Playing musical words

Posted on September 17, 2013 by knlistman

stephs (4)One of the quickest ways to make your writing voice stand out from the crowd is to master the use of literary devices. Some devices are just fancy names for specific types of diction and syntax.

For example, anastrophe is a type of hyperbaton in which the position of a single word is changed from the normal syntax for emphasis. In case that definition doesn’t make sense,  you can just remember that anastrophe is what makes the speech of Yoda in Star Wars so distinctive.

However, there are many more literary devices that have potential. These involve selecting words for their actual sounds, as the sloshing, crackling, twinkling onomatopoeia words. I fondly think of these as the ‘musical’ literary devices. Longer words, with many syllables ending in vowels, like onomatopoeia, sound elegant, while short consonant bound ones, such as slang, carry a cocky connotation. I’ve witnessed people discussing whether it is more important to be intelligent or smart. To me that is a moot point, as both words mean the same thing. However, people base shades of meaning on types of sound. (This is important to remember when naming characters.)

You can consciously change your writing voice by selecting words that alliterate, or begin with the same sound. Be aware of overusing alliteration in a mnemonic manner such as persuasive writers and speakers are fond of doing. Every point you make does not have to begin with the same letter. Instead look at Robert Frost’s poem Birches which uses words beginning with “b” in a playful manner for his celebration of the simple joys of youth.

Consonance, or repeating a consonant at places other than at the beginning of words, as in “barn,” “turn” and “consternation” has a similar poetic effect. Assonance refers to the intentional repetition of vowel sounds, like the long “o” in Edgar Allan Poe’s Eldorado. English does not have a huge number of vowel sounds so that readers may not be swayed much by the effect of assonance. However, combine assonance with ending consonance and you have the ever popular sound of rhyming words. Again, don’t go overboard with this device.

The pleasantness or harshness of word when read aloud has a subtle impact on mood even when they are read silently. The word cacophony contains one element that makes a word harsh–the repetition of the “k” sound. Repeating other voiced consonant, such as “d,” hard “g” and “z,” also create a guttural sound. Euphony–the beautiful sounding effect–is created by using words full of unvoiced consonants such as the soft “s,” “l,” “j,” and the “f” sound, which is found in the middle of euphony.

Does getting down to the sound of letters really affect the way people perceive your writing? Have you heard of the Bouba/kiki effect? The sound of letters affects the way people perceive shapes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bouba/kiki_effect). We probably all realize this is also occurring in writing, even if no one has managed to construct an experiment to prove it yet. So, keep on playing with musical words to embellish your tone of voice.

Posted in Literary devices, Style and voice, Writer's resource | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Deciding on a direction

Posted on September 14, 2013 by knlistman

TX_dallas b

“Say what you are going to say, say it, and finally say what you have said.” I don’t know how many times I’ve heard this rule for organizing the written word repeated in the educational realm. But rules are meant to be broken. Following this rule consistently will end up putting your readers to sleep. So many formulas to create structure in writing breed boredom instead. Good writing requires movement towards a goal, without being completely predictable.

There are multiple types of graphic organizers to assist the writer in brainstorming: such as branching, bridging, and bubbling. However, consider exactly how the reader would comprehend a composition if you wrote it with one central idea and all the related sub-ideas jutting out in different directions? This would be like constantly returning to home between every leg of a road trip. There is no way to get away from the fact that reading is a linear activity. When you examine all the types of organizational schemes for writing they fit into one of two categories: time-based narrative (sequential) or subject-based (non-sequential). Organizing your thoughts as words actually requires a progression towards an end using one or both of these.

Fiction, biography, history, and the unbelievable true story are predominantly sequential. But flashbacks, flash forwards, clusters of events and parallel accounts all break into the march of time so the narrative doesn’t always move forward. There is a larger, overshadowing orderliness based on the theme.  Being conscious of this helps you know when to insert a time bending device, such as flashback, because it assists the reader in understanding the next step forward to reaching the goal.

Non-sequential writing may move from topic to topic based on location, people or some other criteria, such as a biological tree. However, the overarching movement is normally from a topic of less importance to one of greater impact. Subject-based writing may still contain many chronological narratives. In fact rarely do you find a book or article that is exclusively composed of sequential narrative or discussion of topics. Most writing is a blend.

Finally there is the matter of digression–the comment only barely relevant to your article, story or book. Many authors divert from their goal to expresses a pet peeve, or to praise a tangent idea. When is it okay to digress? There is no hard and fast rule. If there were, you would only be breaking it to keep your writing interesting. You must decide if the digression adds to the color of the story, gives insights to your view of the world or simply makes the piece incoherent. As with other characteristics of voice, organization requires judgment, and that is why it reflects your uniqueness.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

Posted in Story structure, Style and voice, Writer's resource | Tagged , , , , , , | 2 Comments

The speed signs for writing

Posted on September 13, 2013 by knlistman

01 steph oct 025

The way we string together words and the type of words we use contribute to the “pace” of writing. Longer sentences with a plethora of subordinated clauses provide an intellectual sound to the writing. The reader takes more time to ponder the concepts presented, which may make the ideas seem as complex. This also forces the reader to slog through the work.

Short sentences with direct verbs are the antidote. However, few readers can stomach an entire work of short choppy bursts. When dependent clauses are avoided, flow is sacrificed. The trick to dealing with pace-changing techniques is knowing when the writing can be improved by putting on the brakes—to let the reader savor the experience of reading—or speeding up for drama.

A good exercise to show how this works is to take a paragraph out of academic writing and rewrite it. Revise it by changing passive verbs to the simple active ones. For good measure, reduce all the lengthy vocabulary to the more easily understood words that mean the close to the same thing. The passage will still contain most of the same concepts; it just will not sound as erudite. It will move faster because the reader can actually read it at a higher speed. You may also find that the sentences start repeating the same idea; a person can write quite impressive prose and still not say a lot.

Repetition can either move the story along or bring to a screeching halt. Repeating the same sentence structure (as long sentences are not convoluted phrases) makes reading easier and picks up the pace. However, sticking with the same sentence structure is the hall mark of an amateur writer. Repetition of types of phrases creates poetry, but doesn’t have to be confined to poems. If you want to add a striking cadence to prose, incorporate both repetition and speed changes to break the monotony.

Finally, changing pace in writing can alter the level of perceived politeness. For example, use of passive verbs, regarded with disdain by many professional writers, also slows down the pace. However, passive voice has its place. It creates a style that is gentler and less accusatory than its counterpart. “The door is to be closed whenever you leave the room,” takes a lot more words than “Close the door when you leave.” But, it sounds nicer and less demanding. In the same manner “The door was left open, again,” is a bit kinder than “You left the door open, again.”

When you drive a car, alternating rapidly between the gas and brake jerks the car uncomfortably. However, a sudden change in the pace of writing does not have the same effect as a lead-footed driver. Inserting a four word sentences between two long ones creates an interesting contrast. So, the best advice on the speed of writing is to not keep it the same.

 

Photo by S.L. Listman

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

Posted in Style and voice, Teaching writing skills, Writer's resource | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

Order matters how?

Posted on September 12, 2013 by knlistman

YodaPuppetWhile diction determines word choice, syntax determines where the words are placed. Language without syntax are words strung together with no method to the madness–in other words, nonsense. Our normal syntax mimics what we have heard before. Unique syntax requires mixing up that order without creating nonsense.

Do you recall Yoda’s distinctive style of speaking in the Star Wars movie series? Simply take the predicate object or predicate adjective at the end of a sentence and move it to the front. Voila–Yoda speak. “But what is a predicate object and predicate adjective?” you ask mystified. Basically it is everything in a normal syntax that follows after the verb.

