Wrestling match

I refer word wrestlers to the fascinating match played out in the comments of Kelvin’s blog.  The Campaign for Plain English would not approve.  That website is worth a visit for the hilarious examples in the Golden Bull awards.

I find myself, as ever, in two camps.  When I run writing seminars, I advocate simplicity, citing a piece of research run by the University of Wales Institute of Science and Technology. The same piece of scientific information was written up in two ways and attributed to mythical writers, Brown and Smith.  ’Brown’s’ was convoluted using long sentences and long words, ‘Smith’s’ was simple and direct.  Not only did scientist readers prefer the simple version but they believed ‘Smith’ to be the better thinker, more credible.  Both passages used only 5 technical words – the difference was in the use of ordinary language.  (Source: Effective Writing by Christopher Turk and John Kirkman)

But ‘big words’ are fun!  And sometimes necessary.  If the range of vocabulary reduces, subtlety of thought will diminish.  The glory of English is the number of nuanced variants available to us.  Use it or lose it!   

Had to check the proofs of the play which will appear in the autumn in Scottish Plays for Schools.  I’m not the world’s greatest proof reader but it’s amazing how much easier it is to concentrate when you have a vested interest in the text ie when it’s your own.  But of course there’s the danger of seeing what you expect to see and not what’s actually printed.  Reading with the ear as well as the eye is the thing.  I pick up an error or an infelicity (there’s a poser of word) when I read my work aloud.