Nominalizations are the noun forms of action verbs, as seen Table 1.

Table 1: Sample action verbs and corresponding nouns (nominalizations)

Why are they bad, and how do I fix them?

Nominalizations have multiple negative effects.

1. They make sentences less concise.
2. They increase the noun-to-verb ratio.
3. They make sentences difficult to understand.
4. They make reading tedious.

Nominalizations often force writers to add additional words to sentences. Changing nominalizations back to action verbs often decreases the number of words needed to communicate the idea, as seen here:

Example 1a, with nominalization: “The commencement of the ceremony will be at noon.”
Example 1b, with action verb: “The ceremony will commence at noon.”

Example 2a, with nominalization: “This example provides an illustration of the problems with nominalizations.”
Example 2b, with action verb: “This example illustrates problems with nominalizations.”

The revised versions also have lower noun-to-verb ratios. In example 1, the noun-to-verb ratio drops from 3:1 to 2:1. In example 2, the noun-to-verb ratio drops from 4:1 to 3:1. As a result, the revised sentences state their message in clear, concise, and interesting language.

Nominalizations characterize legalese, businessese, academese, and all other -ese types of writing. They characterize writing that is difficult to understand and tedious to read. As the number of nominalizations increases, the reader’s difficulty understanding also increases. Using action verbs solves these problems.

In the next two examples, the nominalizations are underlined. Each sample is followed by the number of words and the noun-to-verb ratio.

Table 2: Revising sentences with nominalizations and lowering the noun-to-verb ratio

Upon reading the original versions of the two sentences above, the reader may rightly ask, “What is the writer trying to say?” The sentences do not communicate well because they have too many nominalizations. They have other problems, too. Both sentences use state-of-being verbs as the main verbs and not the meaningful action, and neither sentence uses the meaningful subject. They also require many words to communicate the message.

The revised versions are far superior. First, and most importantly, they are easy to understand. Second, they answer “Who did what to whom?” Third, they are concise, with seven and six fewer words, respectively. Fourth, they use action verbs as the main verbs. Overall, the revised versions demonstrate direct writing.

(Notice also that when I revised the second example, I was able to remove requirement of the experimentation protocol because it became self-explanatory.)

Are nominalizations ever ok?

Nominalizations are acceptable in two situations:

1. Providing common names, and
2. Ending main ideas.

First, nominalizations help communicate common titles and things.

Nominalizations like these do not make sentences difficult to understand, and they allow the writer to state ideas succinctly. For example, consultant is a noun form of the verb consult. However, consultant describes a common type of person or job, as in “The consultant advised us to sell our stocks.” If you were to revise this sentence to avoid consultant, you would need many more words to express your idea.

As another example, illustration is a noun form of illustrate, but when used to describe a drawing or a picture, it is acceptable, as in “The illustration shows how the parts are assembled.” If you were to replace illustration with image, for example, you would be replacing one noun for another, so the revision is no better than the original.

Second, nominalizations can provide a feeling of closure to a sentence.

One of the reasons nominalizations make reading tedious is they are “heavy” words. They force the reader to pause and consider the meaning, which quickly becomes mentally fatiguing. However, a nominalization at the end of the sentence gives the reader the sense that the idea is now complete. In very non-technical terms, they end a sentence with a “thud.” In this way, they help a sentence have more impact on the reader. This can be useful at the end of a paragraph or at the end of an important point or main idea. In the two examples that follow, the second example provides greater impact.

Example 3a, weak: “Fertilizer helps plants grow faster.”
Example 3b, strong: “Fertilizer accelerates growth.”

Thus, a nominalization may be acceptable if it

1. Makes the sentence more concise, or
2. Accents your main idea.

In all other cases, and to the extent possible, avoid nominalizations. Your writing will be more concise, more understandable, and more direct.

1. Formality
2. Language complexity
3. Objectivity, and
4. Information depth.

The purpose you are trying to accomplish, the readers’ needs, your relationship with the reader, and the type of document affect the style in which you write. Style is a strategy for effective writing, not a goal.

