home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
Magnum One
/
Magnum One (Mid-American Digital) (Disc Manufacturing).iso
/
d3
/
style.arc
/
STYLED.DOC
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1988-08-15
|
46KB
|
1,170 lines
STYLED.DOC
The Manual for
STYLED and STYLLIST
Version 1.7
(c) 1987 by Louie Crew
Chinese University, Shatin, Hong Kong
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Copy freely. Pass it on. Do NOT sell.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To use:
STYLED requires MS-DOS, version 2.1 or higher.
1) Put STYLED on a disk with at least one text file.
2) Type STYLED plus a carriage return.
3) Follow the menus.
4) STYLED automatically creates files to store 4 word lists.
They could require as much space as your original text,
but rarely do. Save plenty of space.
or, for a report to disk only
1) Put STYLLIST on a disk with at least one text file.
2) Type
STYLLIST plus a carriage return.
or
STYLLIST plus the name of a file to analyze
The second choice automates everything and returns to MS-DOS
after it has created REPORT. The first choice (slower)
allows you to enter the filename from a prompt within the
program.
REPORT lists your long words, your forms of "to be,"
and your potential nominalizations, without some of the overkill
in STYLED. It lacks the punctuation report and other screen
graphs in STYLED.
Why?
STYLED and STYLLIST chart patterns in texts. I created them to help me
revise. I now also use them to analyze what others write. They help me as I
compare professionals with amateurs.
Each program serves as a heuristic. It only describes: it cannot
prescribe or remedy. It can help a clever person to identify and arrange
insight. A dullard a dullard will remain.
Each program abstracts several forms from texts. Writers must
integrate form and content. Form alone lacks efficacy. Witness thousands
of bad poems in good iambic meter, hundreds of bad symphonies in perfect 3/4
time, millions of discarded images painted with the finest of oils.
Monsieur Jourdain, beware!
Each program detects patterns. Clever writers will preserve some,
expunge others.
Each program can freshen the air for those who know little to do with a
text except to check for "mistakes."
At the least, each program orders dickering. Occasionally they prompt a
reVision, a new way to see. Epiphanies come rarely, however. Only muses
can program those.
The programs offer no help with pre-writing and early drafts. They
attend to matters that most writers notice only minimally in early on.
The programs serve those who think they have said something worth the
time to polish.
Revision can gobble huge amounts of time. Many people revise for hours
without improving. Many lack strategy. These programs can help, modestly.
I sometimes spend an entire day revising one page. When I can't, I
wish I could. I wish more of the writers I read, would.
Warning:
Do not let this program waste your time. I have appended samples of my
own sessions with the program. You should find many other uses.
I cringe when I imagine mindless ways to use the program. For example,
the program quantifies transitionals. Transitionals often evidence
cohesion, but only if the writers have used them accurately. For some
writers, THUS=ALSO, MOREOVER=NEVERTHELESS, etc. This program will not
detect their confusion. No program protects us from sophomores. Thank the
goddess, most grow up.
I smile when I imagine those who think these matters completely
unimportant. At Breadloaf, Robert Frost used to talk for hours about a
minute effect of meter. "But surely you don't think about such things when
you write!" allegedly a poetaster exclaimed. Frost teased, "About little
else."
Too many people think that mystery abides only in abstracted ideas,
that the package counts for little. Like choristers who sing in showers
only, these compose not, and woo an audience of only one.
Interpret, but distrust your interpretations. Features most important
often occur but once.
Each program identifies slots. You must imagine wise ways to fill
them.
====
What?
First you tell STYLED the name of the text you want to analyze. You can name
the file from the command line in one of two ways:
STYLED file.txt
or
STYLED #*.txt
The second way loads STYLED and start with a list of *.TXT files for you
to choose from.
You can also simply load
STYLED
The program will then prompt you:
Answer # (plus wild cards) if you you wish to see the directory.
Hit just <ENTER> if you you wish to end.
Which TEXT file would you like to analyze?
Note that STYLED allows you to use MS-DOS wild cards (? or *) after the symbol
`#' if you want to view a directory. You may ask to see a list of the files
on a different drive or subdirectory as well, as when you are logged on A:
and enter for the FILENAME
#B:\mysubdirectory\*.DOC
You will then see all the files with the extension .DOC on \mysubdirectory on
the B: drive.
