\r\n| \r\n Development of ideas<\/span><\/p>\r\n<\/td>\r\n | \r\n Sentence structure<\/span><\/p>\r\n<\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n<\/tbody>\r\n<\/table>\r\nYou may find yourself thinking, \u201cWell, it depends,\u201d or, \u201cBut what if\u2026?\u201d You\u2019re absolutely right to think so. These lists are just guidelines; every writer will have a different hierarchy of concerns. Always try to think in terms of, \u201cDoes this affect my understanding of the writing?\u201d<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\nAre HOCs More Important than LOCs?<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\r\nNo, not necessarily. HOCs tend to interrupt a reader\u2019s understanding of the writing, and that\u2019s why they need to be addressed first. However, if a LOC becomes a major obstacle, then it naturally becomes a higher priority.<\/span><\/p>\r\nThink of an example of how a Lower Order Concern could become a Higher Order Concern.<\/span><\/p>\r\nHere are some other issues you might face. These may be more difficult to categorize, and they may largely depend on the writing. If you think, \u201cIt depends,\u201d make notes about the circumstances under which these issues could be a HOC or a LOC.<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n \t- Evaluating sources<\/span><\/li>\r\n \t
- citation method<\/span><\/li>\r\n \t
- style<\/span><\/li>\r\n \t
- paragraph structure<\/span><\/li>\r\n \t
- active vs. passive voice<\/span><\/li>\r\n \t
- format<\/span><\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n
How to Address LOCs<\/h2>\r\n![\"Two](\"https:\/\/s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com\/courses-images\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/107\/2016\/07\/07151135\/5123535399_c46dfac5d2_z.jpg\") Analyze your use of source material<\/strong>. Check any paraphrases and quotations against the original texts. Quotations should replicate the original author\u2019s words, while paraphrases should maintain the original author\u2019s meaning but have altered language and sentence structures. For each source, confirm that you have adhered to the preferred style guide for the target journal or other venue.<\/span><\/p>\r\nConsider individual sentences in terms of grammar, mechanics, and punctuation<\/strong>. Many LOCs can be revised by isolating and examining different elements of the text. Read the text sentence by sentence, considering the grammar and sentence structure. Remember, a sentence may be grammatically correct and still confuse readers.<\/span>\u00a0<\/sup><\/span>If you notice a pattern\u2014say, a tendency to misplace modifiers or add unnecessary commas\u2014read the paper looking only for that error. Read the document backwards, word for word, looking for spelling errors. Throughout the writing process and especially at this stage of revision, keep a dictionary, a thesaurus, and a writing handbook nearby.<\/span><\/p>\r\nStrategies such as reading aloud and seeking feedback are useful at all points in the revision process<\/strong>. Reading aloud will give you distance from the text and prevent you from skimming over what is actually written on the page. This strategy will help you to identify both HOCs, such as missing concepts, and LOCs, such as typos. Additionally, seeking feedback will allow you to test your ideas and writing on real readers. Seek feedback from readers both inside and outside of your target audience in order to gain different perspectives.<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n\"Correctness\" in Writing<\/h2>\r\nIn thinking about correctness, it\u2019s important to recognize that some rules are more important than others. <\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\nEssential\u00a0Rules of the English Language<\/h3>\r\nJoseph Williams helpfully distinguishes three kinds of rules in Williams and Bizup\u2019s Style<\/em>.[footnote]Williams first described invented rules in J.M. Williams, \u201cA Phenomenology of Error,\u201d College Composition and Communication<\/em>, 32, no. 2 (1981): 152-168.[\/footnote]<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>First, there are rules that are basic to English, such as \u201cthe car\u201d not \u201ccar the.\u201d For example, <\/span><\/p>\r\nINCORRECT: I thought whether true claims not. <\/span><\/p>\r\nCORRECT: I hadn\u2019t thought about whether the claims were true. <\/span><\/p>\r\nIf you\u2019ve gotten most of your formal education in English, you probably observe these rules routinely. If your writing has mismatches of number (singular\/plural) or tense, it might be\u00a0<\/span>due to haste or carelessness rather than unawareness. Similarly, capitalizing the first word of a sentence and ending with appropriate punctuation are basic rules that most people comply with automatically when writing for a professor or in other formal situations.<\/span><\/p>\r\n![\"Slogan](\"https:\/\/s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com\/courses-images\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/107\/2016\/07\/07155108\/8620544599_8232076a34_z.jpg\") <\/p>\r\n\r\n
