Blog Archives

Tip #32: Maintain parallelism with conjunctions

10/30/2014

One of the main differences between spoken English and written English is attention to structure. Structural concerns attend effective written English more than they do effective spoken English.

In truth, the best presentation in either spoken or written forums will pay attention to structure. But when viewed through the perspective of simply conveying a message, spoken English is a bit more lax than written English.

That’s why effective technical writers pay attention to structure.

A common structural error found among inexperienced writers is the failure to maintain parallelism when using conjunctions. Conjunctions connect the ideas found in different clauses to create a larger, more complex idea embodied in a sentence. Different classifications of conjunctions perform the same function (making connections between ideas) but do so in different ways.

Coordinating conjunctions signal a relationship of position between ideas. Examples include and, but, or, nor, for, so, and yet.
Subordinating conjunctions signal a relationship of dependency of one idea to another. Examples include after, although, because, before, if, since, unless, when, where.
Correlative conjunctions signal a relationship between two ideas to form a more complex third idea. For this reason they always occur in pairs of either single words or phrases. Examples include both/and, either/or, neither/nor, not only/but also, and whether/or.

Some of these words are used as other parts of speech. For example, so is also an adverb, and for is also a preposition. Although all conjunctions can involve parallel structures, the conjunctions more often requiring parallel structure are the correlative conjunctions require attention to parallel structures most often.

Consider the example sentence in the graphic above. The correlative conjunction pair used here is both/and. To assure parallelism, the writer should look at the structure of each part connected by the correlative conjunction pair. In this case, machine design is connected with how to manufacture.

This structure is not parallel because machine design is a noun phrase and how to manufacture is an adverbial phrase. Although both phrases function as nouns, they are really different types of phrases and as such do not comprise a true parallel structure when connected with conjunctions. True parallel structures contain items identical in both appearance and function.

To revise, the writer has two options. The first option changes the noun phrase to an adverbial phrase. This procedure yields

All senior mechanical engineering students will learn both how to design machines and how to manufacture.

The second option changes the adverbial phrase to a noun phrase, which produces

All senior mechanical engineering students will learn both machine design and manufacturing.

Both options produce grammatically correct sentences, although I personally prefer the second option inasmuch as this sentence communicates the same basic idea with fewer words.

Note that in both options the structure of each phrase connected with the conjunctions is identical in both appearance and function.

By respecting parallel structure when using conjunctions, writers use consistency to bring clarity and power to their writing. That makes writing more effective. And that in turn increases the professional image the reader associates both with the writer and the brands associated with the writer.

So maintain parallelism when using conjunctions. Better writing always makes a better presentation.

0 Comments

Tip #31: Simply don't split infinitive verbs

10/23/2014

0 Comments

One of the most obvious signs that a technical writer has failed to distinguish between spoken English and written English is a split infinitive verb. I never tire of sounding like a broken record on this point because it accounts for much of the less effective writing I see, especially in technical and other such professional circles.

A split infinitive verb (or simply split infinitive) is a verb in the infinitive form (which in English is two words) with another word (usually an adverb) placed in the middle. The infinitive form is the most basic form of the verb, the one without any tense. You can think of the infinitive form as the root form or foundation form since all verb forms outside the infinitive are merely transformations of the infinitive form.

Most languages have infinitive verb forms that comprise only one word. However, in English the infinitive form is two words. Take, for example, the Spanish word esperar, which means to wait. Both esperar and to wait have the same meaning and are infinitive verb forms. But esperar is just one word, while to wait are two words. Thus, the problem of split infinitives is really unique to English, since splitting a single word is simply not done.

What exactly is the problem with a split infinitive? It’s structural and contextual. The infinitive form in English is two words, which means that both words act together as a single unit or package. Separating those two words from each other creates two separate units or packages, which has no functional legitimacy in the structure of the sentence. Both words are needed in order for the infinitive form to perform its function within the sentence structure.

When writers divide a single functional unit, they create a context that conveys disorder and looseness. While appropriate in many types of informal writing, technical and other such professional writing requires more formality associated with more orderly, firm sentence structures. Introducing an inappropriate context to writing always makes for less effective writing.

