Exploring sentence structures, induction, and emphasis

Key

• “→” indicates first-level nesting (i.e., child), “→→” indicates second-level nesting (i.e., grandchild), and so on


• Each phrase is a semantic child only of the previously latest parent


• Two or more phrases are siblings if and only if at least one of them has a child phrase


• In the notation “n/state”, “n” is the level assigner and “state” is the state-marker


• In the notation “state/n”, “n” is the level to which the “state” corresponds

Analysis

“How is one difference of opinion sufficient to qualify the truth of a rift in the Anna Hazare camp—between Hegde and Hazare himself—in the eyes of the media?”

How is
1→one difference
2→→of opinion
3→sufficient
4→→to qualify
5→→the truth
6→→→of a rift
7→→→in the Anna Hazare camp
8→→→→between Hegde and Hazare himself
9→→→in the eyes of the media?

In the above example,

• 1 and 3 are siblings


• 2 is the child of 1


• 4 to 5 is a passive transition


• 6 to 7 is a passive transition


• 6→7 is the child of 4→5 is the child of 3


• 8 is the child of 7


• 7 and 9 are siblings

Thus,

1/origin → _child → sibling/1 → 2/origin → 3/child → _grandchild → sibling/3

Notes on the example

Reduction of complexity The most deeply nested child will receive the least emphasis. Consequently, more important points have to be nested earlier on. If one complex idea is to be delivered, it would be wiser to break the sentences down: that way, deeply-nested child phrases are eliminated and the subject is grasped easily. However, this breakdown increases the amount of physical space necessary to hold the text.

Siblings limit Sentence lengths are harder to analyse because different people have different attention spans, and when the payoff involved is space, passive transitions can be employed to keep from creating more children or more siblings. At the same time, it is advisable to limit the number of siblings in each sentence to two.

Fragmentation If a child phrase is being included, the norm is to fit it into the sentence between two commas or two M-dashes. This is also the reason commas are powerful because they induce a pause in the reader’s flow, as if breaking his/her speed and having him/her scrutinize the child phrase. At the same time, inserting too many such breaks makes the text read fragmented, and fragmented texts make for frustrating reading.

Transitive phrases Consider the previous sentence: “At the same time, inserting too many such breaks makes the text read fragmented, and fragmented texts make for frustrating reading.” In this case, the comma is used for a different purpose:

1/origin → 2/origin → 3/origin

Essentially, the phrase “At the same time” is used to conduct a transition from the previous sentence to the current one and so the first comma marks the end of the transition and the beginning of the body. Similarly, the insertion “, and” indicates a fusing of the current sentence—the body—and “fragmented texts make for frustrating reading.” In fact, in order to broaden the emphasis on the idea, “, and” can be removed and substituted with a period.

Exploring sentence structures, induction, and emphasis

Key

• “→” indicates first-level nesting (i.e., child), “→→” indicates second-level nesting (i.e., grandchild), and so on


• Each phrase is a semantic child only of the previously latest parent


• Two or more phrases are siblings if and only if at least one of them has a child phrase


• In the notation “n/state”, “n” is the level assigner and “state” is the state-marker


• In the notation “state/n”, “n” is the level to which the “state” corresponds

Analysis

“How is one difference of opinion sufficient to qualify the truth of a rift in the Anna Hazare camp—between Hegde and Hazare himself—in the eyes of the media?”

How is
1→one difference
2→→of opinion
3→sufficient
4→→to qualify
5→→the truth
6→→→of a rift
7→→→in the Anna Hazare camp
8→→→→between Hegde and Hazare himself
9→→→in the eyes of the media?

In the above example,

• 1 and 3 are siblings


• 2 is the child of 1


• 4 to 5 is a passive transition


• 6 to 7 is a passive transition


• 6→7 is the child of 4→5 is the child of 3


• 8 is the child of 7


• 7 and 9 are siblings

Thus,

1/origin → _child → sibling/1 → 2/origin → 3/child → _grandchild → sibling/3

Notes on the example

Reduction of complexity The most deeply nested child will receive the least emphasis. Consequently, more important points have to be nested earlier on. If one complex idea is to be delivered, it would be wiser to break the sentences down: that way, deeply-nested child phrases are eliminated and the subject is grasped easily. However, this breakdown increases the amount of physical space necessary to hold the text.

Siblings limit Sentence lengths are harder to analyse because different people have different attention spans, and when the payoff involved is space, passive transitions can be employed to keep from creating more children or more siblings. At the same time, it is advisable to limit the number of siblings in each sentence to two.

Fragmentation If a child phrase is being included, the norm is to fit it into the sentence between two commas or two M-dashes. This is also the reason commas are powerful because they induce a pause in the reader’s flow, as if breaking his/her speed and having him/her scrutinize the child phrase. At the same time, inserting too many such breaks makes the text read fragmented, and fragmented texts make for frustrating reading.

Transitive phrases Consider the previous sentence: “At the same time, inserting too many such breaks makes the text read fragmented, and fragmented texts make for frustrating reading.” In this case, the comma is used for a different purpose:

1/origin → 2/origin → 3/origin

Essentially, the phrase “At the same time” is used to conduct a transition from the previous sentence to the current one and so the first comma marks the end of the transition and the beginning of the body. Similarly, the insertion “, and” indicates a fusing of the current sentence—the body—and “fragmented texts make for frustrating reading.” In fact, in order to broaden the emphasis on the idea, “, and” can be removed and substituted with a period.

Amor dictis

People are afraid to use words.
What are they afraid of?
That they will awaken some evil?
That in the moment of putting down one word after another, something hidden behind a mental door will peek out?
Yes.
But that is why I like to write.
I want to know what is behind that door.
I want to meet it.
I want to befriend it.
If it seems good enough, I will want to become it.
I write to know myself.

The bigger words are not just fancy contrivances.
No.
They are each a separate kind of meaning.
I could say I'm "happy".
I could say I'm "gay".
I could say I'm "joyous".
I pick "joyous".
It sounds more mature.
Beyond the simple mapping of sound to meaning, there is the emotion of the sound itself.
The words you know are "sound" + "meaning".
The words I know are "sound" + "meaning" + "sensation".
Remove the "meaning" for once.
Listen to words as "sound" + "sensation".
Haven't you ever sat and listened to the calls of a nightingale?
I have.
In the forests of Yercaud in south India.
That was when I wondered.
That was when I first took away the "meaning" and discovered music.

Have you ever said "vendetta" and thought it sounded like wood being chopped by knives?
Have you ever said "fabulous" and thought of the colour green?
Have you ever said "anathematic" instead of "despicable" and thought how antihero-like it sounds?
Have you ever wondered what the timbre of a word is?
Words are both written and spoken.
Have you ever wondered how novels are successes?
They are successes because the reader is able to read what the writer is able to write.
And vice versa.

Don't be afraid to use words.
That which we have a finite supply of is wasted when used.
That which we have an infinite supply of is wasted when unused.

Amor dictis

People are afraid to use words.
What are they afraid of?
That they will awaken some evil?
That in the moment of putting down one word after another, something hidden behind a mental door will peek out?
Yes.
But that is why I like to write.
I want to know what is behind that door.
I want to meet it.
I want to befriend it.
If it seems good enough, I will want to become it.
I write to know myself.

The bigger words are not just fancy contrivances.
No.
They are each a separate kind of meaning.
I could say I'm "happy".
I could say I'm "gay".
I could say I'm "joyous".
I pick "joyous".
It sounds more mature.
Beyond the simple mapping of sound to meaning, there is the emotion of the sound itself.
The words you know are "sound" + "meaning".
The words I know are "sound" + "meaning" + "sensation".
Remove the "meaning" for once.
Listen to words as "sound" + "sensation".
Haven't you ever sat and listened to the calls of a nightingale?
I have.
In the forests of Yercaud in south India.
That was when I wondered.
That was when I first took away the "meaning" and discovered music.

Have you ever said "vendetta" and thought it sounded like wood being chopped by knives?
Have you ever said "fabulous" and thought of the colour green?
Have you ever said "anathematic" instead of "despicable" and thought how antihero-like it sounds?
Have you ever wondered what the timbre of a word is?
Words are both written and spoken.
Have you ever wondered how novels are successes?
They are successes because the reader is able to read what the writer is able to write.
And vice versa.

Don't be afraid to use words.
That which we have a finite supply of is wasted when used.
That which we have an infinite supply of is wasted when unused.

No Candy For Right. Lesser Candy For Wrong.

Enough has been said over the last 10 years about the deluge of information on the web, and on the TV, the radio and the papers. All of it has contributed – one way or another – to change the way we look at the world around us; significant bits of it have even gone on to dictate newer with which we can interact with it. Unsurprisingly, however, there is also in place a different protocol, an upgraded one, that includes a new set of mistakes we could commit, a new set of implications and an altogether new rewards program, speaking as such, for not committing those mistakes in the first place.

Amongst them, there is a certain “mistake profile” that strategically underlies a lot of mistakes committed by unifying them with one principle: “doing it right makes no difference, doing it wrong makes a world of it”, and this kind of mistake has become more common; so common, in fact, that in some institutions, of investigations and reportage to be specific, they have attained the critical pedestal of being called systematic simply because they are not corrected even if exposed glaringly.

