The editor explains that the piece promoting the business’s product is not an advertorial, but is a case of “working together with a local success story in a way that is mutually beneficial”.

You set to work on the piece and create an article which is then published in print and online.

A reader contacts you after the piece is published to tell you that a similar service is being offered by a non-commercial community project run by volunteers and which is totally free-of-charge.

You thank them for alerting you to the free service, and tell them that you have since been working on a second piece about the paid-for service, with an article due to be published in a couple of days.

The reader suggests you add a line about the free service saying that “In these times when people are struggling with the cost of living it might be nice to let your readers know that there is a similar service completely free-of-charge”.

What should you do?

A: Ignore the new information that you have received and publish without mentioning the free service because you feel you can’t mention every service that exists in the area or take attention away from the paid-for service whose coverage is “mutually beneficial”.

B: Rework the article to include the information you have just been given because thorough and comprehensive journalism means that you should include all relevant information that could help enhance the knowledge of your audience about the topic you are covering.

C: Plan a third piece about the free service to be published at a later date.

Suggested action

We would recommend option B if print and online deadlines allow (and of course online articles can always be updated).

You have been alerted to relevant information by a member of the public. It is information that is absent from your report and which could be of valuable to your audience.

As a journalist you have a responsibility to inform the public debate so that the audience can make educated choices.

Your job is to gather facts, test them, then present them to the audience so they can assess their value.

Because of that, you should be sharing all relevant information that could help those who read your journalism.

Withholding information, for whatever reason, should be done for solid editorial reasons only, such as the likelihood to offend, cause harm, or mislead. For more on offence please see our ethics section and the article about offence and journalism.

In this case the reporter should refer up to their editor, explain that new information has come to light which is relevant to the piece being produced, and discuss how to incorporate what you have learnt in a clear and concise way that is of benefit to those who consume the news your media house produces.

You should never knowingly publish an incomplete news report unless it is part of a series of investigations which, in their totality, present all the facts to the audience.

The post Withholding information – scenario first appeared on Media Helping Media.

Journalists should not waste words. Their writing should be concise and tight. Adjectives and adverbs clutter up news stories and should be avoided wherever possible.

When it comes to writing – not just news writing but any kind of writing – adjectives and adverbs have a bad reputation.

Mark Twain said: “When you catch an adjective, kill it.” Stephen King said: “The road to hell is paved with adverbs”.

For many decades, the conventional wisdom in journalism has been that you do not, usually, need adjectives and adverbs. Your sentences will be better if you cut them out.

But wait! I just used “usually”, an adverb, and “better”, an adjective. If I cut them out, the first sentence will no longer be accurate, since I am trying to say that there will, occasionally, be a need. And the second sentence does not work at all if I remove “better”.

So you cannot ban the use of adjectives and adverbs.

But you should keep them to a minimum. Mark Twain, in fact, modified his advice:

“I don’t mean utterly, but kill most of them (adjectives) – then the rest will be valuable. They weaken when they are close together. They give strength when they are wide apart.

“An adjective habit, or a wordy, diffuse, flowery habit, once fastened upon a person, is as hard to get rid of as any other vice.”

Instead, make a virtue of economy: use as few words as possible. The newspaper guru, Leslie Sellers, in his 1968 guide, “The simple subs book”, put it this way: “fewer words, better sense”. Apply this across the board, but especially (a permissible use of the adverb in this case) with adjectives and adverbs.

Adjectives and adverbs are words that modify. Adjectives change the meaning of nouns. Adverbs change the meaning of verbs, phrases, clauses or sentences. You should always test whether the modification is necessary.

Here are a few examples of commonly-used but unnecessary modifiers, in which the first word can always be cut:

• completely untrue
• strictly necessary
• broad daylight
• considerable difficulty
• firm decision
• together with
• along with
• grateful thanks
• high-speed car chase

Adjectives to do with size are often too broad to add any useful meaning, like “big”, “huge”, “massive”, “astonishing” . They can be cut or replaced with something that adds to the understanding of the story.

Adjectives like “tragic”, “improved” “sad”, “incredible” “unfortunate” are especially dangerous since they include value judgements. Leave it to your readers or listeners to make their own judgements.

Two of the most objectionable words are “really” and “very”. They seldom add any meaning. Mark Twain suggested that every time you are tempted to write the word “very” in your story, substitute the word “damn” – then, as he put it, “your editor will delete it and the writing will be just as it should be”.

Mark Twain was also down on adverbs. He said they were the tool of the “lazy writer”. In their most common form they end in “ly” and are attached to verbs. Here are some sentences which would be better without their adverbs:

“She tiptoed silently into the room.”
“He glared aggressively at the traffic warden.”
“She knew perfectly well he was lying.”
“He completely rejected the allegation.”

In all these cases, the adverb states the obvious. The verb does the job without needing modification. Always try to let the verb stand alone – if it needs strengthening with an adverb, it is the wrong choice of verb.