The Main Menu
Once you have told STYLED what text you want to analyze, the main menu
gives you
STYLED's menu initially gives eight choices:
Regarding \l\problem.txt
Analyze
1 = Word length
2 = Punctuation
3 = Syntax
4 = Nominalization
----------------------
(V)iew the file
(N)ame another file
(S)hell to MS-DOS
(E)nd a session
Choice:
Any of the first seven will return to the menu. Use the E
key to exit to the MS-DOS prompt in an orderly way.
The V choice lets you view the text. You do not have to leave the
program to return to your word-processor. The program shows the text to you
one screen at a time. Hit ESC to exit, any other key to continue whenever
the program pauses. The program numbers each screen when you view the text.
The S choice lets you leave STYLED temporarily. While you work
at the MS-DOS level, STYLED remains in memory. To return, type EXIT at
the MS-DOS prompt. You may even run some other programs while you have
Shelled, if your computer has enough memory.
========================================================================
Note: if you run STYLLIST, that program bypasses these the choices
and directly prepares one file which reports the long words, the forms of
TO BE, and the potential nominalizations.
========================================================================
At this point, I recommend that you stop. If you have not done so,
run STYLED and STYLLIST. Investigate one of the samples or test a text file
of your own. Return to this document only to reflect about how to interpret
the data.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
The Reports
1. Word Length.
This report replaces each word with a bar the length of the word,
and it preserves the terminal punctuation. It prints in dark-on-light only
words with 10 or more characters. It adds a sentence number, totals the
words in each sentence, and calculates:
Total word count:
Words 10+ chars.: ( %)
Aver. wds/per/sent:
Then it lists all the long words with a sentence number.
2. Punctuation.
(STYLLIST does not include this report.)
All punctuation blinks. One diamond character represents each word.
Afterwards, the program tallies the punctuation and computes the average
interval.
3. Syntax.
(STYLLIST does not include this report.)
Structure words ( possible coordinators, subordinators, and
transitionals) appear in high intensity.
First and last words of sentences, as well as words before and after
internal punctuation, appear in low intensity, unless reported as structure
words.
A dull bar replaces each other word.
The program tallies the structure words and it lists them, each with
its sentence number.
4. Nominalization.
Forms of the verb TO BE appear in dark-on-light letters. Many words
that may hide action appear in high intensity. All other words appear in
low intensity. After the program tallies forms of TO BE and the words
that may hide action, it lists them on screen with sentence number.
How to Use These Data
Your own goals should dictate how you use any statistics. Pattern
to integrate content. What should you emphasize? What should you intensify.
What junctures should you stress as such?.... What does your audience
expect? How can you use their expectations to engage them on your terms?
Or on theirs?
If STYLED's graphs correspond in no way to what you intend, put a new
Duracel in your inner ear and reprocess the words.
If all sentences look alike, rearrange them to serve a purpose,
possibly one you had not seen? If you detect monotony, make it serve you
or delete it.
A writer who strives primarily for style seems a bit like someone
who arranges books by color. A writer with style, resembles someone who
arranges some books by size.
Thurber's editor warned him not to use the colon. Thurber persisted.
One day the editor came to Thurber's desk, touched the colon, and ripped
the key from Thurber's word-processor.
Scholars have written about "Tennyson's scissors."
Some verbal fetishes enrich; others impoverish. STYLED can help you
only to spot them, not to evaluate them. The program will not zap any
combinations on your keyboard or printer, but you should.
Use the program to sample published texts which share your goals and
your audience. Interpret carefully. Generalize reluctantly. Reverse
a common practice if to reverse improves your manuscript. Norms should not
imprison, but should liberate. Attend them consciously, cautiously.
Visit the sculptor's private studio, not the gallery. Suspend
reverence. Let the moment demystify. Ask how you might sculpt better.
Models which deserve your praise will survive.
In time you will discover your own norms. AUTHOR derived from AUCTOR,
L., `originator,' which in turn derived from AUGERE, `to increase,' `to
produce.' Those faithful to this etymology do not merely copy, but originate
and augment.
Word Length
Readers understand and remember shorter sentences better than longer
ones. Longer sentences suggest complexity. Shorter sentences suggest
simplicity. Clever writers and readers master both. Some pack complexity
into few words. Others uninterrupt simplicity beautiful for many lines.
