Writing style
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 15159
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Writing style
The other readability issue is that bulk text written in capital letters is slightly harder to read than lower case because all the letters are the same height, and thus less distinctive.
Still, when it comes to readability online, nothing makes reading harder for me than long paragraphs.
- Jack D Ripper
- Posts: 610
- Joined: September 30th, 2020, 10:30 pm
- Location: Burpelson Air Force Base
- Contact:
Re: Writing style
I would think that incomprehensible gibberish in short paragraphs would be harder to read than something sensible that was in long paragraphs. But, yes, long paragraphs online are worse than long paragraphs in a printed book, as it is harder to keep one's place, particularly if one has to scroll to read the whole paragraph.
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 15159
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Writing style
Incomprehensible gibberish in long paragraphs is harder again :)Jack D Ripper wrote: ↑October 31st, 2020, 8:19 pmI would think that incomprehensible gibberish in short paragraphs would be harder to read than something sensible that was in long paragraphs. But, yes, long paragraphs online are worse than long paragraphs in a printed book, as it is harder to keep one's place, particularly if one has to scroll to read the whole paragraph.
I lose the shapes of words in long paragraphs - both in print, as you say, and on screens - because my vision becomes dominated by what is basically a grey block, in which I need to dig for detail. There's extra effort involved for the reader. A wonderful quote from Kurt Vonnegut's writing tips:
https://nicolebianchi.com/kurt-vonnegut-infographic/7. Pity the reader
They have to identify thousands of little marks on paper, and make sense of them immediately. So this discussion must finally acknowledge that our stylistic options as writers are neither numerous nor glamorous, since our readers are bound to be such imperfect artists. Our audience requires us to be sympathetic and patient teachers, ever willing to simplify and clarify — whereas we would rather soar high above the crowd, singing like nightingales.
-
- Posts: 1172
- Joined: November 22nd, 2019, 10:39 pm
Re: Writing style
Besides caps lock NEVER being used, by me, ALL the words written in capital letters, by me, are MEANT TO BE 'emphasized'.
Fair point, which I had NEVER noticed previously.
So, headings, in capital letters, to you, are harder to read than the following story, written in lower case letters, correct?
Why is that, can you not concentrate for extend periods of length? Or, for some other reason?
Also, to you, how long is a "long paragraph"?
-
- Posts: 1172
- Joined: November 22nd, 2019, 10:39 pm
Re: Writing style
But being willing to simplify, clarify, AND explain things in VERY simple and easy terms is ACTUALLY an EXTREMELY simple and easy thing to do. For example, being willing to explain in simplified, specific, precise, concise, and clarified terms that, for example;Greta wrote: ↑October 31st, 2020, 9:03 pm7. Pity the reader
They have to identify thousands of little marks on paper, and make sense of them immediately. So this discussion must finally acknowledge that our stylistic options as writers are neither numerous nor glamorous, since our readers are bound to be such imperfect artists. Our audience requires us to be sympathetic and patient teachers, ever willing to simplify and clarify — whereas we would rather soar high above the crowd, singing like nightingales.
'Life, and living', Truly are JUST, and Truly are VERY simple and easy INDEED, IS another example of just how simple and easy 'Life, and living, REALLY IS', as can be SEEN and EVIDENCED here.
However, being EVER willing to simplify AND clarify things, instead of EVER wanting to, so call, "soar high above the crowd, singing like nightingales" does NOT necessarily help readers at all. If readers, for example, have absolutely NO interest in what has been simplified, and NEVER seek CLARIFICATION, themselves, then for the writer 'to clarify', for EACH and ALL individual DIFFERENT readers, ends up taking thousands upon thousands of more little marks on paper.
So, for a writer, to be 'ever willing to simplify and clarify' is a Truly simple and easy thing to do indeed. However to find the least amount of the EXACT RIGHT little marks, to put down so that ALL readers can gain CLARITY is NOT some thing that has been achieved YET.
So, Life, and living, REALLY IS JUST, simple AND easy.
But how many readers Truly understand this SIMPLIFIED writing?
See, being ever willing to simplify is very simple, and easy. And, being ever willing to clarify is also very simple and easy. But, if a writer does NOT YET KNOW what is needed to be clarified, then no matter how willing they are to clarify, they do NOT YET KNOW what NEEDS to be clarified.
