Tip 5: And let me finish at the end: In America we finish formal letters to those we don't know well and those we don't know at all with:

-"Sincerely."

-"Yours faithfully" (If you don't know the name of
the person you're writing to); and

-"Yours sincerely" (If you know the name of the
person you're writing to).

-"Best wishes"; or
-"Best regards."

Top

Week 2
Most of you probably know of Ockham's Razor. It's basically a principle of efficiency. More specifically, it is the logical principle that you should not use any more steps in a logical argument than are necessary to get the job done. You should shave away all the rest.

In Anglo-Saxon countries, something akin to this principle of efficiency also dominates in writing-style guides. And although it is possible to take this too far, the more common error by far is not to take it far enough. Academic writing is especially plagued by the tendency not to take it far enough. Many academics seem to have a special penchant for highfalutin babble - wordiness that obfuscates more than it clarifies, that irritates more than it stimulates.

One of the most common errors is to use a noun followed by a verb construction where one verb would actually do the job. Another is to use cluttering jargon where an everyday word would be clearer. These sort of style preferences constitute what I like to call the B.S. barometer. B.S., of course, stands for "bad style."

Examples:

(1) In the court, regulatory decision-making was carried out.

You could try: Regulatory decisions were made in the court.

(2) The decision-making occurred over a three day period.

Try: The decision was made in three days.

You'll often find it when the passive tense is used. I suppose it is used because it sounds more formal, and some people get the mistaken idea that it thus sounds intelligent.

(3) The choice to enlist the members was made by the committee.

Try: The committee decided to enlist the members.

To avoid B.S. in the passive tense, it sometimes helps to articulate who the actor is.

(4) The action was executed with speed.

Try: The regulators acted quickly.

Maybe you've noticed that in all of the examples above, the sentence I have offered as an alternative is shorter and more direct. In Style: Toward Clarity and Grace, Joseph Williams offers numerous examples of the sorts of problems I have mentioned above. Among other things, he gives detailed examples of how authors overuse nouns. The examples below are taken from that book:

(1) "The police conducted an investigation into the matter."

Try: "The police investigated the matter."

(2) "The committee has no expectation that it will meet the deadline."

Try: "The committee does not expect to meet the deadline."

(3) "The intention of the IRS is to audit the records of the program."

Try: "The IRS intends to audit the records of the program."

While the advice I have offered here is very solid, it is not a command. There are obviously times to use the passive tense. There are times to use nouns in the place of verb phrases. But it will behoove you to try to become conscious of these abuses. As with many things, the vice doesn't consist in doing a particular action, but as Aristotle would tell us, in doing it in the wrong place and the wrong time or in doing it too often. This particular sin will probably not lead you to hell, but it could prevent you from getting published in English speaking journals. Or it could mean that nobody will read your stuff even if it gets published. So just bear it in mind and try to be good (writers).

Here I only have time to offer you a few examples. For some similar issues, consult the online edition of Strunk and White's Elements of Style (link below). See especially chapter 2, sections 14-17. Or borrow my version of Style.

Top

Week 3

"Did you read Elements of Style yet? "Have you rewritten your paper last week?" If these two questions sound OK to you, then you desperately need to read my tips today. But even if you noticed something was wrong with them, it still might not hurt to brush up.

This week I want to look at the simple past tense and the present perfect.

The simple past tense

This tense is used to talk about finished or completed actions, states, or situations when referring to them with a keyword that indicates a completed time framework.

Some typical keywords indicating that the simple past might be appropriate follow: "last week," "last year," last month," yesterday," "ten minutes ago."

Examples:

Michael Thompson gave a talk at the New York conference last May.
I saw Jurgen Habermas at a conference last year.
I read Simmel's book about money last month.
She finished her dissertation two years ago.

Sometimes, however, the time framework is just known or implied.

So we say, for example:

David Hume wrote the Treatise on Human Understanding.
Plato was Greek.
I didn't finish the report on time.

The present perfect tense

The present perfect tense can be used to talk about both completed and non-completed actions, states, and situations.

We often use it when you use the present tense in German. Again there are typical keywords that indicate that we might need it: "this month," "this year," "recently," "yet," "already," "so far."

Most of these key words are for time frameworks that began in the past and continue into the present. Others just show that something has happened in close proximity to the present, as when we say, "I have just finished reading Joseph William's book, Style"; or, "She has recently finished her dissertation." Note though: we say, "I saw her just a few minutes ago." "Ago" is a keyword for the simple past.

Examples:

She has lived in Paris since 1994.
He has studied (or has been studying) sociology for 20 semesters, and he still hasn't finished his degree. (N.B. We don't say, "He is studying sociology for 20 semesters.")

Most of you needn't fret about these tenses in your academic writing too much. But they do come up when you write about statistics that have been gathered this year, or information that applies to the studies carried out in 1999, and so on.

I have just touched the tip of the iceberg here. The best grammar book I know for this sort of thing is English Grammar in Use, by Raymond Murphy.

Or for an online source try

About English

Top

Week 4

Comma usage:

Commas are among the most used -- and most incorrectly used -- punctuation marks in English. But don't underestimate their importance.

Just think of the difference between:
Call me Ishmel; and
Call me, Ishmel.

In the first case, Ishmel is telling you his name. In the second, someone is telling Ishmel to give him a ring sometime. (This example, by the way, is taken from Daniel Dennet's Darwin's Dangerous Ideas, which is about Darwin and other things.)