Journalists choosing their words are the same as carpenters choosing a piece of wood or tailors choosing a length of cloth. We are all craftspeople and our success depends on using the right raw materials – in our case, words.

So be sparing in your use of adjectives and adverbs. It is one of the qualities that marks a professional.

For further reading on this subject, you might want to read the excellent “A journalist’s guide to the use of English”, by Ted Bottomley and Anthony Loftus. It was written in 1971 and has been updated for this website by Ted’s son John.

The post The use of adjectives and adverbs in journalism first appeared on Media Helping Media.

Many news stories are about action. You want to capture that in your writing and seize the attention of your audience. One of the ways is by choosing the active voice.

Strong verbs are the best words for suggesting action: run, leap, hit, accuse, rescue, build, explore, kick, ride, catch, etc. And verbs have two “voices”: the active and the passive.

In the active voice: I wrote this module.

In the passive voice: This module was written by me.

In the active voice, somebody is doing something. In the passive voice, something is being done.

They are both perfectly correct, grammatically, but the active voice is shorter, stronger and more direct. It works much better in news stories. There are exceptions, which we will come to later, but in the vast majority of cases, the active voice gives your story impact and vitality.

Here are two ways of writing the same story:

Passive voice: After several months of better trading conditions, the annual bonus to staff at the Fred Smith store group will be paid for the first time in four years.

Active voice: Staff at Fred Smith stores will get their first annual bonus in four years, after the group reported better trading conditions.

The active voice works better – it is less wordy and it puts the human interest angle first.

So the active voice is a basic part of a journalist’s toolkit. It is the default way of writing an interesting story. But the passive voice is not all bad! Sometimes it is the right choice.

“A lion has eaten the president” is much less effective than “The president has been eaten by a lion”.

This is because the overwhelmingly important subject of the story is the president, not the lion, and you want the president mentioned at the beginning of the story. The passive voice serves better in this case.

So the starting point for news writing is to favour the active voice – and to recognise the comparatively rare occasions when it will be better to use the passive.

But there is another reason to understand the use of the active and passive voices. They do not just affect style and impact, they can also affect meaning.

People in the public eye, particularly politicians, sometimes use the passive voice to obfuscate, confuse and mislead.

The classic example is “mistakes were made”.  From the politicians’ point of view that is better than “I made mistakes” because it sets up uncertainty about what happened.

“I made mistakes and I’m sorry” is a very different statement from “mistakes were made and I regret them”.

In the latter case, the politician leaves open the possibility that the mistakes were made by someone else and his regret could easily be about someone else’s error. Because of the way he has phrased his statement, we cannot tell.

It is the skilful use of the passive voice to evade accountability.

Notice that when politicians describe their successes, they say “We took swift action to deal with the situation”. But when they talk about things that have gone wrong, they use words like “it was considered that…”, or “it was felt necessary….”, distancing themselves from the decision-making process through use of the passive voice.

I remember a philandering politician was asked at his latest wedding whether he would now be a faithful husband. He replied: “When a man marries his mistress, a vacancy is created.”

He was saying, in effect, that he would continue to have extra marital affairs – but in his choice of the passive voice, “a vacancy is created”, he was implying that some external force was creating the new opportunities for infidelity that he would no doubt later take up.

Again, the passive voice suggests the politician is an observer of what is happening, rather than the author of it.

So when you are quoting some public figure, make sure to point out any ambiguities created by his use of the passive voice.

You might want also to look at these thoughts on use of  the passive voice by David Poulson at the Knight Center for Environmental Journalism.

The post The active and passive voices in news first appeared on Media Helping Media.

News writing is the opposite.

You start with the essence of the story, for example, let’s imagine the following headline which reads: “The price of cotton has fallen by 15 per cent”.

You then add extra information such as the impact on producers, the textile industry, the economy, consumer prices, employment, etc.

Details such as whether it was expected, what is being done about it, whether it is short- or long-term, and how people are reacting to the news are then added..

A reader or listener can stop after the headline and summary knowing the basic facts.

The person who wants to know more can continue for added information.

Some journalists refer to this method as pyramid journalism, as set out in the graphic above, others refer to it as the inverted pyramid. But no matter how you look at it, the headline is at the top, and more information is added according to its relevance and newsworthiness.

Those who need to understand the essential information will be able to access it in the first few lines, while those who are fascinated by the story can continue reading background information that supports the main thrust of the article. And those who are not that interested will have moved on to another news item.

It’s a simple but effective technique that relies entirely on how well focused you are.

You, the journalist, must decide what the top line is, what comes second, third, and so on.

And you must alway keep in mind that you risk losing your audience if you get too bogged down in detail and offer too much of one kind of information at the expense of other aspects of the story.

In the next lesson we look at the six questions that journalists should ask. What, Why, When, How, Where, and Who.

The text for this lesson was written by John Allen a former executive editor of BBC News. The text is from Media Helping Media and is reproduced under the terms of Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 4.0. The graphic at the top is by David Brewer released via Creative Commons CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

The post Essential elements of a news story first appeared on Media Helping Media.

The ultimate misuse 

Chapter 4 from the book ‘A journalist’s guide to the use of English’

NO ONE CAN DEVELOP WORD POWER without the ability to spell, for mis-spelling is the ultimate misuse of words.

Good spelling is primarily a matter of observing and remembering. Below are 80 words which are frequently misspelled. Test yourself on these.

Abhorrence, accommodation, acquiescence, adolescence, annihilate, Antarctic, asphyxiate, auxiliary, benefited, cemetery, chequered, connoisseur, convertible,  corroborate, debatable, definitely, descendant, destructible, discreet, dissatisfaction.

Ecstasy, effervescence, eligibility, embarrassment, emissary, exaggerate, exhilaration,
fahrenheit, fallacious, fallible, forty, fuchsia, fulfilling, funereal, gauge, haemorrhage. handsomely, harassed, heinous, humorous, hygiene, hysterical.

Idiosyncrasy, immigration, incoherency, innocuous, innuendo, jeopardise, liaison, licentious, loquacious, maintenance, manoeuvre, mantelpiece, meanness, Mediterranean, miniature, miscellaneous, mischievous, nonchalant, noticeable.

Occurred, omitted, oscillate, paraphernalia, profession, privilege, pseudonym, recommend, reconnaissance, referred, resuscitate, separate, supersede, tendency, tranquillise, unnecessary, unparalleled, veterinary, vociferous.

Plurals

THE main problem occurs with words ending in Y. The rule is that if Y follows a vowel, the S is added to form the plural.
E.g. donkeys, moneys, storeys.

But if the Y follows a consonant, you must change the Y to I and add ES.
E.g. ladies, pennies, stories.

Some trouble arises over unusual plural forms and these have to be memorised.
E.g. Singular: series oasis

Plural: series oases
A good deal of confusion arises over plurals ending in OS or OES.

Here are a few guidelines:

1. Monosyllabic words take OES. E.g. goes, noes.

2. Words used frequently in the plural take OES. E.g. heroes, potatoes.

3. Long words take OS.  E.g. archipelagos, generalissimos.

4. Proper nouns take OS. E.g. Romeos, Lotharios.

5. Alien words take OS. E.g. commandos, ghettos.

6. Words which have a vowel before the O take OS. E.g. cameos, folios.

7. Abbreviated words take OS. E.g. photos, pros.

The following examples confirm the above rules: dominoes. embargoes, mosquitoes, mottoes, tomatoes, tornadoes, curios, dynamos, magnetos, manifestos, mementos, provisos

Distinctive spelling

SOME words have a distinctive spelling according to the part of speech in which they are used. These must also be memorised.

Suffixes

HOWEVER, while observation and memory are the keys to good spelling, there is additional guidance which can help. This was published on pages 131-133 of THE PRACTICE OF JOURNALISM, included within a chapter on Good English by Dr. Syntax.

The whole chapter is worth reading but one page is quoted here, for this is an area where even good spellers flounder.

“Many writers hesitate when they find they must write certain words about the spelling of which they feel unsure; and some words have an odd look when written. Benefit and its derivatives are an example. Should it be benefitting or benefiting? The rule about adding a suffix (-ing, -ed, -er) which begins with a vowel falls into two parts:

“1. When the suffix is added to a word of one syllable which ends with a consonant preceded by one vowel, the consonant is doubled before the suffix is added. E.g. bed, bedding; sob, sobbed; dig, digger; sun, sunny.

“2. When the word has more than one syllable, the final consonant is doubled before the suffix only if the last syllable of the word is stressed. E.g. befit, befitted; begin, beginning; occur, occurred; but gallop, galloping; parallel, paralleled; devil, devilish; benefit, benefiting.

“There are a few exceptions to each part of the rule and these must be memorised. E.g. bus, buses; travel, traveller; gas, gases; cavil, cavilling. If two vowels precede the final consonant of the word, the rule above does not apply; so we must write: bias, biased; peer, peering; proud, prouder; beat, beaten; bleed, bleeding.

“What happens when a word ends with a silent E and you want to add a suffix depends on another rule, which also has two parts. It all depends on what letter begins the suffix, and this is the rule:

“1. If the suffix begins with a consonant the mute E remains, e.g. safe, safety; same, sameness; exceptions include duty, truly, awful, width, judgment, acknowledgment.

“2. If the suffix begins with a vowel, the mute E is dropped, for example, bake, baking; sane, sanity; mile, milage; rate, ratable.

“But sometimes the mute E distinguishes between two words with different meanings, such as singeing (burning) and singing; lineage (family descent) and linage (payment by the line).”