Rules of Formality<\/h4>\r\nWilliams\u2019 second category is comprised of rules that distinguish standard written English from the informal variants that people use in their day-to-day lives. Most students with middle-class and non-immigrant backgrounds use informal vernaculars that closely parallel standard written English. Students with working-class or more modest backgrounds or who are members of transnational and multi-lingual communities may use informal variants of English in their everyday lives that are quite different from standard written English. It\u2019s an unfortunate reality of social inequality that such students have to expend more effort than their middle-class English-speaking counterparts to master the standard conventions. It\u2019s not really fair, but at least the mechanics and rules of formal writing are documented and unambiguous. Learning to communicate effectively in different social contexts is part of becoming an educated person. <\/span><\/p>\r\nSome examples: <\/span><\/p>\r\nINFORMAL: We ain\u2019t got no more of them cookies. <\/span><\/p>\r\nFORMAL: We don\u2019t have any more of those cookies. <\/span><\/p>\r\nINFORMAL: My coat, my phone, and my keys was all lock in the car. <\/span><\/p>\r\nFORMAL: My coat, my phone, and my keys were all locked in the car. <\/span><\/p>\r\nINFORMAL: u shd go 2 caf\u00e9 b4 wrk bc coffee <\/span><\/p>\r\nFORMAL: You should go the caf\u00e9 before work to get some coffee. <\/span><\/p>\r\nThe informal versions are clearly English, and they\u2019re widely understandable to others. The first and second examples contain choices of tense, number, and punctuation that are <\/span>inappropriate in standard written English even though they don\u2019t actually impede communication<\/span>. Most students already understand that these first two categories of rules (rules fundamental to English and the rules of standard written English) are obligatory for formal writing.<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\nRules as Folklore<\/h4>\r\nThere is a third category of rules that Williams notes and enthusiastically criticizes; he calls them \u201cinvented rules\u201d because they usually arise from busybody grammarians rather than enduring patterns of customary language use. Some invented rules Williams calls \u201coptions\u201d: those that your reader will notice when you observe <\/i>them and not care if you don\u2019t. Here\u2019s an example of the fabled <\/span>don\u2019t-end-a-sentence-with-a-preposition rule<\/span>: <\/span><\/p>\r\nOBSERVING THE RULE: With which concept can we analyze this problem? <\/span><\/p>\r\nIGNORING THE RULE: Which concept can we analyze this problem with? <\/span><\/p>\r\nSome grammarians would claim that only the first version is correct. However, you probably have the (accurate) impression that professional writers are much more likely to choose the second version. This rule does not reflect real-life customary practice, even in standard written English. That\u2019s why Williams calls it an \u201cinvented rule.\u201d Most of your professors are fine with the second version above, the one that ends a sentence with a preposition.<\/span><\/p>\r\n![\"A](\"https:\/\/s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com\/courses-images\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/107\/2016\/07\/07160237\/8029219811_a8044f623e_z-300x300.jpg\") Williams calls the second sub-category of invented rules \u201cfolklore.\u201d They\u2019re invented rules (like \u201coptions\u201d) in that grammarians think writers should observe them, but, in reality, no one does. Williams gleefully lists instances in which the very grammarians who propose these rules go on to unselfconsciously violate them.[footnote]J.M. Williams, Phenomenology of Error<\/i>[\/footnote]<\/i><\/span>\u00a0<\/span>You may have heard of these rules, but they\u2019re widely considered absurd. <\/span><\/p>\r\nFor example, some grammarians are dismayed that people use \u201cthat\u201d and \u201cwhich\u201d interchangeably, and they argue that writers should use \u201cthat\u201d to indicate restrictive elements and \u201cwhich\u201d to indicate non-restrictive elements. A restrictive element is one that makes a necessary specification about something; a non-restrictive element is one that simple adds extra information. Consider these two examples: <\/span><\/p>\r\nVersion 1: <\/span><\/p>\r\nThe party that Alex went to was shut down by the police. <\/span><\/p>\r\nVersion 2: <\/span><\/p>\r\nThe party which Alex went to was shut down by the police. <\/span><\/p>\r\nFor almost all readers, versions 1 and 2 are saying the exact same thing. For the persnickety grammarian, version 1 is specifying the party that Alex <\/i>went to, and not the party that, say, Jordan went to, while version 2 is simply inserting extra information about Alex\u2019s attendance at the party. According to these grammarians, \u201cthat Alex went to\u201d adds critically needed information (restrictive) while \u201cwhich Alex went to\u201d adds bonus information (non-restrictive). <\/span><\/p>\r\nAs Williams and some others explain: <\/span>it\u2019s bullshit<\/span>. Professional writers use commas and carefully chosen words to do the job of distinguishing restrictive and non-restrictive elements, and they choose whichever relative pronoun (\u201cthat\u201d or \u201cwhich\u201d) sounds better in context. You could observe the distinction between that and which if you like, but no one would notice. More importantly, observing this invented rule wouldn\u2019t necessarily make your writing any clearer, more concise, or more graceful.