Practice Blawg » Writing Tips

A Toddler’s Mastery of Passive Voice

Gregory Luce — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 02:22:11 +0000

Augie, my two-year-old son, has mastered the art of implied passive voice. Here’s how it works. Say, purely as a hypothetical, he throws his new toy car off a bridge and into the Arno River. Rather than say “I threw my car into the river,” he immediately turns to me and asks “What happened?” In his question, he removes himself as the actor. No longer did he throw his toy car into the Arno. Rather, the toy car was thrown into the Arno. Brilliant, and it works brilliantly to avoid, at least in his mind, active responsibility.

“What happened?” Milk was blown through the straw and across the room.

“What happened?” Our front door was closed and we were all locked out.

“What happened?” The shoe was thrown out the fourth floor hotel window.

Augie’s use of implied passive voice teaches two lessons.

First, when used sparingly and intentionally, passive voice works, and works quite well. It’s likely most useful in the criminal context to remove an actor– usually a defendant– from an alleged act, as in “at that point, the gun was fired and two shots hit the victim in the chest.” Passive voice, in this context, gives the reader information but does not give the reader the full story, and that may be just what you want. But, when used in the wrong context, it fails to build the reader’s trust. That is, just as Augie raises with his question, you know you are not getting the full story. And that’s the problem.

Second, Augie’s “what happened” can be used with your own writing to ferret out passive voice and remove it from your sentences. Read your sentences and, after each one, ask what happened. If Augie or anyone else (or thing) is not there doing something– throwing, slipping, spilling, scribbling, mashing, or smashing — then you probably have an issue of passive voice. Rearrange your sentence so that someone or something is directly responsible for the action. Rearrange your sentence so that my son Augie is there. While he won’t be happy to be so responsible for his actions, your reader will thank you for a more active, direct and snappy sentence.

© Gregory Luce for Practice Blawg, 2010. | Permalink | No comments yet | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: Passive Voice, Toddler

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

Avoid Sexist Language

Nancy Hupp — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 14:49:53 +0000

My most stunning and irrevocable gender reference occurred when I tried to make a friend after getting settled in my college dorm room. I strolled into the adjoining room, introduced myself to Deb, the occupant, then, in an effort to make conversation, glanced at a picture on her bulletin board, pointed and said, “Is that your Mom? She looks like you.” To which the Deb replied, “No, it is a picture of my Dad.”

Oops. No calling that back. But in writing, it is much easier to avoid such gaffes.

Every month we get together with Minnesota State Bar Association members for Off the Clock, an informal discussion about tech tools for solo and small firm practitioners. Once a week we post either a tech or writing tip so you can better yourself two minutes at a time.Take two minutes and learn ways to employ gender-neutral language or, in the negative, to eliminate sexist language. Whatever the label, the problem is easy to spot. You are typing along and you refer to he, him, his, she, her, hers or alternating between them because the subject is reliably neither.

Example: An attorney must keep a record of his continuing education credits.

The worst solution is to overdo it with a Slash-i-fi-cation, always strikes me that the writer is trying too hard. Also the his/her causes a blip in the flow of the text. The reader stumbles.

An attorney must keep a record of his/her continuing education credits.

A similar but different bad solution is to alternate back and forth. Too much effort and downright confusing for the reader.

An attorney must keep a record of his continuing education credits. In Minnesota, an attorney needs to file her record with the licensing agency.

Another bad solution – to go stuffy.

One must keep a record of one’s continuing education credits.

Somewhat better, same idea, but can be a little chummy.

You must keep a record of your continuing education credits.

Okay, enough with the bad solutions. Here are some good easy ones:

Pluralize — works in the vast majority of situations.

Attorneys must keep a record of their continuing education credits.

Delete the offending pronoun entirely.

An attorney must review the work of his paralegal.
Instead: An attorney must review the work of a paralegal.

Get repetitive.

Before a law school graduate can practice law, he must pass the bar examination.
Instead: Before a law school graduate can practice law, the graduate must pass the bar examination.

Enough of this, you get the idea. I will step off my soapbox soon but first let me add a few last ideas while on the topic of unnecessary reference to gender…

Watch out for sexist expressions.

gentlemen’s agreement
a manly effort

Strive for gender-neutral terms.

mail carrier
not mailman

Use parallel construction.

husband and wife
not man and wife

Avoid unnecessary gender references.

competent attorney
not competent woman attorney

The world is full of those who are insensitive and those who are too sensitive. Avoid being the former and failing to assume your reader is the latter. Gender-neutral writing is easy, make it a habit, make friends. Remember Deb, the dorm room occupant, never became my friend. Oh, how I wish I said, “Is that your parent?”

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

Legal Style Guides

Nancy Hupp — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 20:44:58 +0000

To badly hijack a quote from Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart, good legal writing style, like pornography, is hard to define, but you know it when you see it.

Attorneys start developing a legal writing style in law school. For most of us, it is awkward at first. Remember IRAC (Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion)? Not to speak of wedging in legal citations, not just in a proper Bluebook format, but in a manner that doesn’t get in the way of content. How much does one paraphrase a case, quote directly?

(...)
Read the rest of Legal Style Guides (379 words)

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

Commas, Exposed

Nancy Hupp — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 22:41:47 +0000

Exasperated, I finally forbade one of my first year law students from using any commas in a writing assignment. We’d gone down the road of attempting restraint. Reviewed the comma rules. But she just couldn’t help herself, it was as if every time she paused on the keyboard, her finger reached out and jabbed a comma into her draft. The draft read like a scratched CD. So she took them all out and we worked together; she justified every comma before I agreed to let it back in. Painful but necessary, the effort exceeded two minutes. You can master the most common comma uses, however, in two minutes. Go.

Use serial commas, that is, commas separating the items in a series.
Does a comma belong between the second-to-last and last item? Most legal style guides advise yes, right before the connector. Why? It removes all doubt; lawyers are all about clarity. Other writers aren’t so picky, perhaps they want to keep the reader guessing so don’t feel bad if you see serial commas handled differently in non-legal writing. For example, serial commas are often omitted in newspapers and magazines to save space.(...)
Read the rest of Commas, Exposed (292 words)

© Nancy Hupp for Practice Blawg, 2010. | Permalink | No comments yet | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: commas, Proofreading

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

Read Aloud

Nancy Hupp — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 18:57:27 +0000

I’ve heard attorneys disparaged: “He just likes listening to himself talk.” Good, that means you will proofread well.

Today’s two minute tip takes two seconds to explain and a little longer to implement. But it is essential. Here it is:

Good proofreaders read their drafts aloud.

Reading aloud tells you what is there and what is not

Your mind will allow you to read over a draft silently, again and again and again, and produce what you wanted to write, even if the word isn’t there. Your mind will even read the wrong word to be the right word, just because you just know the right word should be there. In other words, reading silently enables wishful thinking. (...)
Read the rest of Read Aloud (289 words)

© Nancy Hupp for Practice Blawg, 2010. | Permalink | No comments yet | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: Drafting, Proofreading

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh