What is Digg?Sponsored by Sony Pictures
Do you believe the 2012 Mayan Prophecy? view!
whowillsurvive2012.com - The Mayan Calendar predicts the end of time: 2012. See the trailer for 2012, opening November 13.
194 Comments
- Veritas77, on 10/13/2007, -5/+35So in other words, pretend you're talking to a 5th grader.
- waterlog777, on 10/10/2007, -1/+25I couldn't fail to disagree any less
- SublimeRuin, on 10/10/2007, -3/+26So, remember kids, not everyone has an average IQ. So please, dumb it down a bit!
To be serious though - concise writing is always best. - catpawblog, on 10/10/2007, -4/+26There is only problem with this article. Those that use all the unnecessary words will never read it. Too bad.
- XPav, on 10/10/2007, -4/+16Too bad the article can't get "affected" or "effected" right.
- DiggzDE, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12What is it called when you start arguing with yourself in your own comment?
- skunkman62, on 10/10/2007, -1/+12i make a good impression by saying "let me axe you dis"
- EvilDr.X, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11And eschew obfuscation.
- skunkman62, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10"Those that use all the unnecessary words will never read it."
how about:
those using unnecessary words will never read it. - wierdaaron, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9In point-of-fact, this article maintains an aesthetic, dynamic user-oriented synergy to create a goal-positive improvement of core strategic priorities.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9Time = Money
Nobody wants to read 5 paragraphs to get 2 sentences worth of information. You're a fool if you think otherwise. - webcure, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9The point isn't to dumb down. It is to steer away from all of those important sounding words and phrases that not everyone will understand. Do you want readers to understand or not?
- fdags629, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Yes, I read the article. In fact, I read it again after seeing your comment and I stand by my statement. I should not have to assume that everyone who reads my emails is an idiot who doesn't know the meaning of the words "ascertain" or "accelerate". Using more precise words increases clarity reduces the need for the follow up emails that will clog my inbox. Some concepts cannot be reduced to one sentence of single-syllable words.
- danubecities, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8All of the examples the writer gives are in passive voice. Even the "improvements" are in passive voice. For example, the writer's improved sentence, "Last year the company was able to speed up operations," should be written, "We sped up company operations last year." Active voice is more direct.
- duster805, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Completely disagree. Clear and concise expression is one of the most challenging skills for many people I have worked with. Someone who can master this and be a great communicator is of much higher value than someone using unnecessarily complicated and confusing jargon. Odds are if you can't explain something clearly yourself, you don't understand either. Furthermore, there seems to be a pattern as people escalate through corporate hierarchy to add in as many valueless buzz words as possible to sound like they are worth what they are getting paid (although they probably aren't).
- mozzer, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Not dumb it down, but excise unintelligible flourish.
- execute85, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Rule #154 of when you should look for a new job: If the reader of your emails can't ascertain what "ascertain" means.
- ninsei, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7FTA:
"Long: During the preceding year, the company was able to accelerate productive operations. The action was predicted on the assumption that the company was operating at a financial deficit.
Short: Last year the company was able to speed up operations. The action was based on the belief that the company was losing money."
Use the short form to ensure that you remain a "layperson with limited technical knowledge of the subject" for the remainder of your career.
Some good points, however you will never be respected or acknowledged by your superiors for your communication abilities if you compose sentences using grade 5 English. If you are wordy for the sake of it people will assume you are intellectually masturbating but if you compose clear concise sentences with effective language you will be recognized for it. - fdags629, on 10/10/2007, -21/+27Stupid article. Clear, effective writing requires more words, not less. We should not be pandering to the lowest common denominator. If somebody doesn't know what a word means, then they should look it up. Honestly, this article reminded me of the "newspeak" from 1984. Buried it.
- Sogui, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7You didn't read the article, you should have tried:
I write long boring emails. Coworkers don't read my emails. I get pissed because coworkers don't read my emails. I am a lonely, arrogant *****. - isuisorisuaint, on 10/10/2007, -5/+11lemme axe ya dis...
- wingo123, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Seriously. It's sort of saddening to think it's that common in a business environment for words like 'ascertain' and 'peruse' to be considered unfamiliar. Is that really the case? I don't consider using these (fairly common) words to be 'unintelligible flourish', either...
- kharnal, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5The complexity of your writing should be in the ideas expressed, not in the words used to express those ideas.
- EvilDr.X, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6No, no, no... KISS = Knights In Satan's Service.
- Meatetarian, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Monosyllabic words, my friend. >:-P
- preisler, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Point lacking from this article: "If you actually know what a word means and it's the best word for what you're trying to say - use it. But stop using words like paradigm if you haven't got a ***** clue what it means." It pisses me off when people run around saying stuff like "we need a new paradigm" or "contextualize" just because they heard it at some crappy seminar.
- Hosalabad, on 10/10/2007, -0/+47. Don't use the word 'literally'. We're still reading your document, we believe you.
- demiurgency, on 10/21/2007, -0/+4You clearly have no idea what good writing looks like.