<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\nOne Particular Folklore Rule to Follow<\/h4>\r\nThere is one rule that Williams calls \u201cfolklore\u201d that you probably have to observe in college papers nonetheless: that is, the rule that <\/span>you can\u2019t start sentences with But, And, So, For, or Yet (or other coordinating conjunctions)<\/span>. Browsing through assigned read<\/span>ings and articles published in major newspapers and magazines will quickly lead you to texts that violate this so-called rule. Here are two examples:<\/p>\r\nFrom the front page of the New York Times<\/em> January 7, 2014:[footnote]Peter Eavis, \u201cSteep Penalties Taken in Stride by JPMorgan Chase,\u201d New York Times<\/em>, January 7, 2014, page A1.[\/footnote]\u00a0\u201cBut since the financial crisis, JPMorgan has become so large and profitable that it has been able to weather the government\u2019s legal blitz, which has touched many parts of the bank\u2019s sprawling operations.\u201d And a little further down we see, \u201cYet JPMorgan\u2019s shares are up 28 percent over the last 12 months.\u201d<\/p>\r\nFrom a news article in Science<\/em>, December 21, 2007:[footnote]Richard A. Kerr, <\/span>\u201cGlobal Warming Coming Home to Roost in the American Midwest,\u201d <\/span>Science <\/i>318, no. 5858 (2007): 1859.<\/span>[\/footnote] \u00a0<\/span>\u201cAltered winds blew in more warm air from the subtropics only in models in which mid-latitude oceans warmed as observed; apparently, the warmer oceans altered the circulation. And that ocean warming is widely viewed as being driven by the strengthening greenhouse.\u201d<\/p>\r\nWhether or not to start sentences with conjunctions will ultimately come down to a matter of your instructors' preferences.\u00a0Thus, you shouldn\u2019t start sentences with \u201cAnd,\u201d \u201cBut\u201d or other coordinating conjunctions unless you\u2019ve been specifically invited to.\r\n\r\nThere are countless other rules beyond the ones discussed here. The point of these examples is to show that you don\u2019t have to observe every little rule you\u2019ve ever heard of. There are some elements of mechanics that you have to master. These practices will gradually become second nature. It\u2019s sometimes hard to know at the outset which rules are standard, which are options, and which are folklore. With the help of a good handbook and your instructors, you\u2019ll learn them over time.\r\n\r\nThe larger point here is that that observing rules isn\u2019t about traversing a minefield of potential errors; it\u2019s just about learning and adopting the practices appropriate to your audience, which is one of the first rules of writing well.","rendered":"Style<\/h2>\nThe stage of proofreading is often focused solely on “correctness”: making sure that all the details are right, and that language is used according to the rules. Proofreading also offers a great opportunity to address more personal concerns, however. It’s a chance to focus on your style<\/strong>, and allows you to craft the final product that best represents your unique perspective.<\/p>\n![\"The](\"https:\/\/s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com\/courses-images\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/107\/2016\/07\/30232001\/6595650871_d1d45074f4_z-225x300.jpg\") A writer’s style is what sets his or her writing apart. Style is the way writing is dressed up (or down) to fit the specific context, purpose, or audience. Word choice, sentence fluency, and the writer\u2019s voice \u2014 all contribute to the style of a piece of writing. How a writer chooses words and structures sentences to achieve a certain effect is also an element of style. When Thomas Paine wrote \u201cThese are the times that try men\u2019s souls,\u201d he arranged his words to convey a sense of urgency and desperation. Had he written \u201cThese are bad times,\u201d it\u2019s likely he wouldn\u2019t have made such an impact!<\/span><\/p>\nStyle is usually considered to be the province of literary writers. Novelists such as Ernest Hemingway and William Faulkner and poets such as Emily Dickinson and Walt Whitman are well known for their distinctive literary styles. But journalists, scientists, historians, and mathematicians also have distinctive styles, and they need to know how to vary their styles to fit different audiences. For example, the first-person narrative style of a popular magazine like National Geographic<\/em> is quite different from the objective, third-person expository style of a research journal like Scientific American, even though both are written for informational purposes.<\/span><\/p>\nNot just right and wrong<\/span><\/h2>\nStyle is not a matter of right and wrong but of what is appropriate for a particular setting and audience. Consider the following two passages, which were written by the same author on the same topic with the same main idea, yet have very different styles:<\/span><\/p>\n\u201cExperiments show that Heliconius butterflies are less likely to ovipost on host plants that possess eggs or egg-like structures. These egg mimics are an unambiguous example of a plant trait evolved in response to a host-restricted group of insect herbivores.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n\u201cHeliconius butterflies lay their eggs on Passiflora vines. In defense the vines seem to have evolved fake eggs that make it look to the butterflies as if eggs have already been laid on them.\u201d (Example from Myers, G. (1992). Writing biology: Texts in the social construction of scientific knowledge. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. p. 150.)