SUGGESTIONS FOR WRITERS
What follows is
a more or less random gathering of suggestions for improving your writing. The central message to remember is that writing
is hard work. Competent writing
requires constant vigilance against all the bad habits, imprecisions, and
awkward constructions that creep into our prose when we allow ourselves to
become careless.
Reference
Works
Every writer should have certain minimal tools near at hand, and should use
them constantly. These include:
A dictionary
(American Heritage and Webster's New World are widely
recommended);
A thesaurus;
A manual of
style (Chicago Manual of Style, MLA Handbook);
A college handbook (Harbrace or Random House are good ones);
A guide to usage (e.g., Wilson Follett's Modern American Usage, H. W.
Fowler's Modern English Usage,
Bergen & Cornelia Evans' A Dictionary of
Contemporary American Usage,
etc.);
Remember, the
point of reference books is to use them.
Don't just let them sit on your shelf.
This is especially true of dictionaries, which must be among the most
essential and least used tools among students today.
PROBLEMS OF
SYNTAX AND GRAMMAR
What follow are some of the most common writing problems among undergraduates
today. Note which ones occur most
frequently in your own writing, and then try to be extra conscious of them when
they occur.
failure to
proofread: always a sign
of laziness and indifference in a writer.
Readers will interpret proofreading errors as a sign that you care
little about what you have to say, and will draw their own conclusions about
how seriously they should take your argument.
(Curiously, despite all assertions to the contrary, proofreading seems
to become much sloppier when people write on word processors; the best
antidote for this is to print out a draft of your text, proofread the
printed version, and then make corrections on the computer.)
spelling
errors: more laziness,
and far more common than they should be.
When in doubt, always use a dictionary. Among the most commonly misspelled words are:
occurred, benefited, all right (not alright), a/an, its/it's (very
commonly confused), affect/effect, to/two/too, their/there/they're, then/than,
led/lead, privilege. But this is the tip
of the iceberg.
bad
hyphenation: also a sign
of laziness. Hyphenate at syllable
breaks, and consult a dictionary when in doubt.
adjectival
hyphens: when a phrase
is used as an adjective, hyphens ordinarily appear between its words. Thus, we speak of the "twentieth
century" as a noun without a hyphen, but describe "twentieth-century
America" with a hyphen.
imprecise use
of words: extremely
common, cured by regular use of dictionary.
Strive always for precision and clarity.
Why is it wrong to say that "Ronald Reagan decimated Walter
Mondale in the 1984 election"? Or
that "Abraham Lincoln was disinterested in the more extreme forms
of abolitionism"?
misunderstood
punctuation marks:
"-" is a hyphen; "--" is a dash. In American usage, " is a quotation
mark, unless you are giving a quotation within a quotation, in which case ' is
used. Quotation marks are always
used in pairs. A colon (:) is used to
point from a full sentence to what immediately follows: a list, a quotation, an
appositive, or an explanation or summary.
What follows a colon need not be a complete sentence in its own
right. A semi-colon (;) is used
primarily to separate two main clauses (either of which could generally stand
on its own as a sentence) which are more connected with each other than a
period would indicate; semi-colons are also used to separate items in a list where
simple commas would become confusing.
underuse of
commas: commas mark the
breathing points in sentences, which is to say that they generally separate
clauses from each other. Among the most
commonly misused commas are those which separate parenthetic clauses from the
rest of the sentence. Thus:
"Charles Beard, who authored An Economic Interpretation of the
Constitution of the United States, was among the most influential American
historians of the first half of the twentieth century." The commas mark a parenthetic
(nonrestrictive) clause, and many students would fail to include one or both of
them; the most common error would be to omit the second comma.
overcapitalization: English is not German, which
capitalizes all nouns. Only proper names
are typically capitalized in English, along with titles and some
abbreviations. Words like "industrialization"
or "capitalism" are never capitalized, for instance. There are as many exceptions as rules in this
area, so again, consult a dictionary whenever you are in doubt.
contractions: generally avoid these in formal
prose. Can't should be cannot, won't
should be will not, wouldn't should be would not, and so on.
slang and
jargon: generally avoid
these unless they're clearly appropriate to your audience. "Nixon was really ticked off with
Archibald Cox," is a case of slang, and would rarely be suitable in a
piece of formal writing. Similarly,
"The OPEC oil price increases impacted seriously on the
economy" is a case of a fad journalistic word creeping like crabgrass into
the language; avoid such usages. For
different reasons, the sentence, "Indians relied on anadromous fish
for their spring food supplies," will leave most readers in the dark. It is almost always better to use simple
language that will not send your reader to the dictionary, so write instead:
"Between April and June, Indians counted for food on the spring spawning
runs, when ocean-dwelling fish made their annual journey up freshwater streams
to lay their eggs." Try replacing
jargon like "morbidity and mortality" with "sickness and
death," and see how much more lively (!) your prose becomes. Avoid inelegant words that end in -ize
(prioritize) or -wise (educationwise).
split
infinitives: the rules
on this are becoming more relaxed, but it is still wise to avoid split
infinitives whenever possible. Thus, you
should generally prefer "to go boldly where no man has gone before"
over "to boldly go where no man has gone before"--unless, or course,
you happen to be Captain Kirk.