Learning how to use syntax to create a unique voice requires a fundamental knowledge of grammar. I recall creating lengthy diagrams parsing complex sentences in my junior high days. But, diagramming went out of vogue (probably due to lack of time) just like junior high schools did (due to lack of space). However, diagramming is still a good multi-sensory technique to learn how syntax relates to meaning.

Choosing unexpected types of sentence is another way to play with syntax. Most languages contain the following types: those that make a statement (declarative), those that ask a question (interrogative), those that command an action (imperative), and those that scream in your face (exclamatory). Beware, the syntax of different types of sentences can be the same. “You are writing a book” fits into any of those categories depending on how it is delivered. The correct punctuation is crucial in this case.

Constantly using exclamations will give your writing a steady screaming voice. Readers will realize you are “crying wolf” most of the time. But what effect does constant use of questions have? Have you ever attempted to have a conversation speaking only in questions? Did it quickly disintegrate into an accusatory exchange? Will that “bad attitude” remain if you try to write a conversation in that same way? Why don’t you try it and find out?

If your writing suffers from phrases that you have heard a thousand times before, try playing with syntax. Change the statement  by rearranging the words. Place the predicate object (or predicate adjective) anywhere but at the end of the sentence. Rather than reiterating the obvious, ask a question. Play with a repetition for a poetic effect. Just avoid saying the same thing you have said a thousand times before!

Photo by Pollack man34 CC. by 3.0

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

Posted in Style and voice, Teaching writing skills, Writer's resource | Tagged , , , | 3 Comments

Tone of voice

Posted on September 11, 2013 by knlistman

ink1007 sunsetTone of voice… you have probably heard this phrase used frequently, such as in “I don’t like your tone of voice.” As a child I often assumed that phrase was the adults’ way of reprimanding someone whose statement was not malicious or false, but brought up an inconvenient truth. In speaking, tone is typically associated with a certain timbre, pitch or intensity that expresses an attitude, such as amusement or disdain. However those cues disappear if the words are written.

How are we to betray underlying emotions in writing? That is one of the keys to creating a distinctive writer’s voice.  Authors often use imagery to create the tone through their descriptive passages.  It does make a difference if the setting sun is “red as a ruby” or” red as blood.” A skillful writer uses imagery, full of connotative words with emotional undercurrents, to draw their characters and set the stage for events.

Diction–use of vernacular and level of formality–is another key way to create tone. A seeming disparity between the diction and the content is especially effective. Although most formal writing seems to be serious, it does not have to be. Consider the very pompous tone of Daniel Defoe’s A Modest Proposal. Most readers are smart enough to realize that Defoe was not serious about cannibalism. He was using the absurdity of a farce to make his point. One should also not assume that informal, folksy diction that is full of colloquialisms means a lighthearted tale, either. Mark Twain expressed serious concerns about slavery through the voice of Huckleberry Finn. The ability to use a diction that is unexpected for the theme contributes to a unique voice in writing.

This brings us to another characteristic of tone–the use of themes. Themes are abstract and if you try to imagine the concept of love, hate, folly or bravery you would probably picture it as a relationship between humans, or anthropomorphized creatures, such as the rabbits in Watership Down. Now, try to conjure up a similar scene depicting love  without any characters. Difficult? Close to impossible. We see the intangibles revealed in the response of characters.

Creating tone, through imagery, diction, and characterization are useful techniques. But, in the end the voice of the writer expresses their inner thoughts and convictions. Techniques are useful, but you must be willing to bare your soul.

Art work by S.L.Listman

 

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

Posted in Style and voice, Teaching writing skills, Writer's resource | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

Write or wrong word

Posted on September 10, 2013 by knlistman

chronic waste c2

Diction is one of the building blocks of voice that pushed far enough can become a two-edged sword, making the written word dangerously inaccessible to readers. When teaching Shakespeare’s plays to students I frequently pointed out that it was not the formal speeches that were hard to comprehend. Rather it was the lines full of common slang and innuendos of Elizabethan English that the students failed to grasp. After all, the bard did write to entertain the “man on the street.”