Many writers use short sentences to clarify the steps of a process.
Some writers subordinate profusely to illustrate delicate logical
relationships between abstract ideas. How does what you want to say
constrain how you might say it?
I like to require my "long words" to serve major rather than minor
plans. When I see my long words lifted alone from the text in LONGWORD.REP,
I do not welcome those for which I had no special purpose. A company will
soon fail if its managers do not contribute to the company's net worth,
especially if they ride in limousines. Shakespeare reserved limousines like
INCARNADINE for matters hunky-dory.
I try to identify clusters of long or short bars. If many short words
cluster, do I dictate? Do I sound childish? If many long words cluster, do
they cloud? What verbs can I use to unpack action? What clearer words can
I use?
How long is long? Each must decide. Another style-checker, Grammatik,
(now released as Grammatik II, Reference Software, 330 Townsend, Suite 232,
San Francisco, CA 94107) calls sentences under 14 words "short," sentences
over 30 words "long." Just as arbitrarily, STYLED calls "long" all words
with 10 or more characters. You decide.
Some sociologists call all adults from 21-35 "young", from 36-50
"middle-aged", and from 50-65 "old". Since they give me only 7 more months of
middle age, I dislike their arbitrary trifurcation of the work years, but I
know what they analyze. Distrust categories; but respect them.
Punctuation
Punctuation often reveals whether I have stressed as I planned.
For example,
Sometimes I begin moderately and intensify later.
At other times I begin dramatically (as with a short sentence, a
long one, or a highly modified one) and then moderate, as with a
stretch of sentences less varied.
Sometimes I risk monotony and then surprise.
Contexts influence the effects of patterns in prose just as much as in
music. A series of short sentences from Hemingway will not likely
function the way the short sentences function in a pamphlet to accompany
aspirin.
STYLED can help me spot places where I have deafened.
Use the program to report how the translators punctuated STPAUL.TXT.
Many consider this passage one of the most beautiful in English literature:
perhaps only the style compels them? The substance cynically indicts
everyone, especially in the Greek.
Use STYLED as a stethoscope to monitor the pulse of any "set piece"--by
Adrienne Rich, Lincoln, Sojourner Truth, Jefferson, Chinua Achebe, Maxine
Hong Kingston.....
Syntax
Some words, like bones, structure the skeleton of a text. STYLED
monitors three types of "structure words": coordinators, subordinators, and
transitionals.
When sentence after sentence appears with only the first and last words,
the rest in bars, either the text does not cohere well or the writer has
fleshed with other words to hide the bones. When the program shows structure
words at frequent intervals, either the skeleton protrudes or supports a
complex body of text. Compare the cohesion of the sample STPAUL.TXT.
If I never subordinate by pattern, I might try to do so at the part of
the paper that I think most important.
Beware: the computer does not know what constitutes a subordinator, a
transitional, or a coordinator. The word THAT, for example, can function
in a variety of these ways, or just as a demonstrative pronoun. The
favorite of grammar tests--
That that that that that boy used is wrong is obvious.
won't confound this program. [We need no program to call this sentence
terrible!] STYLED reports the 5 THATs as potential structure words, and
reports the 2 forms of TO BE.
Specifically the program reproduces any word which matches one of these
56:
ACCORDINGLY, AFTER, ALSO, ALTHOUGH, AND, AS, BECAUSE, BEFORE,
BESIDES, BOTH, BUT, CONSEQUENTLY, EITHER, ETC., FIFTH, FIRST,
FOURTH, FURTHERMORE, HENCE, HOW, HOWEVER, IF, INDEED, INSTEAD,
MEANWHILE, MOREOVER, NEITHER, NEVERTHELESS, NOR, OR, OTHERWISE,
PROVIDED, SECOND, SIMILARLY, SINCE, SO, STILL, THAT, THEN,
THEREFORE, THIRD, THIS, THOUGH, THUS, UNLESS, UNTIL, WHAT, WHEN,
WHENEVER, WHERE, WHEREAS, WHETHER, WHICH, WHILE, WHO, WHOM
The Cholesterol Report
Forms of TO BE
The program finds AM, ARE, AREN'T, BE, BEEN, BEING, IS, ISN'T, WAS,
WASN'T, WERE, WEREN'T, I'M, YOU'RE, HE'S, SHE'S, IT'S, THERE'RE, THERE'S,
WE'RE, THEY'RE, WHO'S, WHICH'S, THAT'S, and WHAT's--regardless of case.