adverbial
comparatives: nouns and
verbs have different comparatives, and you should always be careful about which
you need to use. Thus, you would say
that "Chicago grew more quickly than St. Louis in the second half
of the nineteenth century," not that "Chicago grew quicker
than St. Louis...." Conversely,
Chicago's had a quicker rate of population increase during this period.
noun-verb
agreement: errors here
occur most often when subject and verb are separated, and when the writer
becomes confused about what the actual subject of the sentence is. For example, "The garden of daffodils
and pansies were lovely in the afternoon light" is in error. The subject is "garden", not
"daffodils and pansies," so the verb should be "was."
unstable
tenses: one of the most
common problems in undergraduate writing.
In general, stick to the past tense in historical writing. But when you do use another tense,
make sure that you use it consistently: do not move randomly back and
forth between past and present tense. A
bad example of this would be a paragraph that began: "America in 1860 was
a nation on the verge of war. The South
feels that it must protect its economy and way of life against the attacks of
the abolitionists; the North is increasingly torn on the issue of slavery, but
was committed to holding the Union together."
complex
tenses: if you do not
have a clear sense of how to use the various tenses in English, consult a
college handbook and go to work on them.
Since history writing requires careful attention to past action, pay
special attention to the many forms of the past tense. It is less crucial that you know the names
of the various verb forms of English than that you develop an ear for when they
should be used--but knowing the names helps develop the ear! Examine the different verbs in the following
sentences and see whether you can identify why each takes the form that does:
"After arriving at Dallas to deliver what would have been a
stirring speech, John F. Kennedy was assassinated by Lee Harvey
Oswald. As Americans began the
process of dealing with their grief, they tended to be more aware
of the unfulfilled promises Kennedy left behind than they were of
the accomplishments he had actually achieved." If you have any trouble distinguishing past
perfect, past imperfect, past participles, and infinitives...work on these.
prepositions: all too often, these either dangle or
are mischosen. There are many words in
English which can be combined only with certain prepositions, and unless you
develop a good ear for these combinations--aided always by the dictionary--you
will make many errors. Thus, one does
not "conform with" something; one "conforms to"
something. One does not perform an
"investigation into" something, but an "investigation of"
something--but one does "look into" something. The judiciary is not "independent
from" the executive, but "independent of" the
executive. Many such usages are purely
idiomatic, and simply have to be learned.
Pay attention to them. Dangling
prepositions are removed from the words they connect, and should be avoided
whenever possible. In the sentence,
"Is that the place he was going to?", the "to" dangles; it
would work better if the question read, "Is that the place to which he was
going?"
bad referents: perhaps the biggest single problem in
undergraduate writing, appearing constantly in many insidious guises. The problem is best understood in terms of
pronouns: whenever you write a sentence in which the reader has to pause--even
for a fraction of a second--to figure out a pronoun's meaning, you have a bad
referent. In the sentence, "Sam was
walking with John when he told him the news," there is no way to know who
is telling the news to whom. The pronoun
"it" is especially susceptible to these problems. Whenever you write a pronoun, look at it
closely and ask if there is any possibility that it refers to more than one
other noun. Bad referents also occur
when a pronoun has no referent at all.
Take the following sentences: "Harvard's student population
expanded quickly during the period from 1960 to 1980. A major reason was that they now included
women." The word "they"
in the second sentence has no referent; the author has assumed that the
implicit subject of preceding sentence was "students" (or maybe
Harvard?), when in fact "population" is the subject. Even harder to detect are bad referents that
derive not from pronouns but from misunderstood or ambiguous noun phrases; this
occurs especially when past participles serve as adjectives. Try the sentence: "The mayor ran the
government and established businesses controlled the economy." Until you reach the end of the sentence, you
can't be sure that the mayor didn't establish businesses; in your momentary
confusion, you lose your forward momentum and the flow of the sentence is lost. Bad referents are a constant trap for the
inattentive writer.
run-on
sentences and non-sentences:
these occur surprisingly frequently in undergraduate prose. Non-sentences missing some fundamental part
of speech, like a verb. Run-on sentences
seem to go on and on often trying to pack too much information into a single
grammatical unit and connect the pieces together with lots of ands that don't
impose a tight unity on the sense of the sentence. The best sentences are generally short and
punchy.