Brevity is the soul of wit.
Buried. - zachshmack, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Why are so many people missing the point of the article? It isn't "dumbing down" to strip away useless words and phrases from your writing. I'm sorry if it makes you uncomfortable to write short sentences and to use short words, but you guys are going to get reamed if you ever take a writing course and try to use any of the language this article warns against.
- Jones82, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4I observe what you did there just now
- zachshmack, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4I blame schools. English teachers assign bland topics and enforce minimum page-length requirements. This fosters the idea that more is better.
I'd like to see that reversed. Make English teachers assign rich topics with maximum page-length requirements.
Anyone can pick up a thesaurus and BS their way through a ten page paper using ornate language. Making your point concisely is a skill. - mrdeathgod, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4How about 'leverage'? Can we get rid of that one yet?
- sholt, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6Why do I feel more comfortable reading the most of the "incorrect" examples, and the corresponding "correct" examples make me feel like I'm talking to a slow 5 year old?
Simpler strategy:
1) Know your audience.
2) Don't be dumb.
Using active voice and striking fluff/unnecessary words are good tips though. - Humptydank, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4I would add -- and it seems odd to me that I should even have to -- profanities. I hate to even get philosophically near the "blame the Internet" monkeys, but I have a feeling that people are treating anything but the most formal business communication with strangers as an IM or a blog. More and more I see things like general corporate e-mails saying "the concerns about server capacity could be put off for months if various departments would take some time to clear off the crap they don't need..." etc.
That offends some people for the language, others for the tone, it's not even particularly clear, and none of those things represent you well to other people.
Wow, I sound like my Dad, but I think it's true. - UoMDeacon, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Am I the only one who finds it funny that monosyllabic is such a long word?
I agree with fdags629; this article seems to pander more to the lowest denominator. Other words exist in the English language for a reason; they are more descriptive, otherwise they wouldn't exist. This article reminds of the Mike Judge movie "Idiocracy". - With, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4In college, I often used the "bad" approach from this article to turn a four page paper into five.
- Jones82, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4I think you pruned that first sentence a little too much
- zachshmack, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Yeah it did...
- CheeseburgerBro, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Nice. The author mistakes the word "predicted" for the word "predicated."
Obviously we're dealing with someone who, you know, *really groks words.* - c1ph3ril, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3"Go ahead and set up a call" is us more of an approval, and "set up a call" is more of an order.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3People do not like to waste time. [insert 5 unnecessary sentences explaining why that is, although it's obvious and doesn't need any explaination]
- kaelyiesta, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Middle ground in this debate: Only use more words when more detail and specificity is needed. The issue should be unnecessary words. Dumbing down language is just as bad as redundant meandering. Being clear and concise should not be mutually exclusive from being articulate.
- runic, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Win.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Many of their example words are very common and I see no problem with using them. The only reason one should use a potentially unfamiliar word is when no simpler word means the same thing. A decent example is "extraneous," since it conveys a very precise message and has a hint (extra) at its meaning. In good context, it's easy to get away with a good number of non-trivial words. A phrase like "Don't you think that's a little esoteric?" is obviously a bad idea, since very few people know the meaning and it's impossible to derive it from the rest of the sentence.
- souluos, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5I spent a few minutes reading this article and stopped. I don't feel I could disagree any further with the premise of this article. Speaking well means having a strong vocabulary. Do not dilute (sorry "water down" for the vocabulary challenged) your vocabulary because other people are less motivated to learn and grow.
The only other point I would add to this, is that there are situations, especially technically, where you have to break down technical concepts so that lay people understand them. However, that does not mean you need to use grade school vocabulary to convey ( "get across" ) information to others.
Don't lower your standards because others are unmotivated to raise theirs. Always strive for excellence. - understudy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I thought the same.
I also thought his 'simplified' version was horrible. A belief and an assumption are not the same. To say 'speed up' instead of accelerate is juvenile. And losing money can mean many things, whereas financial deficit is clearer.
Why speak to the lowest common denominator?
_ - KatherineC, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6Good list. A couple more useless words... In my humble opinion. No it's not it's your opinion, just say it.
- Kelmon, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Disagree - business communication isn't an essay writing competition or a letter to the editor at The Times. Everyone complains that they don't have enough at work and making communication faster, both to compose and read, would benefit all. Of course, don't shorten the communications so that they no longer convey meaning but don't make them longer than they need to be just so you can show your command of language.
Incidentally, cutting down the length of communications doesn't mean substituting words for abbreviations - they're my #1 pet hate at work. Add those and half the time you might as well be speaking a foreign language. - C0ldsnap, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Great piece. The article isn't about 'dumbing down' communication, it is about expressing your concepts in the most accessible way and making them more understandable.
Having a strong vocabulary is about using the best terms for a given situation, not avoiding certain words just because you think they're 'fifth grade'. - ubuntumatthew, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3These statements are true for any style of writing, not just business writing.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 194 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is