Restrictive and non-restrictive phrases:

Comma usage with restrictive and non-restrictive phrases is also important for the meaning of a sentence. A restrictive phrase defines the noun of a sentence, a non-restrictive phrase just adds additional information about the noun being referred to. And while a non-restrictive phrase takes a comma, a restrictive one does not.

The following sentence has a restrictive clause:
"The boys who attended the picnic became ill."

It means that all the boys who attended the picnic became ill. The phrase "who attended the picnic" defines or restricts the noun of the sentence in this context, i.e. "the boys." And that phrase is not set off by commas.

The clause in following sentence is non-restrictive:
"My car, which is parked across the street, is a Ford."

No restrictive characteristic of the car is expressed in the phrase "which is parked across the street." And that phrase is set off by commas.

Omit the comma before the word "that":

One problem with comma usage that seems to be particularly frequent among German writers is the use of a comma before the word "that" in a restrictive clause. I assume that German writers use this incorrectly because they use a comma before the word "dass" in German. Just keep in mind, though, in English we don't do it that way.

We would write, for example:
(correct) "The hat that he was wearing was made in Spain"; and not

(incorrect) "The hat, that he was wearing, was made in Spain."

The use of the serial comma:

I want to mention one last point that you should bear in mind when writing your papers. There is a difference between British and American comma usage before the word "and" in a series. In Britain the convention is to omit the comma before "and," whereas in America the convention among academics is to use it.

British: "They invested time, money and hard work."
American: "They invested time, money, and hard work."

Just bear it in mind and adjust your work to the publishing house that you want to send your work to. Most of you would benefit from reading and re-reading some of the chapters from the online grammars that are available below.

Top

Week 5

Subject and Verb Agreement

The most efficient way for me to work with some of these grammar themes is just to refer you to the well-developed work of others. For this weeks topic just take a look at:

The Blue Book

Be dazzled by how much information is packed into just a few rules. And don't forget to do the exercises and the tests when you're finished so that you can practice using what you find on these Internet pages.

Top

Week 6

Parallel Construction

Consider the following sentences.

(a) During the event they ate popcorn, drank cola, and they talked.

(b) Last night they drank wine, talked and TV was watched.

(c) Whenever she came, he spoke loudly, continually interrupted the conversation, and bad news was exchanged.

None of the above sentences is very good. They all suffer from a lack of parallel construction.

In the first sentence the noun "they" should be used only once. It needn't be repeated at any time later in the sentence. If a writer desires to repeat it for stylistic effect, then the sentence should be:

(a) They ate popcorn, they drank cola, and they talked. Or perhaps: They ate popcorn, they drank cola, they talked.

Sometimes one of these latter two variants is to be preferred for the rhythm of the prose.

In the second and third sentences the problem is that there is a switch from the active tense to the passive one. This makes the sentences more clumsy.

Try instead:

(b) Last night they drank wine, talked and watched TV.

Or for the third sentence it would probably be best to do more complete rewriting:

(c) Whenever she came they exchanged bad news; and he inevitably spoke loudly and continually interrupted her.

Unskillful or inexperienced writers often make mistakes like these because of the mistaken belief that they should constantly vary the form of their expressions. But while varying form is a virtue in some contexts, it is certainly a vice in many others. Take a look at the following examples from the Elements of Style. (The following points are cited verbatim from that book.)

(Poor version):
"Formerly, science was taught by the textbook method, while now the laboratory method is employed."
(Improved version):
"Formerly, science was taught by the textbook method; now it is taught by the laboratory method."

"The first version gives the impression that the writer is undecided or timid; he seems unable or afraid to choose one form of expression and hold to it. The [second] version shows that the writer has at least made his choice and abided by it."

"By this principle, an article or a preposition applying to all the members of a series must either be used only before the first term or else be repeated before each term."

(Poor version):
"The French, the Italians, Spanish, and Portuguese"
(Improved version):
"The French, the Italians, the Spanish, and the Portuguese"

(Poor Version):
"In spring, summer, or in winter"
(Improved version):
"In spring, summer, or winter (In spring, in summer, or in winter)"

"Correlative expressions (both, and; not, but; not only, but also; either, or; first, second, third; and the like) should be followed by the same grammatical construction. Many violations of this rule can be corrected by rearranging the sentence."

(Poor version):
"It was both a long ceremony and very tedious."
(Improved version):
"The ceremony was both long and tedious."


(Poor version):
"A time not for words, but action"
(Improved version):
"A time not for words, but for action"

(Poor version):
"Either you must grant his request or incur his ill will."
(Improved version):
"You must either grant his request or incur his ill will."

(Poor version):
"My objections are, first, the injustice of the measure; second, that it is unconstitutional."
(Improved version):
"My objections are, first, that the measure is unjust; second, that it is unconstitutional."

When making comparisons, the things you compare should be couched in parallel structures whenever that is possible and appropriate.

(Poor version - [though it has something poetic]):
"My income is smaller than my wife."
(Improved version):
"My income is smaller than my wife's."

Top

Week 7: Punctuation with quotation marks

1) In American academic writing a comma normally is inserted inside quotation marks. The same applies to a period -- and regardless of whether it is a part of the quoted material.(Close textual studies are one of the rare exceptions to this rule.)

Examples:
a) "She worked yesterday," he said.

b) As Daniel Boorstin noted in Two Kinds of Revolutions, "[O]ur main problem in the United States, and, generally speaking, the central problem of technology, is how to come to terms with solutions."

Example:
a) Albert Hirschmann notes, "Loyalty is a key concept in the battle between exit and voice...."

Example:
As Hirschmann says, "As a rule, then, loyalty holds exit at bay and activates voice" (Exit, Voice and Loyalty, 78).

Examples:
She had two objections to the "improvements": they convoluted the ideas and bespoke the sort of folksy Americanism that she disdained.

She had read the "Great Gatsby"; it was required in her freshman English course.

Examples:
"He's gone absolutely mad!" he exclaimed.

He couldn't differentiate between Sartre and the modern "constructivists"!

Professor James noted that the pragmatic criterion could be summed up in a simple question: "does it work?"

He often asked rhetorically: "If it meant embracing such blatant nonsense, why would anyone want to be 'postmodern'?"

Top

Week 8: Punctuating like the Queen

Sometimes just when you think everything is clear, you find an unexpected complication. Regarding punctuation, what is normally "unexpected" ought to be expected, especially given the variations between British and American usage. Just as there are differences between British and American spelling ("colour"/"color"; "labour"/"labor"), there are also differences in the usage of quotation marks.

Most of what I said last week also applies to British publications. But not all of it. There are a couple of important differences between the two dominant English styles.

The first difference can be neatly summed up as follows: In British English you only include the period or comma in the quotation marks if it is part of the quoted material. In American English you include them inside the quotes regardless of whether they are part of the quoted material or not. Note the difference:

American English: He wondered what exactly Marx meant by the word "communist."

British English: He wondered what exactly Marx meant by the word 'communist'.

Regarding the above case: In British English, because the full stop is not a part of the quoted material, it is not included in the quotation marks. The same rule applies regarding comma usage.

American English: She did not know exactly what Otto meant by the word "sacred," but she was sure that it was different than what she meant by it.

British English: She did not know exactly what Otto meant by the word 'sacred', but she was sure that it was different than what she meant by it.

Another significant difference concerns the use of single quotation marks. In American English the single quotation marks are virtually only used to indicate a quote within a quote. (And the main quote is put in double quotation marks, while the quote within the quote is put in single quotation marks.)

As Daniel Boorstin has noted: "In the crisis which followed the Great Depression, when Franklin D. Roosevelt announced his program for saving the American economy he did not promise to implement a theory. Rather, he declared frankly that he would try one thing after another and would keep trying until a cure was found. 'The country demands bold, persistent experimentation. It is common sense to take a method and try it: if it fails, admit it frankly and try another.'"

By contrast with above, in British English it is widespread to put the main quote in single quotation marks and the quote within the quote in double quotation marks.

As Daniel Boorstin has noted: 'In the crisis which followed the Great Depression, when Franklin D. Roosevelt announced his program for saving the American economy he did not promise to implement a theory. Rather, he declared that he would try one thing after another..."The country demands bold, persistent experimentation...."'

Additionally, however, in British English single quotation marks are often used when quoting single words, or short quotes.

British: CNN referred to Chancellor Schroeder as a 'leftist'.

American: CNN referred to Chancellor Schroeder as a "leftist."

It is important to tailor your work to the particular publisher or publication in question. You obviously need to find out what style book they use and follow it. I have taken the information here from the most standard of sources. Those tips for American English are from The Chicago Manual of Style, those for British English from Fowler's Modern English Usage (which follows Hart's Rules).

An additional tip: In both American and British style guides, when a quotation is given a separate, individual line, it needn't be included in quotation marks.

As Boorstin said:

In the last century or so, whenever the citizens of continental western Europe have found themselves in desperate circumstances, they have had to choose among political parties, each of which was committed to a particular theoretical foundation for its whole program - 'monarchist,' 'liberal,' 'catholic,' 'socialist,' 'fascist,' or 'communist'. This has not been the case in the United States. Not even during the Civil War. Historians still argue over what, if any, political theory Lincoln represented.

Not:

As Boorstin said:

"In the last century....political theory Lincoln represented."

You should drop the quotation marks. And remember: as a rule, only longer quotes are offset from the main text in this way.

Top

Week 9: When are colons used?

Colons, like semi-colons, are used to mark a break in grammatical constructions. Traditionally, however, colons indicate a closer relation between the two elements of the sentence than semi-colons do. It is preferable to use a colon if the second clause of your sentence simply elucidates the contents of the first one.

She wrote three articles last year: two were published by Harvard, one by Princeton.

Colons can be used to introduce formal statements or quotes.

Do you think Marx was dismissing the value of all moral theory when he said: "Talk of rights and justice is obsolete verbal rubbish"?

Marx made numerous statements indicating his rejection of traditional moral theory. He also said: "The communists preach no morality!"

Colons are commonly used to introduce a list in a series. When this is done, the objects listed are often separated by semi-colons, especially if they are long or complex clauses.

Hegel has a very abstract notion of the word object: there are physical objects in the world, which include physical, discoverable entities and even abstract things such as social systems; there are also mental objects (or thought abstractions), which include things that don't exist, such as unicorns or three dollar bills.

Hegel seems to think that three areas of thought are fundamental: thoughts about thought (which he discusses in his logic); thoughts about nature, including man (which he discusses in the philosophy of nature); and thoughts about the human mind, including the socially constructed world of man (which he discusses in the philosophy of mind).

