#avoiding jargon and complex terms. Make use of personal pronouns | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

lingbooks · 4 years

Text

Wordslut: A Feminist Guide to Taking Back the English Language

While I know a lot of linguists who are feminists, there is some tension between feminist ideals and the anti-prescriptivist approach that linguists take towards language. Linguists, as a general rule, aim to document and examine language as it is used, without providing their own opinions on how they think language should be used. This approach to language allows linguists to show that certain forms of language, from split infinitives to singular they, are not bad or wrong or “grammatically incorrect.” However, when it comes to sexist language, it’s a lot harder to say that there’s no such thing as “bad” language use.

Some of the questions that arise are easily answered. It is fairly easy to distinguish between using slurs and splitting infinitives, as slurs are meant to hurt or disparage people, while split infinitives only offend the sensibilities of some long dead men who desperately wished English were more like Latin. But what about less malicious language use that still has sexist undertones? What about calling ships or storms she? What about using the word guys to refer to groups that contain women?

I thought a lot about this contradiction while reading Wordslut: A Feminist Guide to Taking Back the English Language by Amanda Montell, a book that attempts to cover a wide variety of topics related to language and gender. Montell’s background in linguistics admittedly isn’t particularly extensive—she has a bachelor’s degree in linguistics, but she’s primarily a journalist who only occasionally writes about linguistics. (I should probably also state that, depending on how you count my graduate work in a related field, I have the same amount of linguistics education, so I’m not going to make any judgments on who “really counts” as a linguist.) That said, Wordslut is definitely a linguistics book—and a pretty good one at that.

Wordslut covers a broad variety of topics in sociolinguistics. Some are expected. The first chapter discusses the variety of (often derogatory) slang words used to describe women, while another chapter discusses the ways women speak to each other. Other chapters cover topics I see less frequently. One chapter, for example, looks at how women swear, while another looks at the vast array of slang words used to refer to genitalia. (I’d warn you that this book is NSFW, but if you’re reading a book entitled Wordslut at work in the first place, you’re a braver soul than I am.) One of my favorite chapters focused on how gay people speak, including both discussions of gay slang as well as examining why there’s a “gay voice” but no real “lesbian voice.” While I already was familiar with some of the topics in the chapter, I was not aware of Polari, a sort of code once used by British gay men as early as the 1500s that gave us such words as twink, camp, and fantabulous, and now I definitely want to know more about it. On a similar note, throughout the book, Montell makes sure to discuss queer, trans, and nonbinary experiences when relevant, which provides perspective that’s usually lacking in older writing about language and gender.

I did find that the quality varied from chapter to chapter—or even within the same chapter. Consider, for example, the chapter on catcalling. One section of the chapter compared catcalling behaviors with linguistic studies on compliments, breaking down precisely why catcalling is not a compliment. I thought this was a really interesting analysis, but I found the rest of the chapter fairly dull; some of it discussed facts I (and most other feminists) already know about how men dominate conversations and interrupt women, while other parts talked about the act of catcalling more generally. (A problem I found throughout the book is that Montell sometimes chose to discuss general feminist issues without really tying them back to linguistics.) While some of this unevenness is to be expected in a book with such a broad scope, one pattern emerged: I generally enjoyed the portions discussing how women speak, such as the chapter about conversational norms in groups of women or the section about the many uses of like, more than the portions discussing how women are spoken about. Perhaps this is because the former read like a celebration, while the latter was more of a rant. Montell is not happy about how our culture talks about women, and while I don’t disagree with her, I often found myself more frustrated than properly fired up.