There NEEDS to be people to explain what 'it' IS that they NEED clarified, BEFORE a writer could clarify, correctly AND properly.
NO writer can clarify FOR readers/others. Only readers/others can explain, ask, or seek, what 'it' IS that they NEED clarified.
Although a writer could CLEARLY SEE things, and thus have CLARITY of things, this does NOT mean that they ALREADY KNOW, for sure, what 'it' is EXACTLY that readers want CLARIFIED.
- Pattern-chaser
- Premium Member
- Posts: 8393
- Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
- Location: England
Re: Writing style
Any author who presents their writing to an audience has, we can assume, content to offer that they feel is worth reading. That author, in my opinion, has a responsibility to that content, to deliver it in a way that will encourage their audience to read it. In this sense, writing comprises style (the subject of this topic) and content. If an author's writing is not read - if it earns no audience - then further discussion is pointless. Neither style nor content matters if no-one reads it.creation wrote: ↑October 31st, 2020, 5:16 pmDo you explain WHY you write in the unusual and unexpected way that you do?Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑October 29th, 2020, 8:41 am
No. You have used them in an unusual and unexpected way, but you haven't explained why, so no, of course we don't know.
If not, then WHY NOT?
Obviously I do NOT explain WHY I write in the way that I do, EVERY time I write. Especially considering that most of what I have been writing, AND SAYING, is;
ONLY THROUGH CLARIFICATION IS CLARITY GAINED.
WHEN, AND IF, CLARITY IS GAINED, THEN UNDERSTANDING IS ALSO OBTAINED.
So, IF ANY ONE WANTS TO OBTAIN TRUE UNDERSTANDING, THEN JUST ASKING TRULY OPEN CLARIFYING QUESTIONS IS JUST NEEDED.
Which ALL means; if you Truly want to KNOW WHY I, or ANY one else, write ANY thing that we do, then it is UP TO YOU to ask the CLARIFYING QUESTIONS for which you seek answers for.
But, OBVIOUSLY, one HAS TO BE Truly interested in what ANOTHER is writing, and/or saying, BEFORE they would even begin to want to gain UNDERSTANDING, Itself, of the 'other'.
By the way, EVERY one uses words, and their formatting, in unusual and unexpected ways, sometimes. This is because there is, obviously, NO 'One rule' for EVERY one.
Also, and further more, I ACTUALLY HAVE EXPLAINED WHY I use 'capital letters'. You have either MISSED it, MISUNDERSTOOD it, or have FORGOTTEN it. So, your claim that I have NOT explained WHY is just PLAIN WRONG, as SOME people do ALREADY KNOW WHY I use capital letters.
An author must earn the interest and attention of their audience. And, while content is vital, style matters almost as much. If your audience find your words difficult to read and understand, they will not bother. There is no value in condemning your audience's lack of discrimination, if they don't feel your writing is worth the trouble of deciphering. When your audience is lost, your message is lost too.
I am the author of this topic, the person who really wants to understand your contribution to the subject in hand. But I'm afraid that I cannot find in your writing anything to retain my interest or attention. Others are less likely to work as hard as me to appreciate what you have to say. It looks as though you have failed. Your message, whatever it is, is lost. I'm sorry.
"Who cares, wins"
- Pattern-chaser
- Premium Member
- Posts: 8393
- Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
- Location: England
Re: Writing style
This is something I hadn't previously considered. Thanks. I didn't realise that long paragraphs might be differently accepted when read from a screen, instead of a printed page. I will try to minimise the length of my paragraphs (online) from now on. Thanks for the feedback!
"Who cares, wins"
- Pattern-chaser
- Premium Member
- Posts: 8393
- Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
- Location: England
Re: Writing style
Personally, I prefer to focus on courtesy, rather than politeness. Courtesy is a code of practice that allows us to speak unpalatable truths without insult, and the violence that inevitably follows. If politeness requires - even only "sometimes" - that one not speak the truth, then I reject it. But you're right, of course, that it is not always possible to make a "useful" response.Jack D Ripper wrote: ↑October 31st, 2020, 6:20 pm ...Perhaps due to being polite. [...] Sometimes, of course, being polite dictates that one not speak the truth. So one either dissembles or one is not polite. So this really comes down to a question of values, of what one regards as most important. That might vary on a case by case basis, as sometimes the one approach may seem more appropriate whereas in other cases the other approach may seem most appropriate. Sometimes, a "useful" response will be impossible.