"Within the human species Linnaeus distinguished several varieties: Ferus, Americanus, Europaeus, Asiatiscus, Afer, and Monstrosus" (D. Boorstin, Hidden History, 115).

If the text introduced by a colon is more than one sentence or if it is a formal statement or quote, it should begin with a capital letter. Otherwise it can begin with a small-case letter.

Marx's view of moral theory seems paradoxical: On the one hand, he made many explicit statements denying the value of moral theory. On the other, in his criticism of "exploitative" and "oppressive" working conditions he seems to implicitly embrace a moral point of view.

A colon should not be used when a list is introduced that is the complement of an element of the introductory statement.

Senator Haynes promised to (1) improve the infrastructure, 2) better the working conditions, and (3) increase welfare spending.

The words "follows," and "following" are followed by a colon if the items to be enumerated come directly afterwards and the sentence is incomplete without the elements that are enumerated in the list.

Hegel's Encyclopedia contains the following books: the logic, the philosophy of nature, and the philosophy of mind.

Top

Week 10: Ellipses

Aristotle was one of the first to have observed not only that there can be too little of a good thing, but also too much of one. This is true, not only of ice-cream (which can make you fat or sick), but also of quotations. You can have too many or they can simply be too long.

The punctuation marks used when cutting part of quotations are known as ellipses or suspension points. These are three or four dots (...). Today I want to look at how they are used.

One method is to use three dots anytime something is omitted. This is accepted by the Chicago Manual of Style, so long as it is done consistently throughout a book.

However, the grammarians at Chicago recommend a more refined usage, differentiating between words omitted in a sentence and those omitted between sentences. (Given that this usage is also more commonplace, and that your articles are often written for compilations with other authors, I would recommend it as well.)

It requires using three dots when a word or group of words is missing from a sentence, but four dots when words are omitted that bridge sentences.

Take the following sentence for example:

The most remembered and most adored European leaders have been erratic and charismatic, with at least a touch of the daemonic.

Words can be omitted from this sentence as follows:

The most remembered and most adored European leaders have been erratic...with at least a touch of the daemonic.

However, let's now take a look at a longer passage, where the words omitted are not from the same sentence. Here's the unaltered quotation:

The most remembered and most adored European leaders have been erratic and charismatic, with at least a touch of the daemonic. Claiming the inspiration of God, they avow their desire to change the course of history. They are remembered as makers and not merely reflectors of the spirit of their age. By contrast ours have been simply "representative men," possessing the commonplace virtues in extraordinary degree (Boorstin, Hidden History, 138).

Should entire sentences or words from different sentences be omitted, then an additional period is useful to make this clear.

The most remembered and most adored European leaders have been erratic...with at least a touch of the daemonic....They are remembered as makers....By contrast ours have been simply "representative men," possessing the commonplace virtues in extraordinary degree.

Sometimes other punctuation is used with the ellipsis dots - if it clarifies what has been omitted. It can be used on either side of the ellipsis dots.

If a sentence is omitted after a question or exclamation, then the question mark or exclamation point is retained, and it is followed by three dots.

Take the following quotes, cited in Boorstin's Hidden History, for example:

Authur MacEwen, whom William Randolph Hearst made his first editor of the Sand Francisco Examiner, said: "News is anything that makes a reader say, 'Gee whiz!' Or as Boorstin puts it: 'News is whatever a good editor chooses to print.' Boorstin adds: "We need not be theologians to see that we have shifted responsibility for making the world interesting from God to the newspaperman."

This becomes:

Authur MacEwen, whom William Randolph Hearst made his first editor of the Sand Francisco Examiner, said: "News is anything that makes a reader say, 'Gee whiz!'"...Boorstin adds: "We need not be theologians to see that we have shifted responsibility for making the world interesting from God to the newspaperman."

If the material quoted from a paragraph (other than the opening paragraph) does not start with the first sentence of the paragraph, this should be noted with ellipses. Once again, first I'll cite the entire text, unaltered:

Nowadays a successful reporter must be the midwife, or more often the conceiver, of his news. By the interview technique he incites a public figure to make statements which will sound like news. During the twentieth century this technique has grown into a devious apparatus which, in skillful hands, can shape national policy.

The pressure of time and the need to produce a uniform news stream to fill the issuing media induce Washington correspondents and others to use the interview and other techniques for making pseudo-events in novel, ever more ingenious and aggressive ways. One of the main facts of life for the wire service reporter in Washington is that the early afternoon paper on the East Coast goes to the press at 10 A.M., before the spontaneous news of the day has had an opportunity to develop.

Nowadays a successful reporter must be the midwife, or more often the conceiver, of his news. By the interview technique he incites a public figure to make statements which will sound like news....

...One of the main facts of life for the wire service reporter in Washington is that the early afternoon paper on the East Coast goes to the press at 10 A.M., before the spontaneous news of the day has had an opportunity to develop.

If paragraphs are omitted between two quoted paragraphs, this can be indicated by putting three ellipsis dots at the end of the paragraph before the omission. (Should that paragraph end in a full sentence, then it will require four ellipsis dots.) This is also indicated in the example above.

Top

Week 11: Subject-Verb Agreement

If you listen to country, bluegrass, blues or any of the various forms of American folk music you might know the following sort of sentences:

Aint misbehavin', savin' my love for you.
That ain't right.
They ain't respectable.

