= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
dlthomas comments on Rhetoric for the Good - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (289)
Beware that many things labeled "adverbs" in dictionaries (particularly older dictionaries) aren't the adverbs that we want to eliminate from clear writing. A better summation of the whole bit on adjectives and adverbs is a simple application of "Prefer Brevity": anytime you have <modifier> <target>, see if you can replace the whole thing with a single word of the same type as the target that expresses the whole idea. This will usually be shorter, clearer, and more interesting.
I agree with this, though since there are probably lots of fiction-writers here as well, I want to point out that for fiction the advice is somewhat different. In fiction, you'll want to replace adverbs with something longer, because an adverb is telling and not showing, and you need more words to show something than to to tell something.
To quote Techniques of the Selling Writer:
This isn't always a bad guideline for non-fiction writing, either. Telling requires the reader to rely on your authority; showing lets them see for themselves. Compare just saying "biologists romanticized evolution" with giving an example of insects defying biologists' expectations by turning into cannibals.
Of course, on some matters you should just state an issue with your authority and get on with it. If you're explaining confirmation bias, no point in launching to a digression about how and why the brain is composed of neurons. Skip that, or if writing online, just provide a link.
Vividness outranks brevity - at least, sometimes.