Beginning with the Renaissance there was a movement toward more formal diction in writing, and then sometime before the twentieth century writers started backing away from that same kind of diction. You could blame or praise Mark Twain for this, but the swing in formality of diction has been continuing for ages. Today, the media has morphed into users of an informal brand of Standard English that is sprinkled with slang and the latest jargon–particularly business and technical. Erudite words are avoided. But jargon can be just as confusing. Some writers are not even aware of how difficult it is to decipher writing that is little more than a dictation of their daily work vernacular.

At the basic level diction is concerned with word choice and its most obvious characteristic is the level of formality. You can write using the cozy colloquialisms of a back country region, the gritty language of the streets, the slang and catch phrases of a generation, or move into more formal territory. The formal language of academia and research is not only aimed at being precise. Words are selected words to impress the reader with depth of knowledge. A simple concept repeated ad nauseam, yet obscured in a wealth of higher level vocabulary, can seem brilliant.

One of the lessons I have learned when corresponding with people from other countries over the internet is the need to use both a more formal grammar and a simple vocabulary to be understood. Those from other countries know English far better than I know their language, but it is a traditional style of English. Often, the first step to cultivate a distinctive diction is to write using the plain, vanilla, Standard English vocabulary and grammar so the work is comprehensible. Then, alter diction by adding colorful words and phrases, making conscious choices that don’t impede the reader’s ability to understand. Word choice requires a balance between the formal speech, dripping with overtones of privileged education, and the man on the street’s style of conversation.

Art work by S.L.Listman

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

Posted in Style and voice, Teaching writing skills, Writer's resource | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

Voice, deconstructed

Posted on September 7, 2013 by knlistman

ink032Voice in writing can be best defined by breaking it down into its components. But the problem remains that voice is comprised of different things, depending on who you ask.

According to the Texas TAKS writing rubric, voice is demonstrated if:

The writer engages the reader and sustains this connection throughout the composition. The composition sounds authentic and original. The writer is able to express his/her individuality or unique perspective.1

For this rubric, voice components would be:

  • engaging  (appealing , interesting)
  • authentic (genuine, realistic)
  • original (creative, distinctive)

First, there is little way of discerning if the composition is authentic without personally knowing the author.  So authentic probably refers to idea that the writing doesn’t sound like someone else wrote it  – or like something they have read before – basically the same thing as original.  Of course, the readers would judge both engaging and original based on their own interests and past exposure to new ideas. The reader’s background brings as much to the table in determining if the writer shows a well-developed voice as the writer does.

According to 6 +1 writing traits as described by Northwest Regional Education Laboratory. Voice is “the personal tone and flavor of the author’s message” and this is further defined by stating:

When the writer is engaged personally with the topic, he/she imparts a personal tone and flavor to the piece that is unmistakably his/hers alone. And it is that individual something–different from the mark of all other writers–that we call Voice. 2

Apparently the engaging, authentic and original definition found in the TAKS rubric, is copied and therefore, has no voice of its own. But it is more concise and easier to understand.

If I look elsewhere, I can find voice defined with more complexity. According to document by Greece, New York  Central School district:

Voice can be defined as the writer’s awareness and effective use of such elements as diction, tone, syntax, unity, coherence and audience to create a clear and distinct “personality of the writer,”3

As you continue to read, you’ll discover that according to the proscribed method each of those characteristics  are to be taught one at a time in order.

