Simplifying ownership

You can show ownership in two ways, with a possessive or a prepositional phrase. Prepositional phrases always make writing less concise. Using possessives, such as the apostrophe-S, will make writing more concise.

Example 1.a, prepositional phrase: The purpose of the CEO is to create an environment for efficiency. (12 words)
Example 1.b, possessive: The CEO’s purpose is to create an environment for efficiency. (10 words)

In example 1, revising the prepositional phrase reduces the sentence’s word count by 2 words. This might not seem significant, but it is. First, if you do this multiple times in a document, the overall effect is more concise writing. You will have removed many unnecessary words. Second, the writing will be stronger overall because you will have removed the weak prepositional phrases.

I only endorse prepositional phrases for ownership when the “owner” is a phrase of 3 or more words. With the possessive, the sentence may be confusing or awkward because the sentence has multiple descriptive words before naming the thing being described. Each case needs to be considered carefully. In example 2, the sentence with the prepositional phrase may be better than sentence with the possessive.

Example 2.a, prepositional phrase: The design of the ergonomic latex foam chair compensates for spine curvature.
Example 2.b, possessive: The ergonomic latex foam chair’s design compensates for spine curvature.

However, when you have multiple owners, possessives are generally better. Example 3 demonstrates this concept with mutual owners, and example 4 demonstrates this concept with separate owners.

Example 3.a, prepositional phrase: The agreement between the owner and the buyer resolved the confusion. (11 words)
Example 3.b, possessive: The owner and buyer’s agreement resolved the confusion. (8 words)

Example 4.a, prepositional phrase: The offices of the president and vice-president display the constitution. (11 words)
Example 4.b, possessive: The president’s and vice-president’s offices display the constitution. (9 words) 

Simplifying adverbial phrases

Adverbial phrases describe how an action is performed. They answer the question “How” in regards to the verb (e.g., Ran how? Worked how?). You may be able to replace the phrase with one or two words without changing the meaning. Although I generally don’t recommend using adverbs, a single adverb is far superior to an adverbial phrase, as seen in example 5.

Example 5: Wrote in a manner that used few words to convey the message = Wrote succinctly

In fact, this is one of the few cases in which I recommend using adverbs. Use this strategy only when you can’t find a verb that explicitly describes the action and doesn’t require a modifying adverb or adverbial phrase. If you can find an accurate verb that doesn’t require modifiers, use it, as seen in Example 6.

Example 6: Drove at a high rate of speed = Drove fast = Sped

Other examples of this technique:

• walked a few steps at a time = walked hesitantly
• administered the survey as the initial step of the process = first administered the survey
• removed the gray matter in a careful manner = removed the gray matter carefully

 Simplifying adjectival phrases

Adjectival phrases describe what something is. Following the concept that using fewer words is better, concise writers reduce adjectival phrases to single words when possible. This is particularly important when a sentence has 2 or more phrases in a series. Consider example 7.a.

Example 7.a: The finances of a hospital that provides free healthcare services to needy families and other financially challenged persons without insurance to cover the cost for services will always fluctuate. (29 words)

This sentence is a mess. The basic sentence is “The finances will fluctuate.” Everything else is description and is fair game for revision. The entire phrase “that provides free healthcare . . . cover the cost for services” describes “hospital.” A name for such a hospital is “charity hospital.” Now we have this:

Example 7.b: The finances of a charity hospital will always fluctuate. (9 words)

We might try “A charity hospital’s finances will always fluctuate,” but that sounds awkward to my ear. This revision may be more drastic than necessary, but the sentence has other opportunities for cutting down the description. “Free healthcare services” can become “free services” because “healthcare” is implied—it’s a hospital. A single word for “financially challenged” is “poor,” and a single word for “without the insurance to cover the cost for services” is “under-insured.”

Identify the adjectival phrases in a sentence and determine whether you can eliminate them or, at least, reduce them to single words. 

Reducing multi-layer descriptions

You described something in your sentence, but some part of that description may be unclear. So you described something in your first description. Now, you have a description of the description. This is a problem for conciseness because the second description doesn’t add value to main message. After the initial description, the new descriptions are off topic, distracting the reader from the point you wish to make. We see this problem in example 8.a.

Example 8.a, multi-layer description: The data collected by researchers from the university best known for education programs, according to Educ. Weekly, show that teachers prevent abuse.

Example 8.a has 4 layers of description, which is 3 layers too many.

• Initial word: “data”
• Layer 1: “collected by researchers” describes “data”
• Layer 2: “from the university describes researchers”
• Layer 3: “best known for education programs” describes “university”
• Layer 4: “according to Educ. Weekly” describes “known”

The strategy for reducing layers of description has 2 steps.

1. Determine whether all the descriptions are relevant. For example, in example 8.a, the university’s reputation may not be related to the data findings. Certainly, the journal name is not relevant here.

2. Move the description in layers 2+ to another sentence. If we decide that the reader needs to know about the university’s programs, we can move that information to another sentence. It is off-topic here.

These 2 steps can lead to multiple revisions, including the following.

Example 8.b, single-layer description: Researchers from Blahblah University collected data on child abuse and found that teachers prevent abuse. According to Educ. Weekly, the university is best known for its education programs.

Overall, the point is this: Find the simplest way to provide descriptions without adding any unnecessary words. With concise writing, you provide the information the reader needs, help the reader understand your message, and keep the reader interested.

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.]