"Who cares, wins"
- Jack D Ripper
- Posts: 610
- Joined: September 30th, 2020, 10:30 pm
- Location: Burpelson Air Force Base
- Contact:
Re: Writing style
I do not understand the distinction between courtesy and politeness that you are trying to make.Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑November 1st, 2020, 7:51 amPersonally, I prefer to focus on courtesy, rather than politeness. Courtesy is a code of practice that allows us to speak unpalatable truths without insult, and the violence that inevitably follows. If politeness requires - even only "sometimes" - that one not speak the truth, then I reject it. But you're right, of course, that it is not always possible to make a "useful" response. 😧Jack D Ripper wrote: ↑October 31st, 2020, 6:20 pm ...Perhaps due to being polite. [...] Sometimes, of course, being polite dictates that one not speak the truth. So one either dissembles or one is not polite. So this really comes down to a question of values, of what one regards as most important. That might vary on a case by case basis, as sometimes the one approach may seem more appropriate whereas in other cases the other approach may seem most appropriate. Sometimes, a "useful" response will be impossible.
I think in many cases, speaking unpalatable truths cannot be done without insult. Of course, there is a difference between saying, "I believe you might be mistaken" and "You are wrong, you moron!", but sometimes people are offended and feel insulted at the suggestion that they might be making a mistake.
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 15159
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Writing style
You might like this readability link: https://degree.astate.edu/articles/unde ... print.aspxPattern-chaser wrote: ↑November 1st, 2020, 7:13 amThis is something I hadn't previously considered. Thanks. I didn't realise that long paragraphs might be differently accepted when read from a screen, instead of a printed page. I will try to minimise the length of my paragraphs (online) from now on. Thanks for the feedback! 👍🙂
Often in print, we logically work through a paragraph to reach a conclusion. Due to the way people tend to scan text online, it can help to start with the conclusion and then explain. Generally, short paragraphs, short sentences and choosing the simplest possible word for a task makes work easier to read. Then again, if you only want serious responses, you can use complexity to minimise trolling.
-
- Posts: 957
- Joined: April 19th, 2020, 6:20 am
Re: Writing style
But, why assume?Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑November 1st, 2020, 7:07 amAny author who presents their writing to an audience has, we can assume, content to offer that they feel is worth reading.creation wrote: ↑October 31st, 2020, 5:16 pm
Do you explain WHY you write in the unusual and unexpected way that you do?
If not, then WHY NOT?
Obviously I do NOT explain WHY I write in the way that I do, EVERY time I write. Especially considering that most of what I have been writing, AND SAYING, is;
ONLY THROUGH CLARIFICATION IS CLARITY GAINED.
WHEN, AND IF, CLARITY IS GAINED, THEN UNDERSTANDING IS ALSO OBTAINED.
So, IF ANY ONE WANTS TO OBTAIN TRUE UNDERSTANDING, THEN JUST ASKING TRULY OPEN CLARIFYING QUESTIONS IS JUST NEEDED.
Which ALL means; if you Truly want to KNOW WHY I, or ANY one else, write ANY thing that we do, then it is UP TO YOU to ask the CLARIFYING QUESTIONS for which you seek answers for.
But, OBVIOUSLY, one HAS TO BE Truly interested in what ANOTHER is writing, and/or saying, BEFORE they would even begin to want to gain UNDERSTANDING, Itself, of the 'other'.
By the way, EVERY one uses words, and their formatting, in unusual and unexpected ways, sometimes. This is because there is, obviously, NO 'One rule' for EVERY one.
Also, and further more, I ACTUALLY HAVE EXPLAINED WHY I use 'capital letters'. You have either MISSED it, MISUNDERSTOOD it, or have FORGOTTEN it. So, your claim that I have NOT explained WHY is just PLAIN WRONG, as SOME people do ALREADY KNOW WHY I use capital letters.
WHY asssume this, or ANY thing else?
Let us take a look at an example of this. Let us say that an author wants to deliver content, to you, which they KNOW is REALLY worth reading, and REALLY worth understanding, but this content, however, goes completely against what you BELIEVE is true.Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑November 1st, 2020, 7:07 am That author, in my opinion, has a responsibility to that content, to deliver it in a way that will encourage their audience to read it.