In German you have the relative complex forms:

ich bin
du bist
er
sie ist
es

I ain't
You ain't
He ain't

For example:

Either Albert or Mary is going to give the talk.

Either his brothers or John is going to give the talk.

Either John or his brothers are going to give the talk.

Neither Jon nor Kate is coming to the party.

As pompous as they are, neither Bill nor the others are geniuses.

If nouns are joined with "and," then the combination of nouns is given a verb for the plural form:

A book and a pen were all he had with him.

One exception to this is when the two nouns are commonly joined together to form one subject:

A gin and tonic is his favorite drink.

John as well as Matt is learning Italian.

One final point that you might want to keep in mind is that some words that can be used in the plural form in German are used in the singular form in English: "information" and "research" are two prime examples. You never say, "The informations are incomplete." Or "The researches were sloppy." It's always: "The information is incomplete." Or: "The research is sloppy."

For more on subject-verb agreement, including tests, take a look in the archives at week five.

Top

Week 12: Misplaced and Dangling Modifiers

"Dangling modifier" is one of those terms that college English professors often write on the criticisms of their students' papers, but without ever explaining what they're talking about. It's one of those things that all the kids were supposed to learn in high school, but that most of them didn't. So, most university graduates know that the word exists, and that it has to do with a typical writing problem. But not many of them could tell you what it means.

Maybe in our case, it would be wise to begin with the basics. A modifier is a word that basically describes another word. So, in the word combination "dangling modifier," for example, the word "dangling" describes the word "modifier." Or to offer you another example, in the phrase "the young political scientist," the word "young" modifies the term "political scientist" (or in any case "scientist"). In these sentences "dangling" and "young" are both adjectives. Modifiers can be adjectives. As we say, adjectives "modify" nouns. But they can also be adverbs. For as we also say, adverbs "modify" verbs. In the sentence "Dr. Lynch writes well," for example, the adverb "well" modifies the verb "writes."

Obviously enough, a misplaced modifier is a modifier that is in the wrong place. What is wrong with the placement is often that it leaves some lack of clarity about what verb or noun is being modified, or it might make a sentence nonsensical.

Dangling modifiers are often placed next to sentence parts that they can't really modify, essentially making the sentence ungrammatical.

Walking down the street, the bus came around the corner.

In this sentence it sounds as though the bus were walking. We all can decipher that it must mean something like:

As he was walking down the street, the bus came around the corner.

Dr. Simpson thought, after reviewing his article, the editorial staff would accept his changes.

Ill-placed modifiers that leave a lack of clarity about which sentence part is being modified are sometimes referred to as squinting modifiers.

Here's another example:

Those who get tutoring often get better grades.

Here the difficulty is that "often" can be understood to refer to "those who get tutoring" or to "get better grades." That is:

Those who get tutoring often...get better grades.

Those who get tutoring...often get better grades.

You could rewrite this sentence as follows:

Those who often get tutoring get better grades.

Or:

Students often get better grades if they get tutoring.

Top

Week 13: Misplaced and Dangling Modifiers (Continued)

Despite everything I wrote last week and the fact that many danglers lead to confusion, it is acceptable to use numerous danglers. These words have been used so long as conjunctions or prepositions that they have lost their original purpose. They no longer modify specific nouns. Instead, they function as simple introductory elements. Here are some examples: according, assuming, barring, concerning, considering, judging, owing, regarding, respecting, speaking (see Garner's, A Dictionary of Modern American Usage, 184)

Given their long-standing usage, such constructions don't really fool us, and they are acceptable. For example:

Considering the efforts at the EU, the new state legislation will probably pass.

This sentence makes no sense when examined literally: Who is considering the efforts? What does considering the efforts have to do with the probability that the plans will pass?

Thanks to the gods of custom, however, language needn't always be logical, and numerous such constructions can be used. Still, changing such sentences will often improve your writing style.

Here 's a reformulation of the previous sentence, for example:

Because of the efforts at the EU, the new state legislation will probably pass.

It will behoove you to be on the lookout for danglers. Many of them simply obfuscate meaning. Simply put: they are examples of sloppy thinking.

Being a world-renowned professor, I thought Dr. Smith would have given a more sensible speech.

Limiting his texts to three pages, there were many chances to cut back to the essential message.

By writing texts of just three pages, he had the chance to focus on what was essential.

Maybe you've noticed by now that many of these danglers begin with the present participle (i.e. an "ing" verb): in the examples above we have "considering" and "being". When you see such an opening, you might be on the alert for dangling modifiers, especially when such sentence elements are followed by expletive statements (i.e., it is or they are constructions, etc.). Rewording sentences with dangling modifiers will often improve your style.

After writing the text, it is possible to find a publisher.

Try:

Once a text is written, it is possible to find a publisher.

Or:

Turning to the new legislative developments, there are many things to keep in mind.

Try:

Many things have to be kept in mind when examining the new legislative developments.

Top

Week 14: Logic and Language

There's a famous story about an occasion when Wittgenstein visited a friend in the hospital. Wittgenstein, concerned with his friend's health, asked how she felt. "Sick as a dog!" she said. But this was too much for the disgruntled philosopher. "How would you know how a dog feels?" he angrily asked, fully disgusted with her loose language use.

Wittgenstein evidently thought that we should only say things that are really logical. (Or at least he seems to have tended towards that view when he was having a particularly lousy day.) We might be happy that he was in a large minority and that the story in fact is more often told to discredit him and analytic philosophy in general. It can be seen as clearly showing the less flattering side of that philosophical movement.

