Monthly information digest for EditPros clients and friends

CONTENTS FEATURE: Put your writing on a diet to communicate more efficiently GRAMMAR COACH: Fielding your questions FINDER'S FEE: Recommend a friend—and earn up to $500 FEATURE: Put your writing on a diet to communicate more efficiently      The holidays are ending, and now you've vowed to bring the annual year-end food binge to a close also. As you cut back on snacking and eliminate excess calories from your diet, this also is a good time to work on trimming the literary love handles from your writing.      Here's a 476-word letter that is bloated with empty grammatical calories — 53 redundancies, platitudes, and hollow, stale, turgid or superfluous phrases. It is a composite of actual examples we have encountered; to avoid embarrassing anyone, we've fictionalized names and the event (although it sounds like it might have been fun). Get out your red pen and see if you can improve the letter by making it leaner and more succinct, while preserving as much of the writer's verve as possible. Dear Pat,      I am writing because I would like to thank you for so generously offering to host the Attila Outerwear Company's annual fashion show in the main banquet room of the Last Resort. Upon examining numerous restaurant sites in our area, it is clear that the Last Resort will be just perfect.      Although I always look forward to receiving your holiday card, it has been nearly three decades since you and I last saw each other. I originally founded Attila Outerwear in 1985, and in the intervening years since then, we have grown substantially as a company. We currently have in excess of 60 employees, and we're the single largest exporter of manufactured goods in our county.      Last month I had the opportunity to meet your business partner, Roger Enout. Inasmuch as Roger noticed my fishing gear, we had a lengthy chat about the importance of further stopping the spread of round gobies and other predatory and invasive fish species. It is interesting that we have something in common — he has served as a past president of my college fraternity.      You have no doubt heard that last year's Attila Outerwear fashion show at the Candelabra Inn was marred by a disturbance. The restaurant manager told me he was not pleased with the admittedly strong musky odor of our barefooted dancers' Hun warrior costumes. I told him I would be more than happy to take his observations under advisement, but I think he basically doubted my sincerity. It might have been the exuberance of the spirited participants in our traditional 21-Hun salute that finally prompted police intervention. I found it personally embarrassing that we were charged by city officials for noise and public health ordinance violations. Needless to say, going forward we will not be bringing oxen into a dining facility.      Our program will initially begin at 4:30 p.m. with a cocktail hour. Our music definitely will be more subdued than in years past; we're swapping out the conga drum troupe for a jazz trio that will perform during the fashion show, which more than likely will last no more than a half hour or so.      We are more than willing to dispense with our customary parking lot bonfire if you can suggest a more workable solution, such as a better locale. The closing bonfire ceremony is not unlike an old-fashioned college football game rally, if you will.      It's hard to tell at this point when the program will finish up, because there are a myriad of unresolved details still persisting. But allow me to reassure you that we will do whatever we can to not cause any problems that would negatively impact our company's public image.      In closing, I would like to congratulate your son, Eric, for successfully passing his chauffeur's license examination. He'll more than likely wind up driving a lot of our celebrants home. Best regards, Frank      Now here's a paragraph-by-paragraph description of the wording we changed. Paragraph 1 ("I am writing because ...") We deleted "I am writing because"; the recipient knows you're writing, so get to the point. We also trimmed the clause "I would like to thank you" to its essential intent: "Thank you," and we deleted the unnecessary intensifier "so." Because Frank was examining restaurants rather than empty lots ("restaurant sites"), we deleted the word "sites." The clause "it is clear that" is a syntactic expletive (see http://www.editpros.com/news0808.html for an explanation); we changed it to "we realize." The word "just," used as an intensifier in the phrase "just perfect," is superfluous, so we deleted it. Paragraph 2 ("Although I always look forward ...") We corrected another syntactic expletive: "it has been nearly three decades." We deleted "originally" in the phrase "originally founded" because something can be founded only once. The phrases "in the intervening years" and "since then" are redundant; one of them must go. A more subtle form of a syntactic expletive lurks in the phrase "we have grown substantially as a company"; that's because the referent of the pronoun "we" isn't immediately clear (the intended subject is "the company"). The adverb "currently" is unnecessary because "we have" is a present-tense form. The phrase "in excess of" is needlessly wordy; we replaced it with "more than." The word "single" serves no purpose in the phrase "single largest," so we dumped it. Paragraph 3 ("Last month I had the opportunity ...") Frank wrote that he had an opportunity to meet Roger, but because people sometimes fail to take advantage of opportunities, we clarified it: "I met Roger." The ponderous phrase "inasmuch as" means no more than "because," so we replaced it. Action either stops or it doesn't, and once something is stopped it can't be "further stopped," so we fixed that. You know by know that "it is interesting that" is another syntactic expletive, so we corrected that. No one "serves as a past president" — a person either was a president, or now is a past president. Paragraph 4 ("You have no doubt heard ...") The underlying meaning of the phrase "you have no doubt" is "I don't doubt that" — a subtle double negative that can be expressed with one word: "probably." Frank wrote that the restaurant manager "was not pleased with the admittedly strong musky odor of the costumes"; he likely said he objected to the odor. The word "admittedly" is unnecessary, because Frank doesn't clarify who made that admission; more importantly, something either has a strong odor or it doesn't. The phrase "more than happy" is gratuitous and silly; if you're more than happy, you're elated or euphoric (and we doubt that those adjectives describe Frank, under the circumstances). An offer to "to take [something] under advisement" almost always sounds disingenuous — which is why the manager doubted Frank's sincerity. We deleted the word "basically" because it contributes nothing to understanding. Yes, "it might have been" and "I found it personally embarrassing" are both syntactic expletives; the word "personally" is superfluous, because we already know that Frank is talking about his emotional response. Frank used a passive construction — "we were charged by city officials for ... violations" to convey a statement that he could have expressed more concisely in active voice: "city officials charged us with ... violations." The expression "needless to say" is — well — needless, and so is the phrase "going forward" because the statement ("we will not" is in future tense. And "be bringing" can be replaced with one word: "bring." We're done with that paragraph. Paragraph 5 ("Our program will initially begin ...")      We can yank three unnecessary adverbs from this paragraph. The adverb "initially" is superfluous when used with "begin." The adverb "definitely" is almost always unnecessary. The adverb "out" in the colloquialism "swapping out" is superfluous; the word "swap" alone conveys the intended idea. The folksy idiom "more than likely" literally means "conclusively" or "assuredly," but we replaced it with a word that matched Frank's intended meaning: "probably." Paragraph 6 ("We are more than willing ...")      The expression "more than willing" is just as goofy as "more than happy"; the word "willing" alone will suffice. By definition, a solution is "workable"; if an idea is not "workable," it's not a solution. The pretentious idiom "not unlike" is a double negative formation that means nothing more than "like" or "resemble," so we changed that. The appendage "if you will" is another pretentious affection that exudes feigned cordiality. On the surface, it poses as the parenthetical equivalent of a question: "will you pardon me?" or "will you indulge me the latitude to speak frankly with you?" In the context of the sentence, it is unnecessary. Paragraph 7 ("It's hard to tell ...")      You already know this one: "it's hard to tell" is another syntactic expletive that needs correction. The expression "at this point" is a bloated way of saying "now." The adverb "up" is unnecessary in "finish up," and the preposition "of" is unnecessary in "myriad of" because the adjective "myriad" is synonymous with "numerous" and can stand on its own. The syntactic expletive "there are" can be corrected. We can eliminate another needless adverb: "still" (in "still persisting"), because "persist" means "continue to exist." As long as we're tidying text, let's get rid of "but allow me to reassure you that," in order to get right to the point of that sentence: "we will do whatever we can to not cause any problems." We'll replace the clumsy phrasing "to not cause" with a proper negating word: "prevent." And we'll replace "negatively impact" with "impair." Paragraph 8 ("In closing, I would like to ...")      