppered with "with whom" and "for which", because too much of that also looks unprofessional; however, a letter, article, or paper can be very well written without sounding like the stereotypical stuffy old professor, and without using a single preposition to end a sentence.

As for Winston Churchill's retort, "This is the sort of thing up with which I will not put", he worded it that way on purpose - to make a point - and because it was he who had been reprimanded for using a preposition to end a sentence. The phrase "put up with" is itself informal, so it is best to keep it out of your professional vocabulary. A better way to word that sentence, which a well-learned man like Churchill would know, would have been, "This is the sort of thing which I will not tolerate" or even without the 'which' - "This is the sort of thing I will not tolerate."

The title is a quote from Winston Churchill. The preposition rule was take over from Latin where it matters. Many English phrases make no sense unless they end in a preposition.

Some of my peeves...

- hear/here. I hear you here. Please don't write "Here, here" like you are trying to attract a waitress; the phrase "Hear, hear" is correct, as in we hear you and agree.

- poured/pored. You pour water, you pore over documents. (The NYT actually "poured over" data in one of their articles. )

- service (noun/verb confusion). A service is what you provide to your customers. Please don't try to service me; that's what a bull does to a cow.

- "For all intents and purposes", not "for all intensive purposes". But, for all intents and purposes, I am intensive about my purposes.

- moot point. A moot point is usually a subject that is irrelevant in the current situation. Mute point is just wrong.

There are others, but I'll stop now.

If you remember the town crier "Hear Ye, Hear Ye", then you won't get this one confused. "Hear, Hear" was adopted by Parliament as a polite way of agreeing with what the speaker was saying. It is like saying "You need to hear this, you need to hear this, its important.", only in short form.

For a moot point, I recall Moot court, where we students would try cases. It was Moot because no matter what we did, it didn't matter, as we weren't in a real court, and no one was going to jail (or go free). I still remember the Saturday Night Live skit with Jesse Jackson - "The point is moot". I'm sure people can find it on the net somewhere

For me, its the teen usage of "whatever" that drives me bananas. I often get a bit of temper going when my kids do this to me. Its dismissive and condescending, and doesn't help articulate a problem that we can solve, but an attitude that what I think doesn't matter.

It's not ninety(90)s - if you're not going to spell out nineties. Also the apostrophe in BSOD's might be to make sure that the plural is not mistaken as part of the acronym. Wikipedia has more here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acronym_and_initialism). I don't think there should be a hard rule on this.

An additional error that is very common is the use of "than" with "different". If one item or object is different relative to another, it is "different from" not "different than". Not a big deal, as many will say, but proper grammar and proper use of the language in use (English in this case) will make one's writings more "professional" and, more importantly, more credible.

Not sure this can be the number 8, but just would like to understand whether presence/absense of "I" [ai] confuse native speakers. I'm not a native speaker, that's why I'm asking the question.

Posts like this one can start from "I'm not sure...", but it's still understandable without "I", so what would be your recommendation regarding this? Cannot it confuse someone sometime?

Thanking you in advance.

Jody, It is a good article, and I would like your permission to post it for my students.

Perhaps you would like to amend it with some of the comments first?

One of my favourite misuses of words is the term 'rouge' used when the student means a rogue access point.

I am currently reading "Strictly English: The correct way to write" by Simon Heffer, which includes the points you have made, but not so succinctly.

Regards,

Hi Madsmaddad,

I'm happy for you to share this info with your students -- maybe it would be most convenient if they downloaded the PDF (http://downloads.techrepublic.com.com/abstract.aspx?docid=2386953), but it might be more instructive if you sent them to this post so they can read people's comments (and possibly jump in with their own ideas and opinions).

This piece wasn't intended to be an exhaustive list, and I left out many of my pet peeves (rogue/rouge is classic, btw -- I haven't come across that one!). But sometimes people are more receptive to adopting one or two good habits from a short list like this. That was my goal, anyway!

-- j

The "rouge" access point pops up a lot in the discussion and question forums.

I always want to ask why it's red...

Deprived, indeed! We should build a list of those types of mistypes. The one I see most is "IT manger."