Plenty of people have been offering their opinions lately about how to manage the current crisis in higher education. One phrase that keeps popping up in all the talk absolutely grates me: “We need to work smarter not harder.” I heard that phrase repeatedly about 10 years ago in lots of federal agencies that were tightening their belts. That was about the same time as “paradigm shift” was the phrase du jour in higher ed.
My cynical opinion is that such phrases are really just voiced verbal pauses — the equivalent of long “ums” that fill the vacuum when someone really doesn’t know what to say. Sort of a more official way of saying “yada yada yada”: You fill in the blanks.
What phrases are driving you crazy in your institution’s jargon these days?
Follow On Hiring through your favorite RSS reader:
27 Responses to And the Triteness Award Goes To . . .
Ben Hemmens - October 9, 2011 at 4:16 pm
I’d add: print it out and read it on paper. I don’t think it’s just because a trip to the ophthalmologist is overdue that I can see things better on paper than on the screen.
Even better (for me): print it out at night, sleep on it, and read it again after breakfast – somehow the office and kitchen being at opposite ends of the apartment helps with this, too.
marcleavitt - October 9, 2011 at 9:08 pm
Every editor(or writer) needs an editor. Because of the intense focus, you develop blind spots. I recall editing a 28-page weekly tabloid. I had three days for makeup and no backup editor. When I put the magazine to bed, I did a final proof. I looked at the cover the next day and saw I had made a typo in the hed.The problem is inherent in the process. You try to do better next time.
Bob Andray - October 9, 2011 at 10:16 pm
I’ll second that. And never, never, send anything late at night.
Ben Hemmens - October 10, 2011 at 5:33 am
… if for no other reason than that the image of you being at your desk early in the morning is probably better for clients than thinking you are always up late trying to finish things.
bizdean - October 10, 2011 at 8:37 am
Yes, ”the passive is a natural and honorable feature of fluent English,” but it’s BORING!
Stan Carey - October 10, 2011 at 9:38 am
I’m very impressed by Richard Peck’s technique of rewriting every chapter 1 without even reading it. I don’t think I could do that! (The link to his Wikipedia page needs fixing, by the way: the “_k” at the end disrupts it.)
Taking a break from our text is a very worthwhile tactic — but, as you say, not one that’s always available. And even when it is, there are limits to its effectiveness. Joseph M. Williams wrote (in “Style: Toward Clarity and Grace”) that when we read our own writing, “all we’re doing is reminding ourselves of what we wanted it to mean when we wrote it. That means that we are our own worst editors.”
carolsaller - October 10, 2011 at 10:40 am
(Link fixed–thanks, Stan!)
mick davidson - October 10, 2011 at 11:28 am
Thanks, there’s some good advice there. It is very hard to edit your own work and get it 100% right. I’ve been doing it for 20 years as a lone technical author, and I’m still finding I’m quite capable of getting it wrong. I find the printed word is the best way to discover most of my errors, but am loath to do that in my day job – in fact I don’t. For my novels and other fiction (see my website: http://mickdavidsonpicturesword.weebly.com/writing.html) I think it is a unavoidable.
As for writing yourself out of a job, I doubt that’ll ever happen. :) Cheers.
Eden Mabee - October 10, 2011 at 11:30 am
It can be boring; but then so can using an “all active” voice. Nothing that one sees all the time can be special or exciting by default. So use both for their respective purposes and enjoy! =)
KMHahn - October 10, 2011 at 11:43 am
My addition: I shut my door and read the whole article out loud. This is even better with co-author. It has taken me a full day to read the article sometimes, which does not say much about my writing, but it is the most helpful self-editing thing I do.
Trey Medley - October 10, 2011 at 12:10 pm
Regarding the last point of split infinitives and prepositions at the end of sentences, this seems to be more a matter of geography than general academic practice. It is true that in the US these are acceptable and need not be expunged, but, unfortunately, much humanities writing in the UK of an academic nature requires one not split infinitives nor end sentences with a preposition. Therefore, unless you are already very well-known, if you want to be well received in the UK, it is still best to avoid split infinitives and ending sentences with prepositions. Still, for internationally published books from Americans, a small amount is tolerated, just don’t go overboard.
rambleonrose - October 10, 2011 at 12:27 pm
Good suggestions. But it is no longer acceptable to use “gendered generics” (e.g. “himself”) when referring to all people (or all writers). See
The Chicago Manual of Style 233 (15th ed. 2003)
green_hornist - October 10, 2011 at 4:45 pm
This is very good advice overall, especially about the need for time and distance in proofreading. If you are serious about taking pride in your writing, though, you will go the extra mile and expunge all the passive constructions and split infinitives, except those that truly get you around an awkward construction. Anything less than that is sloppy and lazy.
green_hornist - October 10, 2011 at 4:47 pm
I like to send e-mail messages to my bosses that are automatically timed to go out in the wee hours of the morning. I don’t write or hit send then. I go to bed and let the computer do it. Makes them think I stay up all night just doing things for them :)
debradurham - October 10, 2011 at 7:36 pm
I find it also helps me to read out loud. I do one pass just to find bits that are awkward or sticky, and a second to pinpoint the details that need further attention. If the topic is complex or technical, I sometimes record myself reading, too, so that I can focus exclusively on listening.
