I too have read Orwell. Rule six is applicable to every communication, but many of his other points remain valid as well. Clarity, brevity and active voice are always better than pretentious language, padded prose and passive voice.
Paul via phone > On Oct 28, 2017, at 1:18 PM, Bob W-PDML <p...@web-options.com> wrote: > > I haven't read Paul's article, but I have read George Orwell's Politics and > the English Language, and one should always pay attention to his rule vi. > >> On 28 Oct 2017, at 17:11, Igor PDML-StR <pdml...@komkon.org> wrote: >> >> >> >> Paul, >> >> Thank you for the detailed response. I've learned some interesting things >> about NYT's style. >> >> My teachers/advisors (at all stages and levels) taught me that each >> paragraph should contain one main thought/point. Then, if you were to write >> down those main points, you get a reverse outline, which is a good tool for >> checking on the coherence of the written communication (paper, thesis, ...) >> And that's what I've been teaching my students in the communication courses. >> >> >> I think I see the rational behind shorter paragraphs (in a way similar to >> that for shorter sentences): they are usually simpler to read. But I'd say, >> not at the expense of splitting the thought. But the same way as a long >> sentence doesn't get just cut in parts, a paragraph doesn't get split up >> into parts before the thought is completed. >> >> >> And, I am failing to see the rational behind quotes being separate >> paragraphs. Moreover, I am rather confused how that is supposed to work >> here: the same direct quote is split into two parts between the last two >> paragraphs. It is not that every sentence of the direct quote are in a >> separate paragraph: Three sentences of that direct quote are split between >> two paragraphs. >> >> Again, sorry, - I don't mean to start a debate here. Rather, I am just >> explaining why I am still confused by NYT's style. >> >> Igor >> >> PS. This is not to undermine that the article is very interesting. >> >> >> >> Paul Stenquist Fri, 27 Oct 2017 18:57:51 -0700 wrote: >> >> Hi Igor, >> >> The Auto Alliance point regarding how long it would take to equip the fleet >> is self refuting in that they said the same thing six years ago. More >> importantly, I get only 900 words, so I have to pick my battles. >> >> >> In regard to the paragraph breaks, the first is debatable but a split >> decision in my view and the editors. The Times philosophy says short graphs >> are better. >> >> The graphs toward the end of the story are mandated by an immutable Times >> style rule: every direct quote is a separate graph. That is written in >> stone, and it seems to have worked well for at least 50 years. >> >> Paul via phone >> >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