These forms almost always force a writer to bury action in less
forceful words, usually in nouns. These forms locate all passives (except
the lone past participle) and all expletives.
What's at stake: When you fetch your transcripts, only the novice
tells you: "I have lost your records." The experienced tells you, "Your
records have been lost." (Passive: agent dropped.) Those ready for
Washington say, "There has been a loss of your records"--with no hint of an
agent who responds.
In documents which I edit most thoroughly, I try to restrict TO BE to
situations in which I name or identify--or to those sentences where all
other alternatives sound silly.
Nominalization
Buried action can clog a text, like verbal cholesterol.
When a noun contains an action, we call it a nominalization.
NOMINALIZATION illustrates what it names: "-ize" buries the action "to
make." Nominalizations make nouns out of other words. Often they take a
part of a word, usually a verb, and remake it into a noun.
Even when we can reverse the process and restore the action to a verb,
should we? When? How often?
Everyone uses nominalizations. I welcome them when:
1) They re-name old information
Kwong acted well in the play.... Other ACTors in Hong Kong
respect his talent, though he does not aspire to RESPECTability.
2) Alternatives strain, obscure, or seem silly and tedious.
"The administration....." instead of "Those who administer"
"Writer" instead of "One who writes"
Nevertheless, I test as many nominalizations as time allows. They
can violate the integrity of what anyone wants to say. If you need
evidence, review the work of the Committee on Doublespeak at the National
Council of Teachers of English.
Bureaucrats and others who write for captive audiences like to mask
most action. Review ADMINESE.TXT. The writer administers a department.
He knew that his captives would read him closely. Presumably he wanted to
impress them. He does not impress me. Read my version in REVADMIN.TXT.
Which do you prefer?
The program does not identify nominalization, but identifies words that
MAY evidence it. Several English morphemes often turn verbs into nouns.
For example, the morpheme MENT makes nouns out of hundreds of verbs, such as
investment [invest+], endorsement [endorse+].... But MENT does not always
make a noun. Witness DEPARTMENT, which buries no action, yet the program
highlights it. The program is stupid: you should not be. Stay awake.
Don't expect the program to find all buried action, or always to highlight
words that hide it.
Even after the program catches buried action, the user must choose
whether to keep it.
Version 1.5+ of the program highlights any word which contains
one of the following strings: ING, MENT, ION, ANCE, ENCE, NCIES, but excludes
DURING and any word that contains the string HING (e.g., sometHING).
An earlier version highlighted words that contain ER, OR, at the end,
to locate words like actOR, inventER, but sent more false alarms than
true ones. If you find some of these matches annoy you more than others, or
if you discover strings not included here which would help you edit more
effectively, write me. If I incorporate those changes in later versions, I
will acknowledge you and send you a free copy.
Please share any other reactions. I don't mind the odd mismatch.
STYLED saves me an enormous amount of time because it finds most of the
cholesterol which previously I used WordStar to seek and replace.
The more a writer names agents as subjects and puts action into
verbs, the more the program will seem inaccurate. Fewer and fewer of its
matches will hide action. That principle affects many computer checks. The
better I spell, the more a good spelling program matches with words which I
have not misspelled.
Text Formats
The program assumes text in ASCII (American Standard Code for Information
Interchange).
If you (V)iew your file first and it appears as you expected to, then
you have a text in ASCII and can go on to my next paragraph. If, however,
your text adds strange graphics, then your text does not conform to ASCII.
Various programs to strip these characters exist. I like to use Gene Plantz'
UNWS.EXE, copyrighted in the public domain. I share copies with the copies
of STYLED I send out. UNWS means un-WordStar. WordStar uses the non-ASCII
characters for its (D) option, the "document" mode from the main menu. You
can create ASCII texts in WordStar if you use the "N" (Non-Document) option
from the WordStar main menu. I prefer to use the D mode first, to have full
editing power, then to strip with UNWS.
STYLED reports sentences by number, consecutively, from the beginning
to the end of the document. It ignores any line that begins with a period,
since many programs format REMARKS thus. It recognizes all initials, plus
a few abbreviations--Ms., Mrs., Dr., Prof., Mr.--as long as the period follows
with no space between.