STYLISTIC
ERRORS
Whole books have
been written about the problems of achieving a fine English prose style, and
there is no space here to pursue the topic in real depth. Books you may find helpful if you want to
work on your prose include the usage guides listed in the preceding section, as
well as:
Strunk & White, The Elements of Style (a real classic);
John Trimble, Writing with Style;
Richard Lanham, Style: An
Anti-Textbook;
Bruce Ross-Larson, Edit Yourself;
and many others.
clarity: the central goal of all prose. All your energy should be directed toward
achieving this end; everything else is secondary to it. Any unintended ambiguity, any sense of confusion
in your reader, means that your message has been improperly communicated and
probably inaccurately received.
underusing
verbs: verbs are what
give your sentences energy and life. Use
as many of them as possible, and make them as vigorous as possible. Compare the following sentences: "The
growth of New York led to conditions of crowding in certain residential
neighborhoods." "As New York
grew, more and more people crowded in to look for housing in a few key
neighborhoods." The second sentence
has three lively verbs to the first sentence's single--and rather
dull--"led to."
over-use of
the verb "to be":
the verb "to be" is one of the most over-used verbs in the English
language. It has no independent life of
its own, but is mainly used to modify other verbs and to connect nouns with
adjectives. Using it is little better
than using no verbs at all. Consider:
"The crowding of New York's residential neighborhoods was a function of
immigration and natural population increase in combination with the social geography
of ethnic settlement." One little
verb struggles to hold 25 sprawling words together. Compare: "Even the birth rate of native
New York families would have strained the city's housing stock. But when the immigrants added their numbers
to the city's natural growth, certain neighborhoods nearly exploded." A common problem in modern prose, often
attributed to the social sciences, is to replace verbs with abstract nouns, a
process in which the verb "to be" plays an important and insidious
role. These two sentences are a good
example.
over-use of
adjectives, adverbs, and nouns:
a corollary to both of the above rules.
Over-use of adjectives and adverbs is a common problem with prose that
tries to be elegant or dramatic.
Strunk's rule of "Omit needless words" will apply to adjectives
and adverbs more than half of the time; English almost always has a noun or a
verb that will communicate more precisely with one word what you wanted to
communicate with two or more. Take the
sentence: "Stepping out into the bright sunshine amidst the delicate
singing of the birds, she sensed a passionate stirring in her spirit that left
her open to the mysterious excitement of the brave challenge that lay ahead of
her." By modern standards, that's
pretty ornate, and would make most readers uncomfortable. Try instead: "She left the house that
morning excited by the prospect ahead of her." Useless modifiers that can almost always be
omitted include such old friends as certainly, hopefully, actually, in fact, in
particular, indeed, necessarily, needless to say, particularly, really,
somewhat, very, and so on. Phrases such
as "the fact that," "the number of," "the amount
of," "the field of," "the idea of," "the degree
of," and so on, can almost always be cut with no loss at all to your
meaning.
associated
rules: prefer concrete
over abstract vocabulary. Avoid purple
prose. Avoid cliches. Avoid latinate vocabulary: prefer short words
to long ones.
avoid the
passive voice: the
passive construction often saps life from a sentence. It is constructed by inverting the subject
and object, taking the active verb and turning it into a past participle, and
adding the auxiliary verb "to be."
Thus, "He ran the circus" becomes "The circus was run by
him." Often the subject disappears
altogether in such constructions, which is one of its attractions for writers:
you can escape having to assert who was responsible for causing an event. "Blacks were often lynched during the
1920's" omits the agent and weakens the verb; better to say, "The Ku
Klux Klan and other racist organizations often lynched blacks during the
1920's."
sentence
length: generally prefer
short sentences to long ones, but vary the length of your sentences to achieve
changes in rhythm. "The morning
began with the resignation of the chief of staff, who had finally had enough of
the strains under which he had been working, and by the end of the afternoon,
many of the officers found themselves with a host of new obligations and
responsibilities." There's nothing
formally wrong with that sentence, but it would probably be better if
shortened. So try: "That morning,
the chief of staff finally broke under the strain of his duties. He resigned.
As a result, by the end of the afternoon, the other officers found
themselves with a host of new obligations and responsibilities."
parallelism: use parallel syntax to express parallel
ideas. Compare "new ways of weaving
cloth and to sew garments" with "new ways of weaving cloth and sewing
garments." The latter is much
easier to follow, and flows much more smoothly.
sexist and
racist language: be
aware that there is a major political debate among writers these days over the
traditional use of the male pronoun to represent any individual, whether female
or male, and the traditional use of the singular ("the Indian" or
"the Black") to represent a complex group of people. Replacing every instance of "he"
with "he or she" is often inelegant, but also more accurate. Another solution is to refer to plural groups
as plural groups, so that when you mean to refer to a group that includes both
men and women, use the ungendered "they." Certainly it is less racist to speak of
"Blacks" than to speak of "the Black" as if the latter were
a single (usually male) undifferentiated racial category. There are no easy answers to these problems, but
you should at least consider what to do with them in your own prose.
LARGER ISSUES:
All quotations
must be exact. Inserting your own
misspellings or changes in punctuation is to misrepresent the original author,
and demonstrates your own unreliability as a historian.
Assume infinite
intelligence and infinite ignorance in your reader; explain everything.
Paragraphs
should form discrete and coherent arguments.
All parts of a paragraph should revolve around a central idea.
Introduce all
people and other important details.
Never use a quotation without letting the reader know who's
speaking. Keep constant track of time
and make sure your reader always knows when and where a given event is taking
place.
Keep what's
important at the center. What's your
argument?
Follow a clear
trajectory. Summarize whenever you've
reached an important waystation, and keep setting signposts so the reader will
know where you've been and where you're going.
Effective signposting is probably the single most important indication
that a reader is paying attention to his or her audience.
Strive always
for clarity.