How could this author best deliver this content, to you? In what way, EXACTLY, could this content be delivered, to you, which would encourage you to read it? Remember this content COMPLETELY opposes 'that's what you already currently assume and believe is true.
This goes without saying.Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑November 1st, 2020, 7:07 amIn this sense, writing comprises style (the subject of this topic) and content. If an author's writing is not read - if it earns no audience - then further discussion is pointless. Neither style nor content matters if no-one reads it.
BUT, how could ANY one KNOW the style or the content, if what was written was NEVER read?
See, this is the problem and issue here; How can an author encourage the audience to read their work, if their work is not read?
And HOW do you propose an author does this?Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑November 1st, 2020, 7:07 amAn author must earn the interest and attention of their audience.
Are you aware that an 'audience', here, are the ones who are ALREADY reading?
You can SEE the predicament that an author would have, correct?
Deciphering, itself, it could be argued is the WHOLE issue here. This is because 'you', human beings, have placed more that one definition to many of the words, which you use.Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑November 1st, 2020, 7:07 amAnd, while content is vital, style matters almost as much. If your audience find your words difficult to read and understand, they will not bother. There is no value in condemning your audience's lack of discrimination, if they don't feel your writing is worth the trouble of deciphering.
I agree that there is NO real value in condemning some thing else for what essentially is your OWN inability. If you do NOT YET KNOW how to write so that absolutely EVERY thing that you say is Truly and FULLY understood, by EVERY one, then that is NOT the fault of ANY thing else other than than the 'you'.
Oh, and by the way, when writing in forums, like this one, then there is absolutely NO reader that 'has to' DECIPHER absolutely ANY thing, as asking CLARIFYING QUESTIONS, to each and EVERY author, is just so SIMPLE, and EASY.
Then it is solely responsibility of the author alone to NOT lose their audience, correct?Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑November 1st, 2020, 7:07 amWhen your audience is lost, your message is lost too.
Okay.Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑November 1st, 2020, 7:07 amI am the author of this topic, the person who really wants to understand your contribution to the subject in hand. But I'm afraid that I cannot find in your writing anything to retain my interest or attention.
Why is that?
And OBVIOUSLY you REALLY do NOT want to understand my contribution at all. 'Your inactions speak way louder than your words', as is said.
But you do NOT 'appreciate' what I have to say. Or, you can PROVE me WRONG, by telling us here what do you ACTUALLY 'appreciate' in what I have to say.Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑November 1st, 2020, 7:07 amOthers are less likely to work as hard as me to appreciate what you have to say.
And, how have you, supposedly, or actually, "worked hard" to 'appreciate', what I have to say?
Also, did you notice YOUR contradiction here?
But I have NOT "failed", at all, in what I have set out to do. In fact the EXACT OPPOSITE is ACTUALLY True.
To you, I have only "failed", because you were ASSUMING I was doing some thing, which, by the way, I was NOT.
But the actual message is NOT 'lost' at all. It is just being HIDDEN, from 'you'. And, 'I' WILL REVEAL 'it' when I am READY TO.
SEE, 'you' have NOT YET been prepared for what is about to be come, so 'you're are NOT ready to SEE what is about to be REVEALED.
WHY would you be, so called, "sorry" here?
Who are 'you' sorry for, or, what are 'you' sorry about, EXACTLY?
Also, this is yet ANOTHER PRIME EXAMPLE of someone starting off a post, with an ASSUMPTION, which has NOT YET been clarified to be true it not, but continues on with that post basing that that ASSUMPTION is true, right, so that they can then put forward their OWN ALREADY HELD BELIEFS, and conclude that they are true and right.
But what could be found is that that ASSUMPTION is WRONG, in the way it was portrayed. This could be found IF clarification was ever made, that is.
So, because the premise/assumption was WRONG, the conclusion is ALSO WRONG.
But ALL unsound and/or invalid arguments, like this one here, can be CLEARLY SEEN, and VERY simply and easily, I will add.
'you', adult human beings, however, are NOT YET able to CLEARLY SEE this, in the days of when this is being written. This is because 'you' like to think and/or believe that things are about 'you' or that things revolve around 'you'. Therefore, 'you' are NOT YET able to SEE from a Truly Objective perspective, and this is WHY 'you' still can NOT SEE thee actual Truth of things CLEARLY, YET, neither.