It is worth noting that Montell is not an impartial voice throughout the book. She wants our language to become more equitable. Mostly, her ambitions are good. (And in her defense, she notes that certain approaches to making language more equitable, such as attempts in 70s to create a “women’s language” or storming a dictionary headquarters to demand the word slut be removed, are unlikely to be successful.) But in doing so, sometimes her own linguistic biases shine through. Consider, for example, an anecdote from the intro of the book, where Montell gives the following speech to a woman who critiques her use of the word y’all:

I like to see y’all as an efficient and socially conscious way to handle the English language’s lack of a second-person plural pronoun. I could have used the word you to address the two girls, but I wanted to make sure your daughter knew I was including her in the conversation. I could also have said you guys, which has become surprisingly customary in casual conversation, but to my knowledge, neither of these children identifies as male, and I try to avoid using masculine terms to address people who aren’t men, as it ultimately works to promote the sort of linguistic sexism many have been fighting for years. I mean, if neither of these girls is a guy, then surely together they aren’t guys, you know?

It’s a nice “take down the prescriptivist” story in some ways, but while I agree that y’all is a perfectly acceptable and useful word, Montell tries to argue that she chose to use y’all not just because her geographical and linguistic background make it the natural choice for her but because it’s the best choice, thereby turning an anti-prescriptivist argument into a prescriptivist one. Later in the same speech, she dismisses the option of using the pronoun yinz because it “doesn’t roll off the tongue nicely.” I’m more intrigued, however, by her insistence that it would be sexist to use you guys. Montell notes, “Many speakers genuinely believe guys has become gender neutral. However, scholars agree that guys is just another masculine generic in cozier clothing. There’d be no chance of you gals earning the same lexical love.” However, she provides no real evidence that guys isn’t truly neutral to speakers who use it, only that it is less marked than gals and that only masculine terms can ever reach this level of unmarkedness. I can’t help but wonder if it’s speakers who are excluding women when using phrases like you guys or if Montell simply hears it that way due to her own linguistic background.

Another issue I had with this book is that it heavily focuses on English. While the topics discussed throughout the book are fairly universal, only one chapter provides any non-English examples. However, given how Montell handles these non-English examples, especially those from non-Western languages, in that one chapter, that might be for the best. The chapter examines how grammatical gender affects speakers’ perceptions of natural gender, as well as the political consequences, and at points, it’s very effective. I was particularly intrigued by her discussion of French feminists’ attempts to introduce feminine terms for certain jobs in a language where words like doctor are obligatorily masculine (and l’Académie Française is trying very hard to keep them that way). A few pages later, Montell moves onto talk about more complex gender and noun class systems. She gives the now famous example of Dyirbal, where most animate nouns belong to one noun class but “women, fire, and dangerous things” belong to another. She then concludes that this demonstrates that this shows something about Dyirbal speakers’ worldviews—that they see everything as masculine unless it could “literally kill you.” It’s a compelling argument in some ways, but it’s hard to discuss Dyirbal speakers’ worldviews without remembering one thing: Dyirbal is an indigenous Australian language with a single-digit number of native speakers. Yes, it has an interesting—and perhaps problematic—approach to gender, but it’s tied to a very specific (and mostly eradicated) cultural context, and it simply isn’t problematic in the same way as l’Académie Française.

Overall, while I had my issues with Wordslut, I had a good time reading it . It’s not a must read, but if you’re looking for a fun, modern source on gender and language, it’s certainly entertaining and informative. It’s also a book that can definitely be enjoyed by linguists and non-linguists alike; there’s not much jargon that would trip up a non-linguist, but it covers a wide enough variety of topics that linguists (at least those who don’t specialize in sociolinguistics) won’t already know everything it covers. In general, if you’re interested in linguistics and feminism, you’ll probably have a good time and learn something new.

TL;DR

Overall rating: 3.5/5 Good for linguists? Yes, unless you’re already an expert in sociolinguistics Good for non-linguists? A definitive yes, since this assumes no background in linguistics Strong points: Broad scope and a fun, modern overview of the intersection between language and gender Weak points: Very English-centric, and the author’s outrage overshadows the actual information sometimes

#linguistics #pop linguistics #sociolinguistics

56 notes · View notes

languagebraindump · 4 years

Photo

Different cultural backgrounds result in different writing styles that usually conform with the prevailing norms of the culture a given text has been composed in. Moreover, distinct ideological views, genders, religion, and socio-economic backgrounds create disparities as well (Sawaki, 2016). Our view of the world is reflected subjectively by the language even in the case of such a universal discourse characterized by dry facts, where there is no room for long musing and use of metaphors.