The program will count the quotation marks (either " or `) at the left
of words to compute the number of your quotes, the <,(, or [ to determine
the number of parenthetical remarks. It does not detect whether you close
these or whether you use them for any other purposes (such as for mathematics).
The program will treat as an ellipsis any string of uninterrupted periods. If
you put spaces between them, you will distort the punctuation report.
The program recognizes spaces as the boundaries of words and tests
the left of each word for no more than one punctuation mark, the right of each
for no more than 2 punctuation marks. The program will treat any additional
punctuation as part of the word: if it ever treats a quotation mark as
part of the word, the program will abort. Although the extra quotation mark
distorts the format of the report files, you can still view all the data if
you type the name of the .REP file from the MS-DOS prompt.
The program recognizes -- as a dash, - as a hyphen. It treats words on
either side of the dash as separate, on either side of a hyphen as one.
The program cannot determine whether a sentence continues after a
quotation that includes terminals. It will treat as two sentences an
item such as:
"John, did you leave?" Mary asked.
or
When I asked "Could you come?" I was not sure you understood.
Reports as Disk Files
STYLED stores data in files to list after 3 of the 4 analyses.
(It stores no punctuation report.) You can access those files when you edit:
LONGWORD.REP [Choice 1 creates.]
TRANSIT.REP [Choice 3 creates.]
TOBE.REP [Choice 4 creates.]
CHOLES.REP [Choice 4 creates.]
STYLLIST uses the temporary extension .R$$ for each of these (except
TRANSIT.REP, which it ignores). Later it combines the .R$$ files into a file
called REPORT and then erases the .R$$ files.
Do not use these names for any other files, not even the extension
.REP or the extension .R$$.
If you plan to access these any of these, rename them before you
analyze another text, because each option overwrites the old file when it
analyzes another text.
You may rename files at the MS-DOS prompt with the syntax:
REN oldfile newfile.
You may freely erase the four .REP files, but you do not have to erase
them, since the program automatically overwrites them.
You must reserve space for these files with any new analysis. They
vary, and all together could require as much space as the original text. Log
onto a disk with plenty of space.
A Tip about the Directory Option
When the program prompts you for the file to view or analyze, it allows
you to see request the directory first. If you enter just the pound sign plus
a carriage return, you will see the full current directory of the logged drive.
You may specify another drive. You may also specify the MS-DOS "wild cards"
--asterisks and question question marks--to limit the clutter. For example:
If you respond:
#B:\ws\*.TXT
the program will show you all files with the extension .TXT on subdirectory
called \ws on Drive B:.
How to Preserve the Reports
Copies of the reports help when you edit.
The entire session:
To save the session with STYLED as a file, from the MS-DOS prompt type:
STYLED >filetosave
Replace "filetosave" with the name of the file in which to reserve the
session. (Upper/lower case does not matter, but you must use the blank
space and the greater-than sign exactly as shown.) If you trap the session
in this way, you will slow the program slightly, and you must have enough
disk space for the large new file. Some word-processors allow you to
see the graphics in the new file; others, such as WordStar, do not. You
can view the reports if at the MS-DOS prompt you enter
TYPE sessionsaved
If you hit Ctrl-P before you enter this command, you will print the entire
session.
The versions saved in this way will distinguish between high and low
intensity.
Smaller Portions of a Session:
Those who have a dot matrix printer that supports MS-DOS graphics, can
use PrtSc to print any screen. This method saves too much data for most
purposes, however.
Use PrtSc to print the word lists. Refer to those lists as you return
to edit your text with your word-processor.
Or you may print any of the four report files described above. You
may edit them and print them from your word-processor or just TYPE them from
the MS-DOS menu.
Soft Copy
I have explained earlier that the program stores four lists as disk
files. When I edit, I use Sidekick to window these reports.
How to Automate the Analyses
If you use the program regularly, you will need not to retype all
responses each time, especially to review only the word lists.
You may use Superkey or ProKey or another macro program to monitor
and store keystrokes which you use every time.
I prefer to hit only one key to complete the full analysis from
the MS-DOS prompt. The one key, S, starts a batch file which I call S.BAT.