It reminds me of a joke about the analytic philosopher who was explaining to his freshman class that in many languages two negatives create a positive, like when we say of someone, "he isn't poor" to mean "he is well-off." Similarly three negatives creates a positive, four, once again creates a negative and so on. At hearing this, a skeptical phenomenology student in the back of the class looked up smiling and just sarcastically said, "Yea, yea, yea!"

The phenomenology student was right. We often use language in ways that isn't purely logical. And to understand meaning, among other things we need to understand the context in which something is said. Wittgenstein also, of course, said some things like that at some time in his career.

In any case, we say illogical things all the time. So we also mean the same thing with "slim chance" and "fat chance." And we say "I don't think Wittgenstein was always so brilliant!" and not "I think not that Wittgenstein was always so brilliant!" despite the aversions that a rather confused logician might have to saying "I don't think..." when expressing something that we do think.

For a certain (poor) variety of analytic philosopher, the real world is a nightmare.

But we also use logic all the time. And while good writers have nothing against a perfectly useful and illogical idiom, they still write logically for clarity.

As Byran Garner notes in his "Dictionary of Modern American Usage," logic can help you avoid saying things like: "I was literally scared to death." After all, the idiom is: "I was scared to death." Saying that you were literally scared to death does little more than betray your wanting logical abilities. Had you been literally scared to death, you wouldn't be around to drive logicians -- and other straight-thinking folks -- wild with such comments.

It is important to understand how your sentences and sentence parts relate to one another. As banal as that may seem, it may be helpful to think about it in some more detail.

This week I will only touch upon two examples. A few of the more common blunders come up in comparisons, where category mistakes are often made. This comes up in work here at the project group more often than you might think. One specific problem occurs because many of you have a penchant for talking about "the case of Italy" or "the case of train policy" and so on. So I run across sentences like:

"The train regulations in Holland are similar to the Italian case."

But you can't really compare "regulations" with a "case". It would be better to re-write the sentence as follows:

"The train regulations in Holland are similar to those in Italy."

In any case, I would love to convince you to avoid using constructions like "the case of ..." as much as possible. They sound lousy to begin with. And they often turn up in confusing and illogical comparisons such as the one above.

The problem also arises in comparing things from different time frameworks.

To cite one example:

"The regulations are stricter in Italy than when the study was conducted."

"The regulations are now stricter than when the study was conducted."

Top

Week 15: Logic and Language (Cont.)

God is love
Love is blind
Ray Charles is blind
Thus, Ray Charles is God.

Even a Ray Charles fan would probably notice the fallacy in the above argument. Somehow we all know something is askew here, even if we don't know what exactly it is.

We might say that the argument commits a fallacy. That's true enough. But precisely has gone amuck? This is an example of an equivocation. That is, a keyword in the argument is used in different ways. The specific problem is that the term "is" is used differently in various premises. Sometimes it is used to predicate a quality to the subject of the sentence. This is true of the statement, "Ray Charles is blind." That is like saying that "My pen is blue." In the conclusion, by contrast, "is" is used to state the identity between terms: "Ray Charles is God" isn't like the sentence "My pen is blue." Instead, it establishes a one to one correspondence.

This is just one typical sort of fallacy. Fallacies are a favorite topic of modern philosophers. And there are now of course lists of informal fallacies on the net. Here are a couple links, should you fancy a quick overview.

The Nizkor Project
Infidels

Having ready accessibility to these lists could prove helpful. Of course, some of you might not care whether your committing fallacies. After all, sometimes persuasion may be what you're going for. And ad hominem arguments or arguments from authority work fine for this in some contexts. Still, as a rule it is at least necessary to avoid ungrammatical inconsistencies. For this, the discussion of danglers from the earlier tips is important, as well as the discussion of illegitimate comparisons.

There is another important point: namely, try to make clear which subject your pronouns and relative clauses refer to.

Quite often I run across problems of this sort in long, complex sentences.

The Reagan administration, inspired by the various trickle-down economic theorists, enacted many new policies, making their theories the most important of the 80's.

Inspired by various trickle-down economic theorists, the Reagan administration enacted many new economic policies. Trickle-down economic theories thus came to play a crucial role in the real politics of the 80's.

Another related problem often arises: In long complex sentences with a relative pronoun, it is often difficult to tell what the relative pronoun refers to.

The theory dealt with many elements of regulatory policy, which in the face of the existing political dilemmas in the late 20th century real politics made the decision-making of the UN extremely difficult, which complicated issues for political leaders.

(1) If your sentence has a relative clause, see if that clause is close enough to the noun being referred to;


(2) If you have a sentence with more than one relative clause, consider rewriting it. Maybe you won't always need to, but doing so will often make your sentences more transparent.

Top

Week 16: Present Continuous/Present Simple and more

The Present Continuous:

"What are you doing?" is a question we can ask when we want to know what someone is doing at the moment we are speaking to them. We answer it by saying what we are doing at precisely that time. "Writing a paper." "Reading the newspaper." "Eating lunch." "Suffering."

This tense is called the present continuous. It has a form of the verb to be, plus an ing form of the main verb.

Questions in this tense look like the following:

"What are you reading?"
"Where is she going?"
"When are they coming?"