In this post I have already introduced some features of Polish academic writing. However, the features such as sophisticated vocabulary or long sentences are visible elsewhere too.

Here are more characteristic features of Polish:

Polish academic discourse according to Aleksander Wilkoń:

1. increase in the subordinate relationship among the semantic fields of signs (complex hypotaxis)

# it basically means that sentences are long. A lexical set of words grouped by meaning that refers to a specific subject (semantic field) are separated by commas that introduce another lexical set of words. “Signs” is a fancy linguistic term for words/phrases/morphemes used to designate/determine objects or phenomena of reality.

2. relatively regular hierarchy of concepts (reduction of the identity to a minimum, avoidance of synonyms);

# we start from the most general idea and then we go into detail. We avoid any personal language.

3. a tendency to assimilate unambiguous foreign scientific vocabulary;

4. a low frequency of expressive structures;

5. the absence of ellipses, nominal sentences, exclamations, apostrophes, etc.;

# we like to clarify everything hence the lack of ellipses, we prefer verbal phrases/structures.

6. use of passive voice;

7. impersonal constructions; the monologue nature of the text;

# we never refer to our readers directly.

8. devoid of subjective, expressive and aesthetic elements (Wilkoń, 2000);

9. according to Wytrębowicz, there is also a preference for sophisticated words even when a simpler synonym is available (Wytrębowicz, 2009).

10. the author of the text is more important than the recipient;

Scientific language as a typically written language can have many stylistic variations; for example, written dissertations in either clear and factual style or an intricate and abstract style. This depends on the personality of the author and his writing skills. It also depends on the subject and genre of the text, and finally on the conventions prevailing in a given research center (Wilkoń, 2000).

Now, let’s look at English and compare it with Polish.

English academic discourse according to Andrew Kemp:

Andrew Kemp, in his doctoral dissertation, refers to Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association which provides a list of particulars (these may be considered as tips rather than writing specifications):

1. Use the past tense or the present perfect tense;

Ø As there are only 3 tenses in Polish, we usually use the past tense. What’s also important to consider are perfective and imperfective verbs.

2. Vary sentence length; however, avoid long noun strings;

Ø The longer, the better; the more complex, the better.

3. Try to use short words and short sentences when possible;

Ø Nope!

4. Avoid jargon, redundancy, wordiness instead use specific language;

Ø That’s also true for Polish, but if your paper is a bit wordy and there are some redundant phrases which make sentences longer, you’re good, no worries.

5. Avoid colloquial expressions and “this, that, these and those” pronouns;

Ø We love “this, that, these and those” in Polish and in English.

6. Avoid illogical or ambiguous comparisons;

Ø True for Polish as well.

7. Avoid third person references when referring to yourself and the editorial “we;”

Ø We use a lot of impersonal constructions.

Andrew Kemp has conducted his research as well. He has analyzed scientific texts and the results are as follows:

1. No use of bias and figurative language;

Ø Kind of true for Polish as well.

2. Lack of “this” as a subject of sentences;

Ø We use “this” as a subject a lot.

3. Little use of direct quotes in the introductory material;

Ø It depends on the writer, the paper, the research center, and many more.

4. No use of imperative and exclamatory sentences;

Ø Imperative sentences are quite common.

5. Use a form of the verb “to be” as the main and solitary verb in the main clause;

Ø No. Use whatever you want. You can even start the main clause with an adjective if you want.

6. The placement of the subject of the sentence is either loose (beginning of the sentence) or periodic (end of the sentence). Frequent use of loose structure, immediately introducing the subject of the sentence, suggests the direct nature of academic writing;

Ø Again, start with whatever part of speech you want.