Content of My S.BAT
UNWS <LETCODE1
styled <LETSTYL
copy *.rep D:\multi\sidek\report
del *.rep
ws c.c
First the .bat file runs UNWS.exe to convert my current WordStar file
into ASCII. [See UNWS.DOC on this disk.] I do not have to answer
UNWS's prompts from the keyboard, because I have stored my responses in the
input file LETCODE1. "<" always tells MS-DOS to read an input file.
Content of My Input File LETCODE1
c.c
1
For convenience, I always call my current document `c.c,' I rename it when I
leave it for another current document. The first line here answers UNWS's
prompt to "Name the file to strip." The second line answers UNWS's next
prompt: it names the new file. (I reserve `1' for temporary files.
I know that I may freely overwrite these later.)
Beware: any new line in an input file sends a carriage return to the
program. UNWS requires them where I placed them. Carriage returns not
required, cause a program to abort. Note that `11' in LETSTYL below actually
represents two different responses you would enter if you ran STYLED from
the keyboard. STYLED does not expect a carriage return after the first "1"
but does require one after the second. Before you write your input file,
run the program it serves and monitor all of you your keystrokes exactly.
Content of my input file LETSTYL
11
/////31
/////41
/////e
The first number in each line specifies the analysis for STYLED to effect.
The second number, "1", specifies my stripped file as the file for STYLED
to analyze. I must have a carriage return here to match the one I would
have to enter from the keyboard, to tell the program that I have completed
the name of the file.
The first slash after each carriage return disengages the pauses so that the
program will not stop when it analyzes. The other slashes answer the
program when it prompts "Hit any key" as it reviews its final lists. For
long lists, I may need several slashes. Extra ones will not abort the
program: when it it finishes the lists, the program waits indefinitely for
a number (1 to 4) or for a V (to view) or for an E (to Exit).
LETSTYL gives STYLED the E to Exit after it has requested all 4 disk reports.
The third line of S.BAT copies these four reports to the directory where I
keep my Sidekick files; the fifth line deletes them from my current directory
(normally my WordStar directory). The final line in S.BAT returns me to my
current file (c.c.). I use Sidekick to window the STYLED report while I
continue to edit.
======
A Note on the versions of STYLED (and STYLLIST):
Version 1.0 (May 1986)
No STYLLIST.
Version 1.1 (June 1986)
Simplified the displays, to view more text with each screen.
Added more forms of TO BE to check, specifically more contractions.
Debugged for codes by word-processors that store ASCII text in lines
(records) the full 255-character length.
Saved the report files (formerly erased) so that writers can use when they
edit.
Added STYLLIST.EXE, the version that reports only to the disk file the
REPORT of longwords, forms of to be, and a reduced version of
nominalizations in which I eliminate most of the overkill.
Version 1.11 (June 1986)
Further reduced the overkill. Added more examples.
Version 1.5 (September 1986)
Reduced the size of both STYLED.EXE and STYLLIST.EXE by 18%.
In STYLLIST, allowed you to bypass the menu: now you may name the file to
analyze when you invoke the program at the MS-DOS prompt:
styllist filename
Version 1.6 (March 1987)
Simplified the menus. Added a shell feature for STYLED.
Version 1.7 (April 1987)
Added the ability to specify a text to analyze when you evoke STYLED
from the command line.
Added more prompts to help you when you enter an incorrect file name.
======
I will gladly inform anyone of future updates or send copies. Send only
enough money to cover my costs. The same applies to my other each for MS-
DOS only.
I will mail the next two new substantial updates at my own expense to anyone
who documents a contribution of at least $10 to AIDS research.
My other programs include:
ADDRESS A program to manage addresses. It groups people in up
to ten categories.
APPLY A program which monitors applications (for jobs,
grants, contests....), either for the applicant or the
institution. It stores the relevant data and merges it
with text files which you create. It allows you to edit
your text for fine changes. I may order dossiers and print
your letters and envelopes. APPLY reviews instanty any past
experience you may have had with the person/institution.
CANTONES A program to help you learn to speak Cantonese.
An earlier version, "MailMerge Cantonese," won
best-article-of-1985 by the Hong Kong Computer Society;
reprinted in the Journal of the Chinese Language Teachers'
Association, May, 1986.
MUSES A program to help writers circulate manuscripts and
prepare bibliographies of their publications. See review
by Rochelle Ratner in CODA, November/December 1986.
Louie Crew
Director of the Writing Program
Chinese University
Shatin, N.T.