The concluding paragraph is self-evident; the letter writer does not need to say "in closing, I would like to." As one sporting good manufacturer declares, just do it. In that closing statement, we can delete "successfully" in reference to passing his examination; passage inherently conveys the notion of success. You know what to do with "more than likely." We can replace "wind up driving" with one word: "drive." And we can express "a lot of" with one word: "many." THE RESULT      We've trimmed 102 words (21 percent) from our letter, which now contains only 374 words. Here's our revised, concise version:      Thank you for generously offering to host the Attila Outerwear Company's annual fashion show in the main banquet room of the Last Resort. Upon examining numerous restaurants in our area, we realize that the Last Resort will be perfect.      Although I always look forward to receiving your holiday card, nearly three decades have elapsed since you and I last saw each other. I founded Attila Outerwear in 1985 and, since then, our company has grown substantially. We have more than 60 employees, and we're the largest exporter of manufactured goods in our county.      Last month I met your business partner, Roger Enout. Roger noticed my fishing gear, prompting a lengthy chat about the importance of stopping the spread of round gobies and other predatory and invasive fish species. We discovered that we have something in common — he is a past president of my college fraternity.      You probably heard that last year's Attila Outerwear fashion show at the Candelabra Inn was marred by a disturbance. The restaurant manager told me he objected to the strong musky odor of our barefooted dancers' Hun warrior costumes. I told him I would try to resolve the problem, but I think he doubted my sincerity. Perhaps the exuberance of the spirited participants in our traditional 21-Hun salute finally prompted police intervention. I was embarrassed that city officials charged us with noise and public health ordinance violations. We will never again bring oxen into a dining facility.      Our program will begin at 4:30 p.m. with a cocktail hour. Our music will be more subdued than in years past; we're replacing the conga drum troupe with a jazz trio that will perform during the fashion show, which probably will last no more than a half hour or so.      We are willing to dispense with our customary parking lot bonfire if you can suggest a better solution, such as another locale. The closing bonfire ceremony resembles an old-fashioned college football game rally.      We're uncertain when the program will conclude, because myriad unresolved details persist. We will do whatever we can to prevent any problems that would impair our company's public image.      I congratulate your son, Eric, for passing his chauffeur's license examination. He'll likely drive a lot of our celebrants home.      Now Frank can fit his more concise letter on one page, and he'll communicate his intentions more clearly to Pat. And if Frank really has embraced the idea of staying lean, he'll walk instead of driving to the Post Office to mail it. Happy new year. GRAMMAR COACH: Fielding your questions 1. David E. wrote:      "I am reminded of how wonderful language is and I recall a quote by Winston Churchill, who had such a way with words. After an overzealous editor attempted to rearrange one of Churchill's sentences to avoid ending it in a preposition, the Prime Minister scribbled a single sentence in reply: 'This is the sort of bloody nonsense up with which I will not put.'" The grammar coach replies:      In conversation or casual written communication, ending a sentence with a preposition is fine. In many cases, a sentence-ending preposition is the most natural way to express a thought. Here's what the American Heritage Book of English Usage says about the acceptability of the practice under certain circumstances: "It was John Dryden, the 17th-century poet and dramatist, who first promulgated the doctrine that a preposition may not be used at the end a sentence. Grammarians in the 18th century refined the doctrine, and the rule has since become one of the most venerated maxims of schoolroom grammar. But sentences ending with prepositions can be found in the works of most of the great writers since the Renaissance. In fact, English syntax not only allows but sometimes even requires final placement of the preposition, as in We have much to be thankful for or That depends on what you believe in. Efforts to rewrite such sentences to place the preposition elsewhere can have comical results, as Winston Churchill demonstrated when he objected to the doctrine by saying This is the sort of English up with which I cannot put.      "Even sticklers for the traditional rule can have no grounds for criticizing sentences such as I don't know where she will end up or It's the most curious book I've ever run across; in these examples, 'up' and 'across' are used as adverbs, not prepositions. You can be sure of this because it is impossible to transform these examples into sentences with prepositional phrases. It is simply not grammatical English to say I don't know up where she will end and "It's the most curious book across which I have ever run." 2. Don F. wrote:      "Do you have any thoughts, please, on the following pronunciations: would-dunt for wouldn't, could-dunt for couldn't? It's as if someone has led these people to believe that an extra 'd' should be placed in the pronunciation. I hear it on TV sitcoms and I hear it being spoken by TV announcers. I also hear it on the street from time to time. A related one I hear quite often is 'dit-nt,' as if the second 'd' were a 't.'      A linguist friend of mine who teaches at the University of Tennessee once said she thought these pronunciations might have originated with an acting instructor somewhere in the lives of the actors. It isn't a regional matter. I would appreciate your thoughts." The grammar coach replies:      We, too, had noticed an odd pronunciation of contractions on television — additional to the ones you mentioned. We've noticed that several of the actors on one show have a peculiar affectation in their pronunciation of certain contractions.      They pronounce the word "didn't," for example, as "DID-it" (e.g., "No, he did-it come home last night"). Similarly, "wouldn't" becomes "WOOD-it," "weren't" is mutated to "WHIR-it," "wasn't" become "WUS-it" and "haven't" comes out "HAV-it." In those sloppy pronunciations, the "n" sound — which properly should be articulated as part of a slightly guttural sound formed by quickly touching the tongue to the roof of the mouth — is replaced by a short "i" sound. We attribute that to laziness. Less tongue movement is required to say "DID-it" than to properly articulate "DID-nt." The same is true of the sloppy pronunciation "DIT-nt" in place of "DID-nt."      The "WOOD-dunt" (wouldn't") and "COOD-dunt" (couldn't) pronunciations that you have noticed could be attributed to overcompensation. I wonder if those aberrant pronunciations constitute a forced (and misguided) effort to sound eloquent. In a vain attempt at elocution, those announcers and actors fabricate a consonant that doesn't belong there.      Are you perplexed by some aspect of grammar or word usage? Don't be shy! Ask the "grammar coach" at EditPros and we'll try to help—at no charge, just for the sport of it. FINDER'S FEE: Recommend a friend—and earn a finder's fee of up to $500      Do you know of a friend or colleague whose office can benefit from EditPros' services? If you do, EditPros may reward you with a "finder's fee" of up to $500.      EditPros LLC, established in 1993, performs writing, editing, proofreading and publication management services for newsletters, brochures, Web sites, annual reports, research studies, business proposals, and other informational and marketing materials. Our office is in Davis, Calif., between Sacramento and San Francisco; however, our clients include educational institutions, private corporations, health-care organizations, trade associations, scientific research institutions, Web site developers and government agencies from throughout the United States. We have worked with some of them for more than 10 years.      If you recommend our services to a friend or business colleague, and that introduction leads to an assignment for EditPros, we will award you a "finder's fee" equaling 10 percent of the amount we earn on the first assignment for the new client, up to a maximum finder's fee of $500. Naturally, the finder's fee is applicable only to client organizations for which we have not worked previously.      This offer will remain in effect until further notice. YOUR TURN: Ask the "grammar coach" or subscribe      We invite you to submit your questions to the "grammar coach," and we welcome you to subscribe to this monthly newsletter—which we'll send to your e-mail address at no charge. We respond to all "grammar coach" questions personally, but delays may occur because we must place top priority on assignments from our clients. We appreciate your patience and your interest.      You also can change your e-mail subscription address. For an address change, please indicate your existing AND your new e-mail address. Thank you. OUR PRIVACY POLICY for e-mail newsletter subscribers:      We do not use any commercial e-mail lists or automated mass-mailing programs, and we do not allow access to the list by anyone else for any reason. Our subscriber list is maintained by hand, and it is not for sale. We are protective of confidentiality because many of our readers are also clients of ours. Any accompanying advertising is placed by Yahoo.com in exchange for our use of the e-mail server to distribute this newsletter.