7. Minimum use of passive sentences, acronyms, contractions, second person sentences, interrogative sentences, compound/complex sentences;

Ø Use them in Polish as much as you want. They will make you sound smart.

8. Use of single-syllable words is more frequent than words of three or more syllables (single-syllable words suggests readability for the most part);

Ø We prefer longer, complicated, sophisticated words.

9. Sentences contain one leading idea only. The rest of the sentence supports that idea or there are subordinate materials that clarify the main point;

Ø With the right punctuation you can intrude several ideas in one sentence.

10. The average sentence length for the articles studied was twenty-five words (Kemp, 2007).

Ø The longest sentence I’ve ever read was around 100 words. There was lots of commas and dashes to clarify the meaning.

References

Kemp, A. (2007, May). University of Central Florida. Retrieved January 22, 2020, from Electronic Theses and Dissertations: https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd/3223

Wytrębowicz, J. (2009). O poprawności językowej publikacji naukowo-technicznych. Zagadnienia Naukozanwstwa.

Wilkoń, A. (2000). Typologia odmian językowych współczesnej polszczyzny. Katowice: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego.

Sawaki, T. (2016). Analyzing Structure in Academic Writing. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.

#polish #comparison #comparing languages #polish language #langblr #contrastive grammar #my teaching

4 notes · View notes

livewebtutors · 7 years

Text

How to Write a Perfect Essay

A perfect essay is not always a perfect one for everyone. The writing that can convey your ideas to your reader is a perfect essay for you. But how to write a perfect essay is a question that can spring up in anyone’s mind and the same answer applies to all, ie, selection of appropriate words.

We need of words to express our thoughts

‘Words are of course the most powerful drug used by mankind’. In these words of Rudyard Kipling we get to know the importance of words. Words help us to communicate, bring out our ideas to convince or rather cajole our audience to accept them without causing any sentimental offense to their thinking.Even if we are precipitating down our thoughts in black and white, it can create a very strong impact on the reader’s mind. This impactful processing of the thoughts is the most vital element for your essay. With use of effective writing and powerful revelation of your knowledge, you can drive your point in the best possible way.

So understand the importance of writing a perfect essay.

What Are Important Points For Essay Writing?

• Avoid Slang Language or Colloquial Terms: Words like such as don’t, can’t, won’t etc. spoil the richness of the essay. Unless you have to quote anyone avoid using them. Slang phrases such as “couch potato’, ‘down to earth’, ‘feeling blue’, etc., and colloquial terms such as fetch, reckon, yonder etc. are not advisable for use in academic articles. Although these may make your blog very attractive but they’re not acceptable in formal academic writing and project some sort of insincerity and callousness in your approach.

•Remove Awkward and Vague Words: To make perfect sense to your readers, you have to re-read what you’ve written and check if the ideas are getting expressed clearly. Let us illustrate with the help of a simple example. Use of awkward phrases in the form of idiomatic prepositions, will not serve the purpose of a good written material. Use of the subordinate clause with correct sentence formation and right use of synonyms is absolutely necessary to convey the meaning clearly. So choose words you use, and take essay help if you think you are going wrong somewhere.

• Avoid Repetition of Ideas: Try to avoid repetition of words or the usage of same words and phrases over and over again. That can make your essay boring. As we know that the words will revolve around the central idea of the essay they will be used twice or thrice in a single write-up. But try to avoid using use same conjunctions and prepositions as much as possible.

• Abstain From Using Redundant Words: Redundant words are added in your essay to make the words sound louder in expression. However, such words can make the terms redundant and you are unconsciously lowering the credibility of the essay. The words ‘completely’, ‘exact’, ‘really’, ‘totally’ only add unnecessarily an extra fluffiness to the word without any meaning.