For instance, under Diction, you may only introduce tone; under Tone, you may only use characterization, you may not introduce Syntax until later on; you can then build on these basics as your students’ understanding grows and develops.3

Does that mean students would learn how to determine the type of words to use and to order them in the sentences before even considering what kind of logical content they are creating? The definition is better than the technique for teaching it. Also, to tell you the truth, although my “audience” may determine whether my writing has voice or not, I have never effectively used “audience” when writing. So if I leave out audience I end up with a list of voice components that include:

  • Diction (choice of words)
  • Tone (attitude expressed by words and ideas)
  • Syntax (order of words)
  • Unity (focus)
  • Coherence (logic of organization)

Another word I hear frequently in the definition of voice is “style.” The term “style of writing” has been thrown around for a lot longer than voice.  So does the writer’s voice simply refer to a distinctive or original style? Because the definition of voice is so nebulous, the new State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR) does not even mention it in when describing writing, nor does the Common Core State Standards Initiative – but every writer, professional or amateur, will tell you the writer’s voice still exists.

Artwork by S.L.Listman

1 http://www.tea.state.tx.us/WorkArea/linkit.aspx?LinkIdentifier=id&ItemID=2147487762&libID=2147487761
2 http://educationnorthwest.org/resource/503
3 http://www.greece.k12.ny.us/academics.cfm?subpage=944

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

Posted in Style and voice, Teaching writing skills, Writer's resource | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

The writer’s voice

Posted on September 6, 2013 by knlistman

voiceWhen people speak they produce many different signals that the audience can interpret: facial expressions, gestures, and timbre of voice can add to the meaning of the words, or reverse them. For example, a person saying “Good job!” in a lusty voice with the right corner of his lips raised in a sneer of disdain means that he thinks you’ve done anything but a good job. However, when we write we only offer one stimulus, words on the page.

Your style of grammar, tone, and inflection, making up your voice when you are speaking out loud offer so many more modes of expression that must be converted to words when writing. When I hear people say creating a “voice” in writing means simply writing like you speak, I cringe. Only putting down the words you say in print is a pale, tasteless version of what needs to be told. However, writing done that way still has a voice; all writing does, just not an interesting voice.

I recall a time when I read aloud a submission (not my own) to a creative writing group. One of the participants asked, “Did John write that? I can recognize his voice.” She smiled assured of her ability to sense his words, while John beamed with pride. Although things marred his style, like occasional trite phrases and repeating words too frequently, John had achieved one goal of a quality voice in writing–distinctiveness. His combination of simplicity with occasional irony made his writing style somewhat unique.

Originality is not the only thing to strive for. Writing can be different from anything you have ever read, but if it simply nonsense you will not stick to that author very long. So another goal of a quality voice is a recognizable structure, a manner or style of communicating in which the elements work together. This is a matter of balance between ordinary and unique language patterns. This could be mixing simple and complex words, or using a sprinkling of words in an unlikely manner. But beware; if the reader has to struggle too much to comprehend, they will stop. If every sentence is a different syntax, such a lack of flow would make reading a piece like wading through muddy water, unable to determine what is beneath the surface.

People with good intentions often advise the new author to cut out adverbs ruthlessly for the sake of economy in writing. But, that may weaken a writing voice. Overuse of a single technique, such as describing all actions with adverbs can become monotonous, but so can eliminating them completely. Any recipe for creating voice should be regarded with healthy distrust. Writing in an intriguing manner requires the understanding of balance in creativity. It is comparable to a variation on a theme in music. Enough of the melody remains that you can hear it, even though the instrumentation, ornamental notes, and tempo changes.

Finally, voice needs to have something appealing to readers, what I would refer to as beauty, which is probably even harder to define than voice.

Artwork by S.L. Listman

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

Posted in Style and voice, Teaching writing skills, Writer's resource | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

Write about writing

Posted on September 5, 2013 by knlistman

Mongoose_-_Project_Gutenberg_eBookWhen students face the task of writing for state mandated tests, there are always a few that want to vent their spleen by describing how much they hate to do this kind of writing. The hapless scorer must read through their litany of  insulting rants, so the scorers typically return the favor by giving these students the lowest score possible. In this situation, I always discourage students from writing about writing.