Levels of Language Complexity 

Some writers use simple, straightforward sentences with few modifying phrases and clauses. Others use complex sentences with many modifiers, interjected descriptions, and multiple clauses and phrases.

Simple sentence example: “Lisa bought a red car.”

This simple sentence contains a simple subject (“Lisa”) and a simple predicate with an object (“bought a red car”). This sentence has two modifying words (“a,” “red”) but no other phrases or clauses.

Moderately complex sentence example: “When the day ended, Lisa, a sales clerk at the downtown market, bought a red car.”

This moderately complex sentence has an introductory descriptive clause (“when the day ended”), a simple subject (“Lisa”), an appositive for the subject (“a sales clerk at the downtown market”), and a simple predicate with an object (“bought a red car”).

Very complex sentence example: “When the day ended, which couldn’t have happened soon enough, given the type of day she had had, Lisa, a sales clerk at the downtown market, a grimy, dark nook in an old building, bought what she mistakenly thought was a new, or, at the worst, slightly used, red car.”

This complex sentence has an introductory descriptive clause (“when the day ended”), a description of the introductory clause (“which couldn’t have happened soon enough”), a description of the description of the introductory clause (“given the type of day she had had”), a subject (“Lisa”), an appositive for the subject (“a sales clerk at the downtown market”), a description of the appositive for the subject (“a grimy, dark nook”), a description of the description of the appositive for the subject (“in an old building”). And then we finally get to the predicate, which is similarly complicated.

Key Features of Language Complexity

As these three examples show, the 2 key features of language complexity are

1. the number of descriptive phases and clauses and
2. the levels of description (such as description of description).

A careful writer considers sentence complexity in light of the readers’ needs. Simple sentences can be read quickly and understood easily. As sentences become more complex, they contain more information and “flavor,” but they require more work from the readers and increase the potential for misunderstanding.

Advice for Writers

As with all style issues, the level of language complexity needs to fit the readers’ needs. Simple sentences are the most easy to understand. They present minimal information in a straightforward manner, with no interruptions in the main thought being communicated. On the other hand, using too many simple sentences, or a string of simple sentences, makes the writing appear amateurish.

For technical manuals, lists of instructions, user guides, and other documents that present single action steps, stick with simple sentences. For most other types of documents, the writer can present more complex information and create better reader interest and engagement by using a mix of simple and moderately complex sentences.

If your goal is reader understanding and interest, avoid very complex sentences. Overall, you will communicate best by

• using a mix of simple and moderately complex sentences,
• limiting the number of descriptive phrases,
• presenting only one descriptive phrase at a time, and
• avoiding descriptions of descriptions.

When you are active, you do something. When you are passive, things happen to you. This is the same concept as the active and passive voice in sentences.

In the active voice, the subject performs the main action. In the passive voice, the main action is done to the subject.

Example D.1a, active voice: “The service team collected the parts.” (subject: service team; main verb: collected)
Example D.1b, passive voice: “The parts were collected by the service team.” (subject: parts; main verb: collected)

To determine whether your sentence is active or passive, ask, “Is the subject doing the verb?” If the answer is Yes, then the sentence is active. If the answer is No, the sentence is passive. In example D.1a, the subject did the action, so the sentence is active. In example D.1b, the action was done to the subject, so the sentence is passive.

If we describe this concept as a formula, we get this:

S –> V = active (the subject does the verb)
V –> S = passive (the verb is done to the subject)

Grammatically, the active voice looks like this:

Subject – Verb – Object (i.e., Who did what to whom?).

On the other hand, the passive voice uses the object as the grammatical subject of the verb, resulting in

Subject/Object – Verb (i.e., To whom was it done?).

By using the object as the grammatical subject, a passive voice sentence makes the information convoluted and complex, and the reader will be less likely to respond to it. Additionally, the meaningful subject (i.e., who or what does the main action) will never be the grammatical subject in the passive voice. 

Definitions:
Main action: The main action described by the sentence, what the sentence is about.
Meaningful subject: The person or thing doing the main action.
Grammatical subject: The word in the subject position in the sentence.

In nearly every sentence, the active voice results in more direct writing. However, the passive voice has a purpose, too. Next, we’ll look at the reasons for each voice.

Reasons for active voice

The main reason for using the active voice is that it directly answers the readers’ question: Who did what to whom? It provides that information and in that order. As a result, the reader can more easily understand and remember the idea you wish to communicate.

Other reasons include the following:

1. Sentences in the active voice are more engaging. Something is performing an action.
2. The active voice is more likely to use the meaningful subject as the grammatical subject and the meaningful action as the main verb.
3. Active voice sentences are generally more concise.
4. The active voice emphasizes active verbs.

In brief, active voice follows the principles of direct writing.

Reasons for passive voice

The passive voice may be appropriate for two reasons: (1) to de-emphasize the person or thing doing the action, and (2) to shorten the grammatical subject.

The main reason for using the passive voice is to hide or de-emphasize the meaningful subject, the person or thing that did the meaningful action. Instead, the passive voice emphasizes the person or thing on which the action was performed, as seen in D.2a and D.2b.

Example D.2a, passive, emphasizes the material: “The material was first developed in the laboratory by researchers from Oslo.”
Example D.2.b, active, emphasizes the researchers: “Researchers from Oslo first developed the material in a laboratory.”

In both D.2a and D.2b, the meaningful action is developed, making researchers the meaningful subject. Whereas the active voice sentence in D.2a uses the meaningful subject as the grammatical subject, the passive voice sentence in D.2b does not. If the writer wishes to focus on the material, and if the researchers are not important (or not at this point in the document), the writer might prefer the passive voice.

Scientific writing, regardless of the field, does not require the passive voice. This also applies to dissertation writing. The active voice is perfectly appropriate for describing the research methodology. The purpose of the research methodology is to describe what the researchers did to collect and analyze the data. Thus, the researchers are correct to use the active voice when describing their actions. Instead of writing

“The data were collected from six species of house sparrows,”

The researcher can write

“We collected data from six species of house sparrows.”

In many cases, the writer can revise the sentence to use the active voice without mentioning the researchers, as seen here:

“Six species of house sparrows provided the initial data for analysis.”

The second reason for using the passive voice is to simplify and shorten the subject of the sentence so that the main verb is closer to the beginning of the sentence and easier to find.

Example D.3a, active voice sentence: “The decision whether to solicit for and hire a new personnel manager or to outsource those functions to an external agency consumed valuable work time.” (subject: 21 words)
Example D.3b, passive voice sentence: “Valuable work time was consumed by the decision whether to solicit for and hire a new personnel manager or to outsource those functions to an external agency.” (subject: 3 words)

Example D.3a uses the meaningful subject (The decision whether to . . .) as the grammatical subject. It focuses the readers’ attention on the main idea of the sentence. For these reasons, Example D.3a is more direct than Example D.3b. However, the subject contains 21 words, greatly delaying the reader from reaching the main verb. On the other hand, Example D.3b uses the object (Valuable work time) as the grammatical subject, forcing the meaningful subject to the end of the sentence. However, the grammatical subject contains only 3 words, so the reader can reach the main verb more quickly.

In cases similar to Examples D.3a, the writer may choose to use the passive voice to reduce the length of the grammatical subject.

In a limited number of cases, the passive voice is useful, but examine every passive voice sentence carefully to make sure it is the better choice. Other than in these two cases, the active voice will produce better writing. When we editing clients’ documents at Precise Edit, we rarely need to use the passive voice.

(Adapted from the forthcoming Bowman’s Concise Guide to Technical Writing, available mid-February 2012 at http://HostileEditing.com.)

A sentence has two types of main verbs: The grammatical main verb and the meaningful action.

Grammatical Main Verb: The grammatical main verb is the word in the position of the main verb. Because it has the grammatical role of main verb, it is called the grammatical main verb. It begins the predicate of the sentence and links with the grammatical subject. When you ask the question “What are the subject and main verb?” you identify the grammatical main verb, as seen in the following example.