Hong Kong
telephone: 0-6066134
TELEX 50301 CUHK HK
CABLE SINOVERSITY
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Appendix: STYLED Practice
The program tests what we intuit about texts. For example, the program
can chart a writer's "leanness" or "periodicity" with specific, visible
evidence.
The program helps writers test drafts. If we want a lean style, or a
periodic one, the program charts how each new draft nears our goal.
The program cannot provide a style; but it can measure several
dimensions of style. We must know our own goals before we can use the
program effectively.
I value force and directness. I like to unpack nouns, to restore
action to verbs. I eschew passives and most other forms of TO BE....
Joseph Williams' STYLE (Scott, Foresman, and Company) and Richard Lanham's
REVISING PROSE (Scribner's) both preach the style I aspire to practice. I
recommend them highly. Both help me winnow.
A Sample Session with a Student's Paper
I asked my second-year students to write about a book which they had
hated. One student concluded:
As far as science fiction is concerned, the story is not the least
interesting. I can hardly read anything really interesting and
mysterious: no fancy about the wonderful world on planets, no extremely
mysterious, haunted rumors about the bronze statue, no need to puzzele,
no way of amusement. Since the author only reports the plot, the
story is quite boring. And I was dissatisfied after reading it.
[This paragraph appears as STUDNESE.TXT on the disk.]
Notice how she gropes. INTERESTING appears twice, as does MYSTERIOUS. But
her text builds. Use STYLED to look at the punctuation, especially in
sentence number 2, where she repeats more meaningfully. The final two
sentences jab. STYLED charts the pulse.
I argue that the student can make a strong paragraph here but needs
skill to determine what to keep, what to excise. If she merely cuts the
repetition, she could turn turn her pulsating indictment into a cadaver.
With the "cholesterol" report, I found 4 forms I wanted to cleanse.
Instead of the two forms of TO BE, compare
The science fiction here does not engage.
I tried to preserve the pulse of the second sentence, as a weighty
indictment, but to repeat less, and to put the more vivid action into
verbs:
No fancy detail, no mystery, no wonder: no rumor haunts planets;
the bronze statue neither puzzles nor amuses.
In my version, verbs reinforce the jabs at the end.
The author only plots. The book bores me.
(The punctuation report of her text shows the jabs, but the report of her
word-length marks them less clearly than does the report of my word length.)
Some readers may prefer the less forceful original. Perhaps I have
even changed her meaning, especially with "author only plots." I argue that
I have discovered more meaning than she had yet freighted, as I often do
when I revise my own texts.
These exercises cannot prove one's taste better than another's. Some
may prefer to write like the student here, or like the teachers and the
administrator below. Which versions would you prefer to read? Which will
you more likely remember?
A Sample Session with Teachers' Prose
In a 1986 issue of Computers and Composition, two teachers reported:
In order to meet the second condition, that the analysis should
lead to direct improvements in a revision, even the measurements which
do correlate with essay quality need to be used with some caution.
Research which studies the relationship of revised essays to holistic
scores should provide more accurate guidance in this area, but our
initial findings suggest some starting points. Reducing the percentage
of abstract words and spelling errors can be accomplisehd directly and
with measureable effect on essay quality; however, students should not
expect that direct changes in word length, sentence length, or
readability will improve an essay. The correlation of average word
length to quality, for instance, cannot be directly addressed in
revision. Substitution of lexical units for the mere sake of length
would change the data but not, necessarily, the quality of the revised
draft. Perhaps indirectly, through active experience of reading and
practice in writing which increase active vocabulary, a student could
meaningfully raise his or her average word length from the low mean
(4.3) to the high limit of 5.0. The fact that these measurements can
be improved only indirectly, suggests the overall importance of scribal
fluency. Since sentence length, word length, and readability are all
measurements of scribal fluency, the results of this study seem to
suggest that more classroom time should be spent on improving scribal
behavior than on practicing those discrete grammatical and stylistic
elements which do not correlate significantly with essay quality.
Whew!