Instead, I assigning students short compositions in which they answers questions like:

  • How do I feel about writing?
  • What do I like and dislike about it?
  • What kind of writing do I enjoy doing the most?
  • What kind of writing do I find the hardest to do?
  • When are the best situations for me to write?
  • What kind of writing do I want to be able to do?

What you want at this point is not necessarily polished essays (do not be surprised if you might receive something better than expected) but raw ideas. Students can then use the ideas and create their own plans for improving writing skills. They need to understand that their compositions should be driven by what they want to communicate. Writing down words may take more time and effort than talking, but it serves a similar purpose. Plus, the results last longer and can spread further.

The next step is to have students create work and then write a critique of their own work. If they are mature enough, you can establish rules for them to critique other’s work. Basic rules are be honest, be constructive and avoid being insulting. They need to look at the techniques they use to get ideas across and evaluate what works the best and what to avoid.

Eventually the students should be able to do this same thing for the literature that they read. But, be aware that as students improve in their own skill, they will not feel the need to place literature on a high a pedestal. A middle school teacher asked her students to describe the bravery of the mongoose in Rudyard Kipling’s Riki Tiki Tavi. One student decided to challenge the conventional wisdom that Kipling was praising courage. Instead she provided details how the “brave” mongoose, who destroyed the snake’s eggs and intimidated other animals, showed more characteristics of a bully than a brave creature. Coming up with new ideas for writing helped this student think critically about what she read.

How can we ever expect students to create papers examining the work of an author, for whom they have no way to see what was really inside of their head, unless the students first master how to analyze what they have written themselves?

Art from The Illustrated London Reading Book – Project Gutenburg

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

Posted in Teaching writing skills, Writer's resource | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

The reason for writing

Posted on September 4, 2013 by knlistman

Honduras_San_Ramon_Choluteca_school_2Because of the glaring short comings of multiple choice question as an indicator of  persons ability to evaluate or synthesize idea, the written essay has become a staple of state-mandated educational tests. Writing does take a lot more planning of action, organization of ideas and refinement of output than bubbling in an A, B,C or D. Writing also takes a lot more training and manpower to evaluate.

For a long time Texas teachers claimed the scoring the written part of the state knowledge and skills exams was arbitrary – sort of an educated dice roll. They were never sure whether the emphasis would be on accurate grammar, impeccable organization or creative story telling. Having talked with people would score the tests, I have heard of the pressure to match the scoring of other raters. It is not easy for multiple people who do not consult with each other to arrive at the same score based on paragraph or two of criteria. Everyone has a slightly different idea of what makes a good essay.

I recall one teacher who tried to proved the arbitrary nature of the scoring. She decried the fact that a student who wrote their entire essay as a dialog received a perfect score, as if there were something inherently wrong with that technique “It must have been because he used quote marks and punctuation correctly for every sentence. That would impress the scorers.”  Actually writing a meaningful essay that is completely dialog may be hard, but there is nothing wrong with it. In Cry the Beloved Country Alan Paton wrote a chapter describing the plight of the natives immigrating into Johannesburg for work – a strong statement made purely through dialog. If the student could manage to pull off a coherent essay that was all dialog, I would have rated them highly also.

Another problem for the written essay scorers is staying awake as they read the same things written over and over again. Typically we praise them for using a particular higher level of vocabulary, organizing with a particular intro-body -conclusion format,  and arriving at a particular kind of edifying conclusion. Students should learn that they can break the mold in there writing, and produce something creatively superior. Simplistically written sentences expressing complex ideas, often makes those ideas more compelling. Repeating the same word frequently is discouraged; it seems amateurish, but intentional repetition can add an extra emphatic or poetic touch. And not expressing same thing as everyone else – that is the real reason for writing.

Photo from San Ramon Choluteca School, Honduras by ZackClark (public domain)

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

Posted in Teaching writing skills, Writer's resource | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment