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.