STYLLIST cites the following long words in this paragraph:
1 > improvements
1 > measurements
2 > relationship
3 > percentage
3 > accomplisehd
3 > measureable
3 > readability
4 > correlation
5 > Substitution
5 > necessarily
6 > indirectly
6 > experience
6 > vocabulary
6 > meaningfully
7 > measurements
7 > indirectly
7 > importance
8 > readability
8 > measurements
8 > practicing
8 > grammatical
8 > significantly
Total word count: 242
Words 10+ chars.: 22 ( 9 %)
They also practice what they preach. They value long words and want
students to value them. In their last sentence they claim that writers
waste time to remove those forms for which holistic graders do not lower
the score. Elsewhere they specify nominalizations and forms of TO BE as
examples. Again they follow their own advice: STYLLIST cites 6 forms of TO
BE in their paragraph:
1 > be
3 > be
4 > be
7 > be
8 > are
8 > be
Forms of TO BE: 2 %
and the following words as possible nominalizations:
1 > condition
1 > improvements
1 > revision
1 > measurements
1 > caution
2 > relationship
2 > guidance
2 > findings
2 > starting
3 > Reducing
3 > spelling
3 > sentence
4 > correlation
4 > instance
4 > revision
5 > Substitution
6 > experience
6 > reading
6 > writing
6 > meaningfully
7 > measurements
7 > importance
8 > sentence
8 > measurements
8 > improving
8 > practicing
8 > elements
Possible buried action: 27 ( 11 %)
Total word count: 242
I used these lists when I revised, to express their ideas in my style:
A student who expects to improve prose must apply our analysis
cautiously. Even when our counts correlate with good grades, further
research needs to define precisely how the correlation occurs. For
example, we found that grades go up when students spell correctly and
use few abstract words; but one should not exchange a word for another
as mechanically as one alters spelling. Perhaps students should read
more. Then they may meaningfully raise average word length from the
low mean (4.3) to the high limit of 5.0. Sentence length, word length,
and readability measure scribal fluency. Classes need to improve
these rather than practice with those discrete grammatical and
stylistic elements which do not correlate significantly with grades.
Crusted with nominals, their prose sounds intelligent. But when I
unclog its arteries, the teachers do not impress me. They discovered too
little:
Spelling helps grades.
&
"Perhaps" [their word!] students should read more.
and claim too much:
Why waste time with features graders do not notice?
Holistically I too give a lower grade to the clearer version, because of its
poverty, not because of its clarity.
I agree that we need to search the data again to determine how quality
correlates with style.
I never finish a text, but halt. STYLLIST cites these long words in my
version:
1 > cautiously
2 > correlation
3 > mechanically
4 > effectively
5 > meaningfully
6 > readability
7 > grammatical
7 > significantly
Total word count: 125
Words 10+ chars.: 8 ( 6 %)
I used no forms of the verb TO BE, but STYLLIST reports five words as
possible nominalizatons:
2 > correlation
3 > spelling
5 > meaningfully
6 > Sentence
7 > elements
Possible buried action: 5 ( 4 %)
Total word count: 125
Since I reduced the total word length by almost half, I decided to live with
the long words listed. I used no form of TO BE, but did use three
nominalizations: CORRELATION and SPELLING name old information, introduced
with the verbs CORRELATE and SPELL. I kept the ambiguous word MEANINGFULLY
because I did not know what the writers MEAN. (SENTENCE and ELEMENTS hide no
action; with them the program misfired.)
Explore your own logic. I share mine to fortify you; examine me for
weakness.
A Sample Session With an Adminstrator's Report
Option 4 of the program reveals many places an administrator buried
action in nouns or used forms of TO BE:
Implicit in what has been suggested above is the fact that the
Department needs significantly to increase its expectations and its
requirements. Both sections of the Graduate Division now have
completed the pioneering phase of their programs. The programs are
well established. A satisfactory international recognition for the
programs has been achieved. The time now has come to build upon the
initial successes of the Department's postgraduate program. During
the forthcoming triennium, postgraduate coursework within the
Department must be made more complex. Students must be required to
operate at more sophisticated--at genuinely international--levels of
commitment and skill.
Compare:
I have implied that the Department needs to expect more, to
require more. We have pioneered long enough. Now we must sophisticate
our graduate students. During the new triennium, our students must
show more skill. They must commit themselves to more complex
materials. The faculty must serve international, not parochial
standards.
When I showed the two versions to a graduate student, he exclaimed, "So much
clearer! The second doesn't sound like a report."
It does not have to. It IS [sic] one.
Yes, I revolt. If you have read this far, maybe you will join me.
Just how many more hours will unclear prose abuse?
Re-Visers unite.
==============