Example: “Fourteen members of Congress changed party affiliation during the campaign.”
What is the subject? Fourteen members of Congress
What is the verb linked to the subject? changed
What is the grammatical main verb? changed

Meaningful Action: The concept of the meaningful action is more complex. To find the meaningful action, the writer asks, “What is the main action being described in the sentence?” The answer will be the meaningful action, as seen in the next example.

Example: “Veterinarians have discovered a new form of feline leukemia.”
Main action described by the sentence: discovering
Meaningful action: discovering

Direct writing uses the meaningful action as the grammatical main verb. After answering, “What are the subject and main verb?” the writer needs to ask, “Is the main verb also the main action being described?” If the answer is Yes, then the main verb and meaningful action are the same. If the answer is No, then the sentence needs to be revised.

Grammatical Main Verb vs. Meaningful Action: The subject and the main verb communicate the primary message of the sentence. If you use the wrong verb, you divert the reader’s attention from the message you intend. On the other hand, if you use the meaningful action as the main verb, you accurately communicate your message and direct the reader’s attention to the point you wish to make.

The following example demonstrates how the grammatical main verb and meaningful action may be different.

Example: “Free energy sources are what politicians describe as science fiction.”
Grammatical main verb: are (following the grammatical subject free energy sources)
Main action described by the sentence: describing
Meaningful action: describing

Here, the main verb (are) differs from the meaningful action (describing). To revise this sentence, we use the meaningful action as the grammatical main verb, leading to the following revision:

“Politicians describe free energy sources as science fiction.”

When writers use the meaningful action as the grammatical main verb, they will also use the meaningful subject as the grammatical subject. The revised sentence describes politicians and their actions, and it uses politicians as the grammatical subject.

As discussed previously in “Choosing the Correct Meaningful Subject,” a writer can choose different subjects to change the focus of the sentence. If we want this sentence to be about free energy sources, we can instead write

“Free energy sources are science fiction, politicians claim”

or

“Free energy sources, politicians say, are science fiction.”

These two options, with free energy sources as the subject, use are as the main verb. This approach is risky because are is a state-of-being verb, not an action verb, which will be discussed later.  For now, examine your sentences and identify the main actions they describe. Then make sure to use those actions as the main verb. 

[This writing instruction is from the chapter "Direct Writing" in the forthcoming writing guide Bowman's Concise Guide to Technical Writing. The guide will be available mid-February 2011 at http://HostileEditing.com. Visit the main company website (http://PreciseEdit.com) for more news and information about this guide.]

Grammatical and Meaningful Subjects: A sentence has two types of subjects: the grammatical subject and the meaningful subject.

The grammatical subject is the word or phrase in the subject’s position, typically before the main verb. It serves the grammatical role of subject and determines what the main verb will be.

Example 1:

“Veterinarians have discovered a new form of feline leukemia.”
Who (subject) = veterinarians
Did what (main verb) = have discovered
To whom/what (object) = a new form of feline leukemia

Example 2:

“Fourteen members of Congress changed party affiliation during the campaign.”
Who (subject) = fourteen members of Congress
Did what (main verb) = changed
To whom/what (object) = party affiliation

In the examples above, the grammatical subjects are veterinarians and fourteen members of Congress. These are the words before the main verb (i.e., have discovered, changed), and they determine what the main verb will be. They serve the grammatical function of the subject, so they are called the grammatical subject. Every complete sentence has at least one grammatical subject.

When you ask the question, “What are the subject and the main verb,” you identify the grammatical subject.

The concept of a meaningful subject is more complex. The meaningful subject is what the sentence is supposed to be about. To find the meaningful subject, the writer must first ask what action the sentence is describing. Once we understand the main action, we ask who or what is doing that action. We can use a previous example to understand this concept better.

“Veterinarians have discovered a new form of feline leukemia.”
Main action: discovering a new form of feline leukemia
Who or what is doing the main action: veterinarians
Meaningful subject: veterinarians

In this example, the sentence is about veterinarians, making veterinarians the meaningful subject.

In direct writing, the grammatical subject and the meaningful subject are always the same word. After asking “What are the subject and main action of the sentence?” the writer needs to ask “Is the sentence about the subject?” If the answer is yes, then the grammatical subject and the meaningful subject are the same. However, if the answer is no, then the sentence needs to be revised, as seen in the following example.

“There is concern about the new policy among safety officers.”
Grammatical subject: there (the subject of the main verb is)
Main action: being concerned
Who or what is being concerned: safety officers
Meaningful subject: safety officers

In this poorly written sentence, the meaningful subject (safety officers) is not the same as the grammatical subject (there). To revise this sentence, we can use the meaningful subject as the grammatical subject, leading to the following revision:

“Safety officers are concerned about the new policy.”

In the revised sentence, which exemplifies direct writing, the grammatical and meaningful subjects are the same words. On a side note, in every sentence that uses there as the grammatical subject, the grammatical and meaningful subjects will be different, and the sentence will need to be revised.

Unlike the prior example, some sentences do not indicate who or what is the meaningful subject. The writer will need to consider the context of the sentence to determine the meaningful subject, as in the second sentence below.

“Financial experts spent three weeks examining the company budget. After careful analysis, the conclusion was that the company has sufficient funds for the project.”
Grammatical subject: conclusion
Main action: concluding, reaching a conclusion
Who or what did the concluding: This sentence does not indicate who did the action, but the previous sentence suggests that it was the finance experts.
Meaningful subject: finance experts

In this poorly written sentence, the meaningful subject (finance experts) is not the same as the grammatical subject (conclusion). To revise this sentence, we can use the meaningful subject as the grammatical subject, leading to the following revision:

“After careful analysis, finance experts concluded that the company has sufficient funds for the project.”

Sometimes, when revising sentences to use the meaningful subject as the grammatical subject, we have choices about what to make the meaningful subject, and this brings us to the second issues about subjects.

Choosing the Right Meaningful Subject: The readers will focus on whatever word or words you put in the subject position. This means you can change the readers’ attention and the emphasis in the sentence by choosing different meaningful subjects.

The previous example shows how the focus changes depending on the subject.

Original sentence: “After careful analysis, the conclusion was that the company had sufficient funds for the project.

Revised, emphasis on the finance experts: “After careful analysis, finance experts concluded that the company has sufficient funds for the project.”

Revised, emphasis on the company: “Based on a careful analysis by finance experts, the company has sufficient funds for the project.”

Revised, emphasis on the funds: “Based on a careful analysis of the company’s finances, sufficient funds are available for the project.

As seen by these examples, the writer not only uses the meaningful subject as the grammatical subject but also determines what the sentence will be about, whether the finance experts, the company, or the funds, respectively.

This brings us back to the readers’ primary question: “Who did what to whom?” The word you choose as the subject answers “who.” As noted previously, the subject, main verb, and object carry the message of the sentence; the rest is description. Thus, you can change the message of the sentence by using different subjects.

In direct writing, you write what you mean clearly and economically. You can only do this if you choose the right subject, the subject that communicates the point you wish to make.

Subjects that can act: When deciding what the meaningful subject will be, you have three types of nouns from which to choose: creatures, things, and ideas.

• Creatures, which include people, are the natural choice for subjects because they can act.
  Example: The committee members convened at10:00 a.m.
• Things (i.e., inanimate objects and places) can do something, but in many cases they are acted upon.
  Example: The projector began smoking.
• Ideas (i.e., abstractions and concepts) cannot act. They exist and can be acted upon.
  Example: Disagreement with committee decisions is not welcome.

The readers’ question “Who did what to whom?” implies that the subject is able to do something. For this reason, creatures make better subjects than things, and things make better subjects than ideas.

With a subject that can perform an action, and with that action described by the sentence, the sentence will be more interesting to the reader. This gives you the opportunity to keep sharing your information. More importantly, the reader will be able to visualize the subject performing the action, increasing both reader understanding and remembrance.