2020 notes by John Bottomley

1. The spelling of some of the examples of suffixes given above may be subject to variation within the established house style of a newspaper or magazine publishing group, some of these established spellings may occasionally seem archaic but the important element in the use of such a style guide is guaranteeing consistency.

2. This guide was compiled long before the advent of social media and all its accompanying spelling and grammatical pitfalls. But it was also written before the increasing domination of American English in the worldwide web, particularly in the default setting of ‘American English’ rather than ‘English’ in computer spell checks. With an increasing over-reliance on the perceived infallibility of spell checks as a means of avoiding errors, the American spelling of such words as organize, realize etc (instead of the English organise, realise) and favor, honor, color (instead of the long-established accepted English favour, honour and colour) may well ultimately be the norm, particularly in rapidly developing countries or where learning spoken English is the priority.

The potential for spell checks to choose what traditionally may have been the wrong spelling will remain however. Four of the five examples given in the above list of Distinctive Spellings show differing spelling of nouns and adverbs. American English does not replicate these rules and the words ‘licence’ and ‘practice’ are now regularly mis-used.

Spell checks have been embraced by publishing and newspaper companies as a way of cutting costs, both for printed and online work. Sub-editors and proof readers are becoming more rare.  But when the spell check programme (program?) suggests there should be no hyphen in the word ‘re-form’ then you may end up using a word which changes the whole sense of what you are writing.

Even worse are bad spelling habits online being transferred to the printed page, again not always picked up by spell checks. Don’t write ‘would of, should of, could of.’ Yes, some journalists do this now. The word is ‘have’ not ‘of’.

So not rely on spell checks alone, if there is nobody else checking your work, check it yourself with the use of a good dictionary.

Module revised by John Bottomley 2020

About this training module

Ted Bottomley and Anthony Loftus were both journalists and training managers at the Express & Star group of newspapers in the UK. The group has given this site permission to publish the module (above), which is one of six taken from the book ‘A journalist’s guide to the use of English’, first published in July 1971 but still relevant today. You can find links to all six chapters below.

Ted Bottomley spent his whole working life in newspapers and more than 25 years in journalism. He was a former weekly newspaper editor, and had a long association with the National Council for the Training of Journalists. He was a member of the Publishing and Editorial Training Committee of the Printing & Publishing Industry Training Board. In the UK journalists still compete to try to win the prestigious ‘Ted Bottomley Award’.

Anthony Loftus was a high court reporter and film and music critic before becoming the Editorial Training Officer of the Express & Star group. He was a member of the Institution of Training Officers and the Association of Lecturers in Journalism, and the chair of the West Midlands Regional Training Committee of the National Council for the Training of Journalists.

You can read more about the book, the men behind it, and how it has been revised and updated by Ted Bottomley’s son, John, a newspaper journalist for 40 years.

The six chapters of ‘A journalist’s guide to the use of English’

• Chapter 1: The use of English
• Chapter 2: The essence of style
• Chapter 3: Word Power
• Chapter 4: Spelling
• Chapter 5: Syntax and sentence construction
• Chapter 6: Punctuation

The post Spelling tips for journalists first appeared on Media Helping Media.

The shape and sound of language

Chapter 2 from the book ‘A journalist’s guide to the use of English’

STYLE DIFFERS FROM SENTENCE CONSTRUCTION (SYNTAX) in that it cannot be quantified; it has no precise rules. This is inevitable because style is concerned not so much with the mechanics of English as with the manner in which the writer uses language to play on the sensations of the reader. Style is concerned with the shape and sound of language. It adds impact to writing, strengthens the contact with the reader and heightens awareness. Even though the reader may be oblivious of what is happening and unable to analyse the techniques that are being used, the sense of enjoyment is enhanced.

However, while style does not have precise rules of its own, it must be based on those rules of syntax which give shape and design to our use of English. And, the more elaborate the style, the greater are the demands made on the writer’s grasp of good grammatical construction.

For example, the novelist Francis Brett Young was a lover of the long sentence. A sentence of his might run to well over 100 words and in some cases exceed 150. But the reader never gets lost, because the balance and shape of the sentence is so carefully constructed that it offends none of the rules of syntax. And that, after all, is the purpose of syntax: to enable the writer to communicate with his reader. Syntax, therefore, is the foundation on which good style is built. Some of the more common pitfalls will be discussed later. Meanwhile, there are some considerations about style which may usefully be examined.

To be effective as a communicator, a writer must develop an ability to select a style which has four principal attributes: suitability, simplicity, precision and poise.

Suitability

THE MANNER of writing must be appropriate to the nature of the subject, to the mood and pace of the events that are being recalled and to the needs of the reader. The style must arouse the interest of the reader and maintain that interest throughout. It must also present the facts or arguments in a manner that enables the reader to understand them quickly and easily.