[caption id="attachment_317" align="aligncenter" width="386" caption="The Indian division of CNN"][/caption]

Commas once held the privileged position of inducing the most of such mistakes in writing. Using the commas in the right place leaves the reader with a smooth flow of thought, although he or she would ultimately take away the point being made at the end of the reading session. However, once the writer uses a comma in the wrong place, that sudden jerk in the flow of thought leaves the reader only with a dissonance that lasts the whole time – and he or she is bound to leave without giving a damn about your ideas. So also in reportage: just today, I was watching CNN-IBN cover the story of the Indian Navy capturing a pirate vessel off the coast of “Lakshwadeep”. If the presenter had pronounced it right, it would have gone a very short distance, if at all, in corroborating the care taken by the presenter to pronounce it correct. However, the moment she pronounced it wrong, it gave away a sense of journalistic nonchalance - especially when there is no hurry associated with covering the piece.

As long as the media is under the scanner, there is a critical difference between “showing” and “telling” that needs to be discussed. In order to understand this, consider the genre of creative writing: when such a piece is being constructed, the author needs to state something to the reader, not declare it. Similarly, facts need to be presented separately wherever possible, and not as cause and effect. This ensures the utmost neutrality even when an extremely suggestive event is unfolding. Such is the difference between statement and declaration. I principally address the contexts of writing and reporting first because they address a larger audience and quickly. However, there are other industries that face significant challenges in the long run because they didn’t look before they leapt.

---

The writer, at this point, was struck by a writers’ block arrow and regrets announcing that the article is done.

Clean Writing For... Geniuses

There are enough articles out there that tell you how to write. Today, I'm going to tell you how NOT to write, especially how NOT to write something that is bound to frustrate the shit out of the reader.

[caption id="attachment_106" align="aligncenter" width="500" caption="That definitely doesn't read right."][/caption]

We'll go through this in a series of points because I don't have the patience (for obvious reasons) to give you an introduction on bad writing, you have enough examples - and if you're around 20 years of age, you probably creating an example in an SMS message or a chat-window right now.

1. Periods (".") are important because they end sentences. They provide an invaluable break in the flow of thought in what you're writing. If you don't use this particular little dot, what you're writing looks like you've thrown it up - literally. Words don't deserve that.


2. An ellipsis is three dots in a row, one after another, without a space in between, like this: "...". That wasn't so hard, was it? Dot. Dot. Dot! It stands for either "to be continued" or "some text has been left out here because I think it's unimportant". Whenever you want to put that thought into the reader's head, you use the ellipsis. You shouldn't use it if the BOTH of us know what's coming next NOR in the middle of a sentence.


3. I'm not too particular about this one, but try capitalizing the first letters of your sentences and any names. The world's not going to end if you don't, but try it out, it could give what you're writing a classy look, like you're particular about things. I know, you're going to be put down as an intellectual dweeb for that, but when it comes to writing, things work differently.


4. I am QUITE sure none of you use Notepad or Wordpad to write these days. You either use MS WORD, that application that Mac users have or inside your browser, and I am QUITE sure that none of you still use IE6 - it's either Firefox, Chrome or that browser Mac users have. All three of them, note, have an add-on for checking the spelling of what you're putting down. In fact, they come with it when you install them. This is just to tell you that writing like that doesn't make you... "cool".


5. Stop using the word "like". Seriously. Use it only when you know what a simile is. A simile is like a metaphor.


6. Commas are beyond this world in their purpose. Please feel free to use them abundantly. You know, when you're writing to someone and you have no way of telling them when you're pausing and when you're not, a comma comes to the rescue, bold as it is. People will invoke a pause in what they're reading when they come across a comma. It's on my list of top 10 inventions of all time.


7. When you've learned how to use a period, you might be interested in the return button on the keyboard. When you press it, you get a paragraph, just like that, right out of nowhere, and a paragraph represents a more significant break in the flow of what you're reading. It's like this: you're organizing an event, and there are the lighting, sound and carpentry teams. It makes sense to have all the electricians in the lighting team and all the audio engineers in the sound team - all of them are humans like all of them are sentences, but the segregation is necessary to get the work done. It's a hard life, but it's better that way.


8. Hyphens bring words together to create hyphenation. An en-dash, which is the width of the capitalized "N", signifies a range (e.g., 6-10 horses); note: no spaces before or after. On modern keyboards, like the QWERTY and the Dvorak, the figure dash and en-dash are actuated by the same button, which is an outright tragedy, but let's move on. The em-dash is as wide as the capitalized "M" and demarcates parenthetical thought ("... I'm sure you know - like everyone else does - that you're a genius..."). It's also used to signify interruption: "So, as I was saying, you need to- BAM! Oh my god, you killed him!"

There you have it: 8 simple rules to make your writing look good, at least better than it already is. Please use them and write like a normal person - and by normal, I mean what it represented in a time as recent as 1981. I don't like the new definition.