The tense, however, is not just used to discuss what we are doing in the present moment. Sometimes we also use it to talk about temporary projects that are taking place over a longer period of time, encompassing the present. So, if I ask an author what sort of book she is presently working on, she may tell me that she is writing a book about global warming. She doesn't mean that she's doing it at the moment that we're talking, but that that is her present project. Similarly, if I move to Paris for a few months, then I would normally tell people at the time that I am there that I am living in Paris for the summer. I wouldn't tend to say, "I live in Paris." That's what we would say about our place of permanent residence. We might say something like, "I normally live in Berlin, but this summer I'm living in Paris."

The Present Simple:

If I want to ask someone about her job I don't ask her, "What are you doing?" I ask her, "What do you do?" She'll answer: "I write books," or "I'm an author," or something along those lines.

The present simple tense is used to describe states or circumstances that are more or less permanent or actions that we do regularly or normally. Questions with verbs other than the verb "to be" and modal verbs -- such as "should" "can" -- will often require the form of the verb "do."

Where do you live?
I live in Bonn.

What sort of wine do you like?"
I like Bordeaux wine.
Or maybe, "Anything that's expensive is usually just fine."
Or maybe, "I don't like wine."

Another point may be worth noting: namely, some verbs are not used with the present continuous form, or they are only very seldom used with that form. Most examples concern states that tend to be more or less fixed -- what we like or love or hate, for example. We would never say, "I'm liking potatoes." Instead, we say, "I like potatoes." Similarly, we don't say, "I'm hating pop music." We say, "I hate pop music." You can find lists of these words in Raymond Murphy's English Grammar in Use (Cambridge).

One final point before stopping for this week: we do not use the present to talk about things that have begun in the past and continued until the present. We do not say, for example, "I have my car for three years," or "I am having my sofa for two months." Here we use the present perfect: "I have had my sofa for two months." Yes, it's really true!

In the context above, the phrase "is/are to be" essentially means "should." Like "should," "is/are to be" can be used when discussing plans and arrangements for the future.

The sentences above could also be written as follows:
The plans should be completed in late July.
The new law should be enacted in early August.

This form of "is/are to be" is especially useful when discussing things that were planned for a time that has past.

The plans were to be completed in late July.
Instead of:
The plans should have been completed by late July.

The same applies to the other sentence:
The new law was to be enacted in early August.
Instead of:
The new law should have been enacted in early August.

This use of "is/are to be" with plans for a past time framework avoids a negative sense associated with "should have been." If that is not already clear from the examples above, the following context should make it clear:

The legislature met in early spring. The trade bill that they passed was to be enacted in late July.
This has quite a different sense than the following sentence:
The legislature met in early spring. The trade bill that they passed should have been enacted in late July.

There is a tendency to read the last sentence as implying that the trade bill was not enacted. There is less of a tendency to read the sentence using "was to be" that way.

Top

Week 37: Brackets

According to the Chicago Manual of Style, brackets, or what are sometimes known as square brackets, have four main uses.

1) They are used to insert editorial comments or corrections in quoted material.

For example: "The diligent [a]ttempts to change the political climate were in vain."

This addition would be necessary if, because of a typo, the "a" had been left out of the original text. Sometimes, instead of correcting the word, the word sic is inserted in brackets after the mistake of this sort. The word sic is also used in this way if a word is incorrectly used. This will also be put in brackets, and written in italics.

"The party was shoked [sic] by the news."

2) Brackets are used as parenthesis within parenthesis.

As the film documents, John Coltrane (who along with Charlie Parker [Birdy] was one of the most influential jazz saxophone players of all time) died on 17 July 1967.

3) Brackets can be used to enclose phonetic transcriptions.

4) It is also common to place the phrases indicating the continuation of text in brackets: e.g. [to be continued] or [continued on page 5]. These will also often be written in italics.

Top

Week 38: That/Which

These two words are often -- but not always -- interchangeable when used as relative pronouns. But most stylists emphasize that "which" is used more in written English than it should be.

Quite generally:
"That" is to be preferred when the description of the object is "restrictive".
"Which" is to be preferred when the description is "non-restrictive".

So much for the linguistic jargon. What does it mean?

Restrictive Clause
Basically a restrictive clause is necessary for us to understand what object is being discussed in a particular sentence. It restricts, specifies or concretizes the noun. Imagine a situation in which two red cars are parked on the street -- one on this side of the street, the other on the other side of the street. If I tell you that I own the red car on the street, you won't know which car I'm talking about. In this sort of a context, I might thus say "I own the red car that is parked on the other side of the street." The clause "that is parked on the other side of the street" specifies or restricts the noun, "car." It is necessary that I use it so that you know which of the red cars I'm talking about. In this sort of a context most stylists recommend using "that" instead of "which."

A non-restrictive clause
"Which" should be reserved for situations in which a clause is non-restrictive; i.e. in which it is added just to give you some additional (perhaps unnecessary) information. So I might also say, "That car over there, which I bought last Tuesday, is the newest model." You need not know that I bought the car last Tuesday in order to know which car I'm talking about. It is not a restrictive clause, more clearly defining the object. It is a non-restrictive clause, just offering a little additional information.

Sometimes it is hard to tell whether a clause is restrictive or not. Take the following example:

The books that I read last week were very well-researched.

Or again:

The books, which I read last week, were very well-researched.

Both of these sentences are potentially correct. The one you need depends on the context in which you make the statement. Is the information in the clause essential or inessential in that context?