The Roman statesman and lawyer Cicero, who did so much to shape the style of his own language, and consequently those languages which are derived from Latin, was one of the most compelling communicators of all time. He perfected a style which could scarcely fail to captivate his audiences, so skilfully did he combine clarity, flexibility and euphony.

This is what he had to say about style:

“Whatever his theme he will speak as becomes it; neither meagrely where it is copious, nor meanly where it is ample, nor in this way where it demands that; but keeping his speech level with the actual subject and adequate to it.”

Cicero was discussing the spoken word but the import of his message is just as germane to the written word. And it is as precise a definition as one can achieve of such an abstract idea. The key phrases are level with the actual subject and adequate to it.

However, while suitability is an abstract concept, there are a few pointers that can be expressed :

1. If the subject is grave, it must not be treated with anything that suggests levity.

2. If the subject is amusing, it may be treated lightly, or with mock severity (e.g. where the punch-line produces an amusing climax or anti-climax, said to be the “delayed drop” story).

3. Whatever the subject, the writer should not needlessly offend the reader’s susceptibilities. This means avoiding any note of cynicism or facetiousness where the story deals with sincerely-held beliefs, however bizarre those beliefs may appear to the writer.

4. Where a story recalls events which have action and movement, the style should suggest pace. This calls for terse expression, the avoidance of too many adjectives, the use of direct and active verbs, and crisp, taut, sentence construction.

5. Where a story deals with a sequence of events, a straightforward narrative style is often the best. However, there are two points that require attention. If one episode is taken out of context to create impact in the intro, make sure that it is briefly repeated in its proper time context. Secondly, make sure there is a consistent use of tenses in reporting events chronologically.

6. If the events recalled in a story are stark and horrific, resist the temptation to over-write. The events themselves will make sufficient impact. Any attempt to add to the horror may lead to banalities or cliches; e.g. the phrase like a battlefield to describe a multiple crash does nothing to heighten awareness.

7. Whatever the story, don’t rhapsodise. Whenever a story plays on the emotions-whether those emotions be joy or sorrow, humour or pathos-understatement is more effective than overstatement.

8. Where the story requires some scene-setting, there is scope for thoughtful word-painting. Consider this example by Arthur Hopcraft writing in UK national newspaper The Guardian. The piece is from a bygone era but evocative enough to still resonate.

“They moved Sorensen’s cross at dusk, when the streets were still, lifting the darling immensity of it, all of a piece, over Sorensen’s hedge and laying it with care fit for a corpse on the two flat trailers behind the tractor. They trundled it up the short, steep hills and huffed it and swore it round the short, tight turns. They stopped at Carr’s Hill, which has always been called Carr’s Hole, and there they stood it upright among the clods and tufts and mushy hollows that mark the graves of old Ireland’s anguish.”

That style certainly plays on the sensations. It captures scene and mood and has a marvellous impact. It screams: “Read on”.

Simplicity

THE HALLMARK of any great prose is its simplicity. If you look back at the extract from THE GUARDIAN and study it, you will see that this quite sophisticated piece of writing is in reality a piece of simple prose. Apart from the name Sorensen and the one word immensity, there is no word with more than two syllables in a passage of almost 100 words.

The sentences are not short; indeed, the opening sentence has over 40 words. Yet, they are easy to read, because they are nowhere convoluted with clumsily contrived subordinate clauses.

Moreover, the language, although figurative in places, has a directness about it which ensures that the whole piece moves at an energetic pace. This is achieved by the use of direct, active verbs.

Directness is, in fact, one of the fundamental ingredients of simple prose. Brevity, on the other hand, is not the same thing as simplicity, but it does contribute towards it.

From this one example certain useful guidelines emerge and others may be added:

1. Prefer the short word to the long one.

2. Prefer the concrete statement to the abstract.

3. Prefer the direct statement to any form of circumlocution.

4. Be firm in avoiding words or phrases simply because they sound good, if they do not develop the theme.

5. Avoid pomposity at all costs.

6. Remember that a sentence must have at least one finite verb, and that this is the most important word in the sentence.

7. As a general rule, choose transitive verbs and use them in the active voice. The passive voice slows down the pace and clutters the sentence with prepositions and a lot of little is and was auxiliaries.

N.B.-It is particularly important to avoid the passive voice in intros and headlines although there are exceptions. (Eg. Kennedy shot is better than Assassin shoots Kennedy because Kennedy is the strongest word for the subject.)

However, there are occasions where the headline is inverted simply to fit the count, when it would be better to change the size of type, or the shape of the headline.

E.g. JONES IS JEERED BY STRIKERS

would be better recast as the more direct:

STRIKERS JEER JONES

thus obviating the use of the auxiliary is and the preposition by.

8. Choose adjectives with great care and be economical in their use. Avoid tautology (e.g. a new innovation).

9. Prefer the short sentence to the long one, particularly in the intro. Apart from having the virtue of directness, the short sentence also has typographical advantages.

As a general rule, aim for a sentence of 20-25 words as a maximum. On the other hand, don’t make a fetish of short sentences. Eight sentences of 12-15 words may be all right in a short news story, but to stick to sentences of such brevity in an article of 1,000 words would not help the reader at all. Such a staccato style lacks fluency and could impede understanding. The ideal in long articles is to strike a balance between short and medium length sentences.

10. Avoid complex statements where too many subordinate clauses, or descriptive phrases, prevent the flow of language.

The most common pitfalls in sentence construction occur in compound sentences, where participles are misrelated, or non-sequiturs are inadvertently created.

Ensure, therefore, that whenever an idea or situation requires explanation by resort to a compound construction, each subordinate phrase or clause is clearly related to the principal statement.

Precision

ENGLISH is a language of richness and variety. But indiscriminate use of words, simply because so many exist, inhibits precision. And precision is paramount in reporting, for clarity and accuracy both depend upon it.

In order to be precise in writing it is necessary to know the exact meaning of words. Words must fit easily into the sense and context of both the sentence and the story as a whole. It is no use choosing a dramatic, highly evocative word, which sounds fine in isolation, if it is over-emphatic or ill-attuned to the story.

Approximation is the antithesis of precision. If the writer is content with being nearly right about the odd word or phrase, the results will always fall below the best standard.

So, primarily, the journalist needs a good and comprehensive vocabulary. Without such a vocabulary the writer should not be in journalism where the very business is all about words.

Study words and their meanings, for a knowledge of derivation helps a writer to be exact in his word usage.

Avoid gimmicky language and be careful about the use of colloquialisms. These may have a place in a direct quotation (provided that they do not make the speaker look foolish) but they should be used with care in general reporting.

The spoken word has accepted speech patterns that are out of place in written prose. “Estuary English” may be all right on radio and television, but it has no place in our newspapers.

Precision also depends on accurate sentence construction, for faulty syntax can invert a meaning or, at least, make the meaning ambiguous.

Do not leave it to the sub-editor or proof reader to spot inaccuracy or ambiguity. Read your own copy and ask: “ Do I mean what I say and have I said what I mean?” Often the honest answer will be “No”. And, if you pass that self-imposed test, ask: “So what?” Often you will find that the story does not go far enough in saying what happens next. Remember the reader wants to know precisely what is happening.

The headline writer should also think carefully before deciding on the most suitable choice of words. A synonym may be required because the obvious first choice of words does not fit the designated space. Two, or even three words may need to be changed before the headline fits. However, unless the synonyms are exact they may change the precise meaning of the headline. So, finally, ask yourself:

“Does the headline tell the story?” Sometimes the answer will be “No”, and the headline will need re-writing.

Be particularly careful with headline words where the active and passive voice take the same form.

E.g. LANDLORD OWED £50,000

This is dangerously ambiguous. Was the landlord owed £50,000 or did he owe £50,000?

Poise

POISE is the absolute essence of style, for it is this which transforms a piece of writing from something which may be dull and pedestrian into prose which has a sheen of its own.

By definition poise is concerned with equilibrium and in this context is related to the design and shape of language. It involves the creation of perfectly balanced, rhythmical, sentences to give perspective to the pattern of writing. It relies on the unusual word or phrase used exactly in context to add sparkle to the picture that is created. In this way it heightens the reader’s insight by appealing to his or senses through images which have an extraordinarily vivid appeal.

Often this imagery involves using literary tricks, known as figures of speech, to add lustre to the prose. Not all figures of speech have a place in newspaper journalism but there is a place for some, provided that they are used with care and restraint. The secret is that the imagery should not obtrude. In the best prose, the reader remains unconscious of technique; he simply enjoys reading the passage.

The worn-out simile (e.g. like a battlefield) sticks out like a sore thumb (another cliche simile). The apt simile, however, adds savour, which the reader relishes.

The metaphor can also border on the banal. And there is always the danger of mixing them, like the politician who smelt a rat and sought to nip it in the bud.

But, for all that, both the simile and the metaphor have a use in painting word-pictures. Turn back to Hopcraft’s piece and you will find that there are two hidden metaphors hidden because they are metaphorical verbs rather than the more common noun-metaphor. The two verbs are huffed and swore. These are intransitive verbs. One cannot huff anything, any more than smile anything; one can swear an oath, but normally swear is used intransitively.

Hopcraft has used these verbs metaphorically in a transitive manner. And the effect is so much more direct than it would have been if he had written: “they huffed and swore as they pushed it round the short, tight turns “. The appeal is in the unusual use of words which are exactly right in context.

There are figures of speech which change the shape of a sentence, such as: Rome is no mean city. (The figure of speech is litotes) instead of Rome is a great city. But like the double negative and the inverted sentence these forms should be used very sparingly and only when they add to the effectiveness of the sentence.

Such figures of speech are primarily a means of evoking word pictures; they are related to the pattern and design of sentence construction. But above all, poise is concerned with the sound of language, for even when we are reading silently we “hear” the words and phrases that appear before our eyes.