• Use the Synonym in their Right Connotation: Using a synonym merely to replace the word can make the sentence sound inappropriate. Synonym should be chosen such that the sentence makes perfect sense. For this, you must understand the connotation of the word, or understanding the emotional response to it rather than the technical meaning. So when you are not sure of the connotation, use a thesaurus and select the best word to avoid making mistakes.

• Limit the use of Jargons and Wordiness: Essay should be simple and precise. Avoid excessive use of technical jargon, as they can make the essay unimpressive. Limited use of technical terms is advisable. Sure, technical jargon and big words sound attractive to you, and you feel like a smart person using them. Drive your point clearly with the use of simple and precise words. The essay will be received with more response than it would have been otherwise.

Wordiness is next to adding uselessness to an impactful word. It makes the sentences more complex to read. Use of phrases and idioms do add flavor to the language, but they are not meant to empower academic writing unless needed. Use of phrase conjunctions should be done wisely and not just to add something ‘new’ to the text.

• Avoid Excessive use of the Pronoun “I”: Using ‘I’ in the essay gives a personal touch to your essay. But, excessive use of ‘I’ is a not good thing.It can make the essay sound very rude and boastful. Adopt a more straightforward approach instead. Self-referring pronouns like ‘me’, ‘my’ and the like are better options to keep the attitude of the essay clean and self-centric.

• Use Confident Words: Some powerful words can add strength and credibility to your essay. Using the right words in the right order at the right time is the best way. Specific verbs can achieve the same effect. So instead of using show, say or report, use of words like maintain, demonstrate, conclude, outline and note are some better options to assert your thought.

How to Choose Correct Words for Essay?

The entire process of word selection is easier with the following strategies:

• Never use unfamiliar words in the essay.

• Check the word which is best suitable for the sentence you are writing.

• Don’t pick up synonyms from the thesaurus without checking their appropriateness for the context of your essay.

• Avoid repetition of words, and look for alternatives to them, but do not replace the thematic words.

All these points can help in writing effective essays and improve your writing. Do not treat your essay as a boring chore else it will show in your writing. Try to give your best to express your ideas. Keep practicing essay writing skills. Practice will make you write a perfect essay.

#essay writing #essay help #essay writing expert #essay writing help #essay writing service

1 note · View note

ber39james · 7 years

Text

7 Brilliant Tips on How to Proofread Emails

That typo or grammar goof you just made in an email might make a bad impression. It could signal that you lack attention to detail. At worst, it could make you seem less intelligent, conscientious, and trustworthy.

Although email typos happen to everyone, they happen less frequently to those who take a little extra time to proofread. Here’s a foolproof step-by-step guide to getting it right before you hit send.

1 Get your contact’s name right.

Did you spell your contact’s first and last name correctly? It’s important. And, if you doubt that, think of the last time you got an email from someone who got your name wrong. At the very least, you probably groaned or rolled your eyes. We get annoyed when people misspell our names because we assume they don’t care enough about us to pay attention to that basic detail.

If you’re uncertain about the spelling of your contact’s name, do a little research to see if you can come up with it via Google or social media. If all else fails, use a generic greeting like “Hi there” that doesn’t use a first name.

Here’s a tip: Make sure you’ve spelled business and website names correctly, too. It’s even a good idea to double-check how the name is formatted. Is it Buzzfeed, Buzz Feed, or BuzzFeed? (Hint: It’s the last one.) Little details do matter.

2 Check your tone.

Does your email sound cold or terse? It might. Often, what sounds fine in our heads doesn’t come across well in text. When you don’t stop to review and proofread your email before you send it, you risk being misinterpreted.

The trick here is to apply some empathy. Clear your head and imagine you’re receiving your email rather than sending it. Does anything you’ve written sound negative or even hostile? There’s a big difference between “I’m looking forward to chatting with you” and “I’ll be expecting your call.” One is friendly and positive; the other sounds as though you’re saying “You’d better call or else.”