I can see how reading aloud would work with a single co-author, but can imagine it getting bogged down with three or more. Is that your experience?
nyhist - October 10, 2011 at 10:00 pm
I always tell students to learn to be aware of their own foibles, and I tell them mine (which makes them laugh). I’ll accept an occasional split infinitive. Even fragments, when appropriate. But I still don’t like sentences that prepositions make an end of. :-)
Chris - October 11, 2011 at 1:14 am
I’m confused (genuinely, I’m not being disagreeable).
Is “hed” field-specific jargon, or is this a typographical error itself?
Dr. CaSo - October 11, 2011 at 2:08 am
I really don’t understand why people are so afraid of the passive! It is extremely useful and people use it all the time without even noticing that they do! There is nothing wrong or lazy or sloppy with the passive! Scientists (and many others) HAVE to use it to avoid repeating “the research asked the participants to do this, the researchers asked the participants to do that…” ad nauseam. The English language (unlike other languages) has this beautiful and complex voice (try teaching it to non-native speakers of English!) and people repeat what their high school teachers told them without even understanding what they are really saying. I am willing to bet that 95% of the people who keep saying “don’t use the passive” wouldn’t actually be able to explain what it is exactly and how it is formed (<– this is a passive!) without having to look it up in a grammar book. Thank you, Carol, for daring to say that it is OK to use it! I am so tired of this stupid and useless "rule."
OK, tell me what's lazy and sloppy in the next sentences:
"My brother lives in Switzerland. He moved there last year because he was offered (<–passive) a great job. At first, he found a great apartment but then was told (<–passive) that the rent was going to double so he decided to move out."
Ben Hemmens - October 11, 2011 at 9:20 am
Although a certain rhythm, with a certain naturalness is needed in written texts and this naturalness must somehow be related to speakability, I still think the goals are different than for texts whose purpose is to be spoken (and recorded). I’ve written a few hours of voiceovers and happily, the voice artist who recorded them said they were good. But it was a very different game than “normal” writing.
I think in writing you can allow yourself more complex sentences because we don’t read linearly, we go back and forth a bit; and in a spoken text, more repetition may be a good idea, because nobody listens without little gaps of attention.
Speaking a text as a correction method may work just because it forces you to look at the words that are actually there.
Donald W. Jordan - October 11, 2011 at 8:10 pm
I find reading the text out loud works really well if the writing is short enough. Often, when writers sight read, they read what they intended rather than what is actually there, but the act of articulating as well as listening while you read out loud will catch many otherwise unseen errors.
Rasana Atreya - October 12, 2011 at 6:01 am
Great post. I liked the fact you think it is okay for writers to use passive voice. Every critique group has a list of learned no-nos: passive voice/”show, not tell” etc which get thrust on every writer. While you cannot use them all the time, they have their place in writing. Thank you for giving us the permission to use passive voice!
pooksocket - October 12, 2011 at 2:20 pm
I had a department chair who sent out things at 4 a.m.
Which meant he was either stinking drunk and thus belligerent, or simply belligerent and looking for an I-was-drunk!-Honest! excuse.
josgirl13 - October 13, 2011 at 9:36 pm
“Hed” is newspaper shorthand for “headline.”
satris - October 14, 2011 at 5:12 pm
in reply to Dr. CaSo
OK, tell me what’s lazy and sloppy in the next sentences:”My brother lives in Switzerland. He moved there last year because he was offered (<–passive) a great job. At first, he found a great apartment but then was told (<–passive) that the rent was going to double so he decided to move out."
Actually, I thought that most of your post was great — but this last part reminded me of the many emails from students who use the expression "I was told." I'm the advising coordinator for the department and every semester I receive numerous emails from student who write "I was told" X, where X is some erroneous, fictional, outdated, or otherwise inappropriate piece of disinformation about course requirements. I always wonder who told them these falsehoods — their roommate? an incompetent advisor in another department? their parents? their older sibling who is an alum? another student with an entirely different degree program? I cannot guess. Likewise, in your example, your brother was told that the rent was going to double. Who told him? the landlord? A fortune-teller? another tenant in the building who wanted your brother to move out so that his own relative or friend could move in? a neighbor down the street who wears tin foil hats? the neighborhood gossip? the same person who warned him previously about the sky falling? In my experience, when someone "was told" something, that something is usually not the case. Not to give the source of the alleged informnation is sloppy. It's so vague that sometimes I think the person was never told at all: they're just making an assumption on their own.
MarjoryMunson - October 17, 2011 at 12:33 pm
“Use of the first person. Even formal scholarly writing came around some time ago to allowing a writer to speak for himself.”I was so happy when this happened. Use of circumlocutions such as “this author,” ”Munson,” or other inventions to comply with the former rule always made me feel that the writer was attempting to avoid taking responsibility for what they were writing.
John Cowan - November 25, 2011 at 3:57 pm
Originally “hed” was a deliberate misspelling used to distinguish instructions on copy from the copy itself. Thus if you got a wire story with “hed to kum” (or just “HTK”) written on it, you knew that the headline was yet to come. ”Head to come” could be understood as the instruction to insert those words into the text. “Graf” was used in the same way for “paragraph”, as in “last graf”; because it was a misspelling, it would never appear in the copy, so had to be part of an instruction.
Nowadays, “hed” and “graf” are just journalists’s in-group jargon.
ellensmyth - February 29, 2012 at 3:09 pm
“A number of so-called rules are obediently observed by writers who haven’t cracked a grammar since high school.” Did you mean “a grammar *book* since high school”?
Thanks for the article. Putting things away can make all of the difference, I agree. But I do think that passive voice can be, and often is, overused.