So poise is as much a matter of aural sensation as it is of visual perspective. And, as such, it relies on the inter-play of sounds to give a melodic balance to the whole composition. That is why beautiful writing is mellifluous as much as it is perfectly proportioned.

The figures of speech that assist most in creating melodic lines are:

1. Assonance: the interplay of rhyming vowel sounds:
E.g. “0 my son Absalom, my son, my son, Absalom! Would God I had died for thee, 0 Absalom, my son, my son.” (2 SAMUEL 18: 33.)

Notice the interplay of the vowels O and I. This creates a melody and a rhythm which suggest poetry, but it is pure prose and very beautiful.

2. Alliteration: the use of words beginning with or containing the same consonant.

There is no better example than W. S. Gilbert’s:

“To sit in solemn silence,
In a dull, dark dock
In a pestilential prison
With a life-long lock,
Awaiting the sensation
Of a short, sharp shock
From a cheap and chippy chopper
On a big, black block.”

(THE MIKADO.)

3. Onomatopoeia: the formation of words whose sounds evoke the sound of the action or object named.

E.g. “ The moan of doves in immemorial elms
And murmuring of innumerable bees.”
(THE PRINCESS, Tennyson.)

It may be thought that these are devices which have no place in a newspaper. But we use them all the time. Consider the phrase “ splash-down “. This is an onomatopoeic description of a space capsule making a “ soft landing “ in the sea.

Alliteration and assonance also have their place but should be used with restraint. Re-read Hopcraft’s piece and you will see there is an interplay of vowel sounds; there are onomatopoeic words such as trundled, clods, mushy hollows; and the whole passage is rich in restrained alliteration:

“They moved Sorensen’s cross at dusk when the streets were still . . . .

… care fit for a corpse on the two flat trailers behind the tractor

… trundled it up the short, steep hills

. and swore it round the short, tight turns.”

The whole piece is full of imagery, and this helps to make it the fine writing which it is.

Notice also the repetition of the word short which gives the sentence a sense of equilibrium. This is an excellent example of a writer choosing the right word and sticking to it.

There is a convention that one should not repeat a word in the same paragraph or sentence. The use of an alternative is known as elegant variation.

As a general rule, this is a good practice for it prevents boring repetition, but the synonyms must be exact. If there is no exact synonym, stick to the original word. Call a spade a spade and stick to it. Do not call it a horticultural implement. That is an inelegant variation. And remember that, occasionally, deliberate repetition can be most effective.

In this essay on style, Hopcraft’s three sentences from THE GUARDIAN have been painstakingly analysed to illustrate several points concerning technique. But let us be quite clear that the good writer achieves these results because of a good feel for language and does not start with a determination to include a couple of apt similes, sprinkle in a few alliterative words and add a bit of assonance.

These things are all weapons which should be kept sharpened. They are part of an armoury acquired by wide reading and much practice in writing. They are then used instinctively and incisively to polish a phrase here, searches for the exact word there. They are successful because they are used without strain.

The results in the hands of the unskilled practitioner are that analogy is forced, allusion is less than apt and figurative language gilds the lily so lavishly as to obscure the meaning or to jar on the reader’s sensitivity.

So beware the blunt instrument and the bluntest of all is the Pun. It is overworked and much abused. There is a place for this sort of play on words, but a very small place.

If the former England and Yorkshire cricketer Brian Close took a few wickets in any one match, the headline A Close haul would have been a very obvious and not very clever pun.

On the other hand, suppose Yorkshire had been fighting against the clock in a big match. Suppose the opposition needed only 40 runs in the last hour with seven wickets in hand. Suppose Close then went on to bowl and took all seven wickets with just two runs and four balls to spare. Then A Close haul would have been a valid headline, because it would be justified even if the bowler’s name were Smith. The fact that it was Close is what makes it a Pun.

Play on words clearly has a place in headline writing and those other arts — assonance, alliteration and onomatopoeia — can also be used to effect. But the watchword is restraint. A headline which strings together six words beginning with S will be less effective than one with a mixed pattern, such as S—S—T—S—S—T. This arrangement is asymmetrical; it is better balanced; it has more poise.

If you are in doubt about a headline, try it on a colleague. If you have to argue about it, then it is not so brilliant; if it is a masterpiece there will be no argument-only instant acclamation.

Finally, remember that poise is not an embellishment, a garnishing to add flavour. It is an integral part of composition, giving shape, balance and fluency to the whole construction, and adding impact by the skilful use of imagery.

Poise is elegance harmoniously achieved by the avoidance of excess.

Conclusion

STYLE has four attributes :

SUITABILITY SIMPLICITY PRECISION POISE

Each of these attributes helps the reader to understand and enjoy what is written.

If the style in any way inhibits direct communication with the reader, it diminishes the quality of the story and points to the failings of the writer.