Yet the appeal to use split infinitives remains strong because writers sometimes want to place special emphasis on a particular verb, especially when that special emphasis is considered part of the meaning intended to be communicated. That’s a large part why split infinitives abound in spoken English, a communication form with rather lax guidelines regarding structure. Written English, on the other hand, is a different animal.

Consider the example sentence in the graphic above. The phrase to simply note is a split infinitive and should be revised. The easiest solution is to swap the order of the first two words as follows:

The procedure is simply to note which lights turn red at what times.

The writer might resist that revision, considering simply note to convey a different meaning than simply to note. Nonetheless, split infinitives have no place in effective technical and other such professional writing.

When encountering split infinitives, I recommend experimenting with different placements of the adverb which splits the infinitive. I would then select whichever option appeals most. For our example sentence, this procedure would yield

The procedure is to note simply which lights turn red at what times.

The procedure is simply to note which lights turn red at what times.

The procedure simply is to note which lights turn red at what times.

Each of these options is grammatically correct, and so the final selection is simply a matter of what the writer personally prefers. My preference is the second option, as presented in the original revision suggestion above.

Whichever option appeals most to you, simply don’t split infinitive verbs. This one guideline alone can make marked improvements in your technical and other such professional writing. And better writing better represents both you as a writer and the brands connected with you.

0 Comments

Tip #30: Do so, not it

10/9/2014

0 Comments

Failing to distinguish between spoken English and written English leads to less effective writing. I’ve detailed some of these instances this year and have lots more in store for future posts. Today we’ll look at one specific instance that may seem small. But it’s always the little things that trip people the most.

Consider the example sentence in the graphic above. Many writers would not see any issue with it. And yet the phrase do it is not correct here. It may be appropriate in spoken English, but as we’ll repeat time and time again, spoken English and written English are two different animals.

The appropriate expression here is do so. Thus, the writer should rewrite the sentence as follows:

Although bioengineers have the technology to perform brain transplants, no clear evidence exists that they can do it.

I’m not exactly sure for the reasoning behind this. But I think it may stem from structural considerations.

It is a pronoun. Often times the phrase do it refers to an action embodied by a verb phrase (as is the case with our example sentence). Pronouns do not modify verbs. Adverbs do. Enter so stage right. So (as used here) is an adverb, and as such so can properly modify a verb or verb phrase.

While it may seem a little thing, little things do matter. Every step you take towards becoming a better writer is a step towards better writing. And better writing better represents both you as a writer and the brands connected with you.

0 Comments

Tip #29: The fact is you don't need "the fact is"

10/2/2014

0 Comments

Good writing is often concise writing. Adding unnecessary words to your writing doesn’t promote effective communication. It’s just fluff that serves no better purpose than filler material.

I’ve been helping others become better writers since 1998. My years of experience since that time convinces me that the failure to distinguish between spoken English and written English is the primary influence upon writers to include unnecessary words in their writing.

One of the most common examples, especially among technical communicators, is the use of the fact is. It’s an expression that is very common in spoken English. And yet in written English, the fact is doesn’t add anything or provide any essential function in conveying meaning between writer and reader. In almost all instances, writers can remove the fact is from their sentences.

Take for instance the example sentence in the graphic above. If we remove the fact is, we get this:

Improper heat treatment can impart undesired properties in the metal.

Compare that sentence with the one in the graphic above. Notice any significant differences in meaning? I didn’t either. The revised sentence is more concise while conveying the same meaning. As such, it’s a better written sentence.

In some cases, the fact is may appear to provide a buffer or transition between ideas in adjacent sentences. This is in fact why the fact is appears in spoken English. It gives our brains time to catch up with the mouth of whoever is speaking.

But that isn’t needed in written English, since each reader will process written words at a slower rate than spoken ones. In certain informal contexts, the fact is may actually serve an added purpose. But in professional contexts such as technical writing, the fact is serves no purpose other than filler material. In those circles, you don’t need the fact is.

All else being equal, better writing conveys the same essential message with fewer words. Better writing makes you a better writer. And better writers convey a better reputation for the brands they represent.

0 Comments

Tip #32: Maintain parallelism with conjunctions

Tip #31: Simply don't split infinitive verbs

Tip #30: Do so, not it

Tip #29: The fact is you don't need "the fact is"

Author

Archives

Categories

We Would Love to Help You Become a Better Writer!

Tech Writing

Nonfiction

Family History

Consulting