3 Make sure you’ll be understood.

Make sure your recipient has enough details to understand what you’ve written. Remember that you and your recipient may not have all the same information—the things you understand aren’t necessarily things your recipient will know. Reread your email with this in mind and fill in the blanks as needed.

Here’s a tip: If you find yourself giving too much background information, take a step back and rethink your strategy. You may want to start with a simple “just the facts” approach that leads into a more involved discussion. For instance, instead of breaking down a multi-step plan in a long, complex introductory email, you might first write a quick summary and ask your contact whether they’d like you to share more details.

4 Check for clarity.

Make sure what you’ve written reads smoothly and conveys your precise meaning. Look for unclear pronoun references.

Scan your emails for words like it or they and then make sure your text conveys what those words refer to. If not, rewrite to replace those pronouns with something concrete.

When we hold it directly after the keynote, it always has good attendance.

Hold what after the keynote? What has good attendance?

When we hold the copywriting workshop directly after the keynote, the workshop always has good attendance.

Better. But we can rewrite to simplify the sentence and avoid repeating the word workshop.

The copywriting workshop always has good attendance when we hold it directly after the keynote.

Keep your sentences simple and direct. Emails written at a third-grade reading level have significantly better response rates. Long, complex sentences and big words can make your text more challenging to read for a busy person who’s rushing through emails. Do consider your audience, however. If you’re writing to a doctor of sociology to ask for an interview, go ahead and use lush language and more complex structure. Otherwise, make “simple is better” your default.

5 Watch out for wordiness.

Part of simplifying your text involves streamlining it. Eliminate filler words and phrases. Get rid of adverbs and use stronger verbs. (Instead of incredibly happy, try overjoyed, thrilled, or ecstatic. Instead of ran swiftly, how about dashed or sprinted?)

Consider George Orwell’s six rules of writing:

Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.

Never use a long word where a short one will do.

If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.

Never use the passive where you can use the active.

Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.

Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.*

*About Orwell’s rule #6, see our rule #2.

Here’s a tip: Grammarly Premium will help you find overused words and filler words. As you become more aware of your use of filler words, you’ll automatically use them less often. Win!

6 Proofread carefully.

Up to this point, we’ve been talking about proofreading in the broader terms of a developmental edit. Now, it’s time to get down to the nitty gritty and proofread line-by-line. Have you spelled everything correctly? Did you use the proper homonyms? (Did you type “There going to the festival” when you meant to type They’re?) Is your punctuation on point?

An app like Grammarly will help you catch and fix your errors. But keep in mind that it’s a tool to enhance your proofreading ability, not replace the need for proofreading altogether. The advantage of using a proofreading app is that every mistake the app catches will teach you something about your writing and ultimately make you a better writer.

7 Sit on it.

Some emails need a while to simmer, especially if they’re sensitive. Let’s say you have to write an email to report the inappropriate conduct of a coworker, or you have to draft a performance review for someone whose performance hasn’t exactly been stellar. Emotion can make you write things you’ll later regret.

Draft your email in your word processor rather than your email client so you’re not tempted to send it impulsively before you’ve given it a thorough review. If you’re able to hold off for a bit, sit on that email for a day before sending it. When you reread your email in the light of a new day, you’ll often find things to revise, especially in terms of tone and clarity.

Here’s a tip: When it’s critical to deliver an error-free email that won’t be misunderstood, it may be helpful to have someone else (particularly someone impartial) look over your draft.

At the very least, make sure the unsend feature is enabled in your email client. (Here’s how to do it in Gmail.) The few seconds of time it will buy after you’ve hit Send will occasionally rescue you from being owned outright by a glaring typo. I once received an email with the subject line “This learning toy made my child crap with glee!”

I’m pretty sure that’s not what the sender meant.

The post 7 Brilliant Tips on How to Proofread Emails appeared first on Grammarly Blog.

from Grammarly Blog https://www.grammarly.com/blog/how-to-proofread-emails/

0 notes