- Pattern-chaser
- Premium Member
- Posts: 8393
- Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
- Location: England
Re: Writing style
No, you won't, because I won't be reading. I had hoped you might just say what you mean, but I have waited long enough, I feel. Perhaps I'm making a terrible mistake; I shall never know. I wish you well; take care.
"Who cares, wins"
- Pattern-chaser
- Premium Member
- Posts: 8393
- Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
- Location: England
Re: Writing style
Jack D Ripper wrote: ↑October 31st, 2020, 6:20 pm ...Perhaps due to being polite. [...] Sometimes, of course, being polite dictates that one not speak the truth. So one either dissembles or one is not polite. So this really comes down to a question of values, of what one regards as most important. That might vary on a case by case basis, as sometimes the one approach may seem more appropriate whereas in other cases the other approach may seem most appropriate. Sometimes, a "useful" response will be impossible.
Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑November 1st, 2020, 7:51 am Personally, I prefer to focus on courtesy, rather than politeness. Courtesy is a code of practice that allows us to speak unpalatable truths without insult, and the violence that inevitably follows. If politeness requires - even only "sometimes" - that one not speak the truth, then I reject it. But you're right, of course, that it is not always possible to make a "useful" response.
You made the difference clearer than I did. "Sometimes, of course, being polite dictates that one not speak the truth." Courtesy, as I understand it, does not require falsehood. Essentially, it only requires that we avoid ad hominem attacks, although we usually describe and understand it in much simpler (and less philosophical) words.Jack D Ripper wrote: ↑November 1st, 2020, 2:47 pm I do not understand the distinction between courtesy and politeness that you are trying to make.
I don't know of any truth that requires me to insult the person I'm talking to. Avoiding insult is not always obvious or easy, but I think it can always be done ... can't it?Jack D Ripper wrote: ↑November 1st, 2020, 2:47 pm I think in many cases, speaking unpalatable truths cannot be done without insult. Of course, there is a difference between saying, "I believe you might be mistaken" and "You are wrong, you moron!", but sometimes people are offended and feel insulted at the suggestion that they might be making a mistake.
"Who cares, wins"
- Pattern-chaser
- Premium Member
- Posts: 8393
- Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
- Location: England
Re: Writing style
Thanks for that. I've archived it in my Evernote collection.Greta wrote: ↑November 1st, 2020, 8:13 pmYou might like this readability link: https://degree.astate.edu/articles/unde ... print.aspxPattern-chaser wrote: ↑November 1st, 2020, 7:13 am This is something I hadn't previously considered. Thanks. I didn't realise that long paragraphs might be differently accepted when read from a screen, instead of a printed page. I will try to minimise the length of my paragraphs (online) from now on. Thanks for the feedback!
"Who cares, wins"
-
- Posts: 2138
- Joined: May 9th, 2012, 3:13 pm
Re: Writing style
Creation's penchant for capital letters is a minor problem. His misplacement and misuse of words. his redundancy, and his improper grammar is worse.creation wrote: ↑November 1st, 2020, 6:24 am
However, being EVER willing to simplify AND clarify things, instead of EVER wanting to, so call, "soar high above the crowd, singing like nightingales" does NOT necessarily help readers at all. If readers, for example, have absolutely NO interest in what has been simplified, and NEVER seek CLARIFICATION, themselves, then for the writer 'to clarify', for EACH and ALL individual DIFFERENT readers, ends up taking thousands upon thousands of more little marks on paper.
So, for a writer, to be 'ever willing to simplify and clarify' is a Truly simple and easy thing to do indeed. However to find the least amount of the EXACT RIGHT little marks, to put down so that ALL readers can gain CLARITY is NOT some thing that has been achieved YET.
IN the above segment, creation capitalizes "EVER" twice. It's the wrong word. Does he mean "always" (or even "ALWAYS")? Even had he written "always", the word would have been misplaced. ""Being ALWAYS willing to simplify" suggests that the writer has no interests other than his desire to simplify. In the next sentence, creation runs on and on. "EACH and ALL individual DIFFERENT readers..." is simply silly and redundant. So is the "more" in last clause of the sentence.
Let's try a translation:
Simplifying does not necessarily help readers. Some readers prefer prose that "soar(s) high above the crowd, singing like nightingales". No prose can be simple and clear to thousands of different readers, each with his own point of view and level of education.
2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
2023 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023