<\/span><\/p>\nWhat changed was the audience. The first passage was written for a professional journal read by other biologists, so the style is authoritative and impersonal, using technical terminology suited to a professional audience. The second passage, written for a popular science magazine, uses a more dramatic style, setting up a conflict between the butterflies and the vines, and using familiar words to help readers from non-scientific backgrounds visualize the scientific concept being described. Each style is appropriate for the particular audience.<\/span><\/p>\nElements of style<\/span><\/h2>\nMany elements of writing contribute to an author\u2019s style, but three of the most important are word choice, sentence fluency, and voice.<\/span><\/p>\nWord Choice<\/span><\/h3>\nGood writers are concise and precise, weeding out unnecessary words and c![\"The](\"https:\/\/s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com\/courses-images\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/107\/2016\/07\/30232326\/5187987248_4577f3e3e3_o-300x244.jpg\") hoosing the exact word to convey meaning. Precise words\u2014active verbs, concrete nouns, specific adjectives\u2014help the reader visualize the sentence. Good writers use adjectives sparingly and adverbs rarely, letting their nouns and verbs do the work.<\/span><\/p>\nGood writers also choose words that contribute to the flow of a sentence. Polysyllabic words, alliteration, and consonance can be used to create sentences that roll off the tongue. Onomatopoeia and short, staccato words can be used to break up the rhythm of a sentence.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/h3>\nSentence Fluency<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\nSentence fluency is the flow and rhythm of phrases and sentences. Good writers use a variety of sentences with different lengths and rhythms to achieve different effects. They use parallel structures within sentences and paragraphs to reflect parallel ideas, but also know how to avoid monotony by varying their sentence structures.<\/span><\/p>\nGood writers also arrange their ideas within a sentence for greatest effect. They avoid loose sentences, deleting extraneous words and rearranging their ideas for effect. Many students initially write with a looser oral style, adding words on to the end of a sentence in the order they come to mind. This rambling style is often described as a \u201cword dump\u201d where everything in a student\u2019s mind is dumped onto the paper in no particular order. There is nothing wrong with a word dump as a starting point: the advantage of writing over speaking is that writers can return to their words, rethink them, and revise them for effect. Tighter, more readable style results when writers choose their words carefully, delete redundancies, make vague words more specific, and use subordinate clauses and phrases to rearrange their ideas for the greatest effect.<\/span><\/p>\nVoice<\/span><\/h3>\nBecause voice is difficult to measure reliably, it is often left out of scoring formulas for writing tests. Yet voice is an essential element of style that reveals the writer\u2019s personality. A writer\u2019s voice can be impersonal or chatty, authoritative or reflective, objective or passionate, serious or funny.<\/span><\/p>\nStrategies to Revise for Style<\/h2>\nRead an essay draft out loud, preferably to another person<\/strong>. Better yet, have another person read your draft to you. Note how that person interprets your words. Does it come across as you had meant it originally? If not, revise.<\/p>\nAdopt a persona that’s related to your topic<\/strong>. Write from the perspective of this person you create: what language would a young woman who’d just spent two years in the Peace Corps use, for instance, if the essay were about the value of volunteer work? How would the words on the page of a project about gun control look coming from the perspective of a very conservative gun owner?<\/p>\nCombine (some) short sentences, or break apart (some) long sentences<\/strong>. Sentence length variety is an asset to your readers, as noted above. If you find a stretch of your essay that uses many sentences of approximately the same length close together, focus on combining or breaking apart there.<\/p>\nPunch up the word choice<\/strong>. Not every word in an essay\u00a0can be a “special” word, nor should they be. But if your writing in an area feels a little flat, the injection of a livelier word can have strong rhetorical and emotional impact on your reader. Think of these words as jewels in the right setting. Often swapping out “to be” verbs (is, was, were, etc.) with more action-packed verbs has immediate, positive impact. Adjectives are also good candidates for updating–look for “things” and “stuff,” or “very” and “many,” to replace with more precise terminology.<\/p>\nLower Order Concerns<\/h2>\nPreviously we examined\u00a0higher order concerns (HOCs) as part of the\u00a0revision stage of the writing process. Once we move to the proofreading stage, it’s time to consider the lower order concerns (LOCs). The difference is simple: HOCs are global issues, or issues that affect how a reader understands the entire paper; LOCs are issues that don\u2019t necessarily<\/i> interrupt understanding of the writing by themselves.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n| \n HOCs<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n | \n LOCs<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n\n| \n Audience<\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n Grammar<\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n\n| \n Thesis statement<\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n Punctuation<\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | | |
|