Klarinet Archive - Posting 000107.txt from 2010/08

From: "Kevin Fay" <kevin.fay.home@-----.net>
Subj: [kl] Writing Lucidly
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 14:07:32 -0400


Peter Gentry posted:

<<<Lucidity is very difficult to achieve (and define). It must depend
critically on the relative knowledge of the subject in writer and reader
together with the motivation of the reader. That said so much technical and
academic writing is designed to advertise the greater knowledge of the
writer to the unwashed reader or provide material for publication in learned
journals ( ie consigned to obscurity). Seldom is there a genuine desire to
educate and inform. Twas ever thus....:)>>>

I write for a living, in a language that looks like English but really
isn't. Much of what Mr. McIntyre writes about is similar to the struggle of
lawyers writing contracts. The aim is to be clear - not to be easy to read
(although that another admirable goal), but to ensure that what is written
has one and only one meaning. Ambiguity leads to disputes, which for
contracts end up being interpreted by a jury of 12 "peers" who may or may
not be able to read.

One technique lawyers use is the defined term. Either in a specific section
of the agreement, or when first used in context, you define a specific
complex thing and then assign a capitalized word for that specific concept.
Using the example at hand, it would read something like: "the displacement
near-node in the mouthpiece adjacent to the reed (the 'Mouthpiece
Antinode')." You would describe the displacement antinode near the end of
the bell with a different term, (for example, the "Bell Antinode"). The
actual word used for the definition really doesn't matter - the term "Ham
Sandwich" would do as well - because the defined terms stands in for the
defined concept wherever used.

To be sure, there is much legal writing that is truly horrible. The urge to
be pompous is strong (particularly by the pompous). Much of what is written
in "legalese" is designed to impress the clients and convince them that
they're getting their money's worth, when in reality it's just sloppy. (A
clue - if the contract writer uses words like "hereinbefore" you're probably
spending too much.)

Good writing doesn't require pomp. For example, the Overuse of
Capitalization when Not Using Defined Terms adds nothing. NEITHER DOES
SCREAMING AT THE READER, or the use of the ten-dollar word (e.g., the
"hereinbefore" hereinbefore described) when a cheap one works better.

People can write to express, or write to impress. They're not the same.

kjf

_______________________________________________
Klarinet mailing list
Klarinet@-----.com
To do darn near anything to your subscription, go to:
http://klarinet-list.serve-music.com