Above, if you've been talking about various groups of books (for example, those that you read two years ago or those that you read last month, then you will need to use a restrictive clause when making a specific statement about "the books that you read last week." If you haven't been talking about various groups of books, then you may not need to make the phrase restrictive. You may just be telling us when you read them to give us some additional information.

One more point needs to be added here -- this time about punctuation. Before "which" is used in a non-restrictive clause, we use a comma. Before "that," in a restrictive clause, we don't.

The painting, which cost him a fortune, is now hanging in the hallway.

In this context, there is a comma. By contrast, if he only has one painting that cost him a fortune, and you are using this information to convey that this is the painting you are talking about -- i.e. that you are not talking about cheap paintings, but about his one expensive one --, then you need to use that, without a comma before it.

The painting that cost him a fortune is hanging in the hallway.

Both of these sentences can be correct. The one you need depends on the perspective when you make the statements. But don't forget to punctuate appropriately once you decide whether you need a restrictive or a non-restrictive clause.

Top

Week 39: A/An

Many of the simple things we learn can lead us astray at times. The rules of thumb for the use of the indefinite article in English are no exception.

While the standard school-house rule is to use "a" before consonants, and "an" before vowels, in fact the issue is a bit more complex than that. What you use depends on the sounds of the consonants or vowels. With a hard sound -- such as we have in the word "European" -- we use "a," despite the fact that the word begins with a vowel. Similarly, because of the soft sound of "h" in "hour," for example, we say an hour, despite that "hour" begins with a consonant.

Please check this weeks link for a somewhat more detailed explanation: From the British Council's LEARNENGLISH ARCHIVE. Here, by the way, is the general link, in case you'd like to look around there: LEARNENGLISH

Top

Week 40: Simple Language

Something new from the halls of Stanford may be worth reflecting on. Their advice is: Want to sound intelligent? Keep things simple!

Obfuscasion hurts

Top

Week 41: References to texts

In English the names of some titles are set in italics, the names of others are written in roman type and enclosed in quotation marks. The general rule is that longer works take italics, shorter ones, quotation marks. However, this needs to be specified. (See, The Chicago Manual of Style, 7.5)

When referring to books within your text, use italics.

Example: Plato's Republic is one of the most important books in the history of political theory. (See, CMS, 15.107)

We also put the names of journals, pamphlets, proceedings, newspapers and sections of newspapers in italics.

Example: Reinholdt always reads the New York Times in the morning.

The names of shorter articles , chapter titles, feature stories, short stories and essays are put in normal roman tpye and enclosed in quotation marks. So are the titles of dissertations and theses, lectures and papers read at conferences, as well as transcripts of meetings (and I presume pre-prints).

Example: "Revolution Without Dogma" is chapter eight of Boorstin's Hidden History.

When the latter such works are listed in the biography, they are not enclosed in quotation marks.

For more details, see the Chicago Manual of Style.

Top

Week 42: Italics with foreign words

When using foreign words or phrases that are probably unfamiliar to readers, place them in italics.

His feelings for his mother resembled those of Francois Villon: Dame du ciel, regents terrienne, Emperiere des infemaux palus....

Pense is the French word for thought.

A longer quote in a foreign language (two sentences or more) is not italicized, but is treated as a quote and set in quotation marks.

Isolated proper nouns (i.e. the names of cities, etc.) are not set in italics.

Although he never learned Kölsch, he felt quite comfortable living in Cologne (Köln).

The words of German nouns can be written in either capital or small-cased letters when used in isolation in English texts. It's your prerogative. When using them in a quotation, you would of course capitalize them.

Top

Week 43: On Writing Introductions

MIT has some helpful hints for essay writing listed on their homepage. Please check out the following tips to perhaps become a bit more conscious of rhetorical possibilities for introductions to your papers. On writing introductions

You may have read that MIT is now also posting their coursework online. Feel free to check their site. Material on writing courses is not yet available, but it will be in the future. MIT course materials online

For their writing and communication center, check here: MIT writing center

Top

Week 44: On the Capitalization of Academic Titles

The Chicago Manual of Style makes the following recommendations for academic titles.

If the title follows a persons name, it should be capitalized (7.26)
Bill Johnson, M.D.
Maureen Stroop, Doctor of Law
John Presely, Fellow of the Max Planck Society
Irene Lindt, Ph.D.

If the titles stand on their own, they are not capitalized.

He received his bachelor of arts degree in 1999.
She wrote a doctorate on gravitational force.
The philosopher, Daniel Dennet, has just finished another book on evolution and consciousness.
John Rees has a doctorate in philosophy.

If the titles become part of a persons name, then we capitalize them when the directly proceed the rest of the name. (14.8)
Dr. Rees is employed in St. Louis.
Prof. Messerly works at the University of Texas.

Certain academic abbreviations are always capitalized: (17.86)
Ph.D.
MA
BA
LL.D.
M.D.

Top

Reading Material:

The Elements of Style, by William Strunk Jr. Professors of English and newspaper editors have praised this book since its inception. It is a clear, concise guide that will help you learn to write clearly and concisely (see chapter 2; Online link below).

Style: Toward Clarity and Grace, by Joseph M. Williams and Gregory G. Colomb. This practical style manual focusses on academic rather than journalistic writing. It offers more depth and breadth than The Elements of Style.

The Chicago Manual of Style. This is the authoritative style guide for American academic publishing. While it will not help you learn to restructure your sentences, it will help you learn to punctuate. It is an essential reference book.

Top