Excess Language
Remember, these lessons and activities assume you’ve read the supplemental Revising Prose reading (pdf).
As you already know, plain language is language that isn’t overly affected or ornate but simple. Below are some guidelines for reviving slow, dull, confusing, inactive sentences:
- Use Active Voice
- Limit Prepositional Phrases
- Get to the Point
- Limit to be Verb Forms
- Avoid Nominalizations
Although I would love to spend the entire semester just looking at sentences, time will not permit it. However, I do encourage those of you who wish to improve your communication further to check out Richard Lanham’s Revising Prose or a host of other style books that discuss more than grammar for revising one’s writing.
Style Books for Further Reading
In the arbitrary order of reader commitment necessary—least to greatest:
- Strunk, William Jr. and E.B. White. The Elements of Style. New York: MacMillan (various editions).
- Richardson, Peter. Style: A Pragmatic Approach. 2nd ed. New York: Longman. 2002.
- Zinsser, William. On Writing Well. New York: Harper (various editions).
- Williams, Joseph M. Style: Ten Lessons in Clarity and Grace. New York: Longman (various editions).
- Corbett, Edward P. J. and Robert J. Connors. Style and Statement. New York: Oxford UP. 1999.
- Kolln, Martha and Gray, Loretta S. Rhetorical Grammar: Grammatical Choices, Rhetorical Effects. New York: Allyn and Bacon (various editions).
- I use this book in ENGL 4183 “Editing with Digital Technologies.”
Note: The above books assume that you, the writer, have some sophistication in Standard Edited American English. These are not handbooks like the late Diana Hacker’s guide A Writer’s Reference that discuss some style issues but are predominantly grammar/spelling/usage rulebooks.
Additionally, employing the strategies from the above books doesn’t exactly mean “better writing.” You can’t think of writing or effective communication as something that happens in a vacuum; you must consider context, audience, and purpose. There is no secret code to writing. Although we have rules, they are meaningless if one’s communication is irrelevant.
Here are a few sentences to get us going. If it helps you, copy and paste the sentences in MS Word. Before you start revising, though, you need to make sure you know what the sentence is communicating. Figure that out first, and then revise. Knowing what it means will guide your revision and keep you from getting rid of necessary information.
1. “I have reason to believe that there is a continuing presence of terrorists in this country.”
Revision:
- Basically, this sentence is communicating that terrorists are in the United States.
- Look for the long, unnecessary introduction
- “I have reason to believe” is unnecessary. If you state it, we can assume you believe it.
- Also, if you insist on claiming you believe, just say “I believe” instead of adding “have reason to,” which is less efficient.
- Identify the prepositions
- Only “of” and “in” are prepositions.
- The “to” in the sentence is the infinitive particle for “to believe,” and it isn’t a preposition in this sentence.
- Yes, words can be in different parts of speech, so “to” may be a preposition (it often is) in one sentence or an infinitive particle in another sentence (like the one above).
- Identify forms of to be
- This sentence only has one form of be: “is.”
- Find inactive verbs or nouns that could be action verbs
- Not too much to change here, and, although a goal is to limit “to be” verbs, you shouldn’t worry about getting rid of all “to be” verbs.
- Below, I have a revision suggestion that uses the “to be” verb are.
Revision #1: I believe terrorists are among us.
Revision #2: Terrorists are here!
Those above revisions are much more to the point. Consider the context of this coming from the former US Attorney General John Ashcroft days after 9/11. It would make sense to get his point across by emphatically stating “terrorists live here!”
2. “It is my belief that criminal charges were brought up based upon affidavits that were delivered to the Attorney General’s Office by the law enforcement agency that was charged to apprehend possible suspects.” –former US Attorney General John Ashcroft
(33 words)
Let’s see that again:
- It is my belief
- that criminal charges
- were brought up
- based upon affidavits
- that were delivered to the Attorney General’s Office
- by the law enforcement agency
- that was charged to apprehend possible suspects.
This isn’t too bad, but it’s definitely long winded. First thing, what is he trying to communicate? Well, this is confusing, but I think he’s trying to claim that a law enforcement agency has warrants to arrest suspects. Remember, this is a politician, and, as I learned from someone who knew him (confidential source from nearly 20 years ago), he liked to use big words to sound elevated. In this instance, he seems to only want to mention his office–the Attorney General’s Office–and no other office or agency by name. That’s not appropriate professional communication.
Revision:
- Long, unnecessary introduction:
- “It is my belief…” is unnecessary, and, frankly, ridiculous because Ashcroft IS the Attorney General, the head of the Justice Department. He should know.
- Also, this desperately needs to be active voice. Who’s the agent in the sentence? Ashcroft? Affidavits? The Attorney General’s Office? A Law Enforcement Agency?
- Not having the agent in the subject spot muddles this sentence.
- Identify the prepositions
- The prepositions are “upon,” “to,” and “by.”
- The “up” in brought up isn’t a preposition in this case; it’s a verb particle. Also, the “to” in to apprehend in another infinitive particle.
- Remember, the goal is to limit prepositions, so don’t feel you have to get rid of ALL of them. In this sentence, “upon” and “to” seem ok. However, “by” moves the agent into the object spot: by the law enforcement agency.
- Identify forms of to be
- This sentence has several forms of be: “is,” “were,” “were”, and “was.”
- We’ll cut a few of those.
- Find inactive verbs or nouns that could be action verbs
- Once we figure out what the sentence is trying to say, we can choose better verbs.
- The revision below considers the most important thing to communicate isn’t the legal mechanisms needed to have courts approve arrests; instead, it’s to communicate that the feds are looking for suspects.
Revision #1: The FBI notified me that they are pursuing possible suspects. (10 words–more than two-thirds reduced)
Revision #2a: The FBI brought criminal charges against possible suspects. (8 words–reduced to one-forth the original length)
Revision #2b: The FBI informed my office through affidavits that they brought criminal charges against possible suspects. (15 words–still, it’s less than half the original length of 33 words.
We could get into nitpicky arguments about whether “me” or “my office” is too informal for the occasion. Rhetorically, there is weight behind the phrase “the Attorney General’s Office,” but Ashcroft is the Attorney General, so it sounds pompous to use the office. Also, is this post-9/11 moment, it would be better to show the country that someone’s in charge and in the know as opposed to the original sentence that seems to deflect any sense of responsibility.
If it sounds like a politician’s phrasing, it’s most likely not appropriate fro professional writing.
Remember, sentences in the real world usually come in context with other sentences. These guidelines are no exception for common sense or audience-specific requirements. Contextual factors will govern your writing decisions more than any rules (no matter how good the rules may be).
Perhaps you should redo the sentences for practice. They might have scared you at first, but examining them will also encourage you not to “dress up” your words unnecessarily.