We said earlier: “The journalist should be able to make the style match the mood of his subject. This means developing a professional polish in order that that the gifts of the writer are placed firmly at the service of the reader.”  It bears repetition, for this is what journalism is all about. Words are our business and writing our way of life.

Revised by John Bottomley 2020

About this training module

Ted Bottomley and Anthony Loftus were both journalists and training managers at the Express & Star group of newspapers in the UK. The group has given this site permission to publish the module (above), which is one of six taken from the book ‘A journalist’s guide to the use of English’, first published in July 1971 but still relevant today. You can find links to all six chapters below.

Ted Bottomley spent his whole working life in newspapers and more than 25 years in journalism. He was a former weekly newspaper editor, and had a long association with the National Council for the Training of Journalists. He was a member of the Publishing and Editorial Training Committee of the Printing & Publishing Industry Training Board. In the UK journalists still compete to try to win the prestigious ‘Ted Bottomley Award’.

Anthony Loftus was a high court reporter and film and music critic before becoming the Editorial Training Officer of the Express & Star group. He was a member of the Institution of Training Officers and the Association of Lecturers in Journalism, and the chair of the West Midlands Regional Training Committee of the National Council for the Training of Journalists.

You can read more about the book, the men behind it, and how it has been revised and updated by Ted Bottomley’s son, John, a newspaper journalist for 40 years.

The six chapters of ‘A journalist’s guide to the use of English’

• Chapter 1: The use of English
• Chapter 2: The essence of style
• Chapter 3: Word Power
• Chapter 4: Spelling
• Chapter 5: Syntax and sentence construction
• Chapter 6: Punctuation

The post The essence of style first appeared on Media Helping Media.

The function of punctuation

Chapter 4 from the book ‘A journalist’s guide to the use of English’

PUNCTUATION is designed to make reading easy. It is the written counterpart of those pauses and verbal inflections which make speech understandable. It also serves to separate sentences, phrases and words into orderly elements. Without correct punctuation written language becomes garbled.

The most important marks of punctuation are: The comma, the semi-colon, the colon and the full stop.

The comma

THIS marks short pauses. It is the most frequently used punctuation mark and also the most misused.

The comma is used:

1. In the place of and to separate a series of words of the same kind.

E.g. The reporter should always write clear, concise, accurate English.

(The words separated by commas are all adjectives defining English.)

The same rule applies to series of other words, provided they belong to the same part of speech.

E.g. She said the same to James, Michael, John and Alexander.

(The separations here are all between proper nouns in a series.)

2. Before and after :

(i) Words or phrases such as: however, for instance, in fact.

(ii) Alternatives.

E.g. His writing was more refined, more intellectual, than Smith’s.

3. To mark off:

(i) words in the vocative. E.g. John, don’t go yet.

(ii) words or phrases in apposition (i.e. a statement in parentheses). E.g. Elizabeth II, Queen of England, has four children.

(iii) Participial phrases.

E.g. Being unaware of the situation, he blundered on.

(iv) Absolute phrases. E.g. That being so, we shall go by train.

4. In double sentences:

(i) Where there are two subjects. E.g. He wanted to leave, but his friend detained him. He felt ill, and his friend had to help him.

(ii) Where there is only one subject, but two verbs, the inclusion of the comma is necessary to make the sentence easier to read. E.g. I visited Thomas and Perks and Marks and Spencers, and later went home.

5. In complex sentences to separate:

(i) qualifying phrases. E.g. In spite of your attempt at secrecy, I know what happened.

(ii) subordinate, non-defining clauses. E.g. The reporters, who were called in on their day off, worked quickly. BUT NOT in defining clauses. E.g. The house that Jack built.

The semi-colon

THE semi-colon marks a longer pause than that indicated by the comma, and it is used:

1. In double sentences, where there is no conjunction;

E.g. The rumour was that the king was dead; the people believed it.

2. In the same kind of sentence where the conjunction is expressed, but where the writer intends the reader to note a longer pause between statements than a comma would signify.

E.g. There will be an inquest, of course; but the matter will not end there.

3. To divide several parallel clauses.

E.g. The ship sank within minutes; all hands and passengers were lost; no wreckage was sighted.

The colon

THE difference between the semi-colon and the colon is that the latter is used when the writer wishes to indicate an even longer pause than that indicated by the semi-colon. It is used:

1. Always before opening quotes. E.g. The Mayor said: “I am glad to be here.”

2. Before listing articles, or people or ideas. E.g. He sold the lot: boat, tackle, mooring rights and fishing licences.

E.g. They rejected his views on all subjects: sex, love, literature, marriage, violence.

E.g. All of them were dead : Bill, Jack, Ted and Willie.

3. To distinguish between two co-ordinate clauses, where the second explains the first. E.g. Keep your language uncluttered: it reads more easily.

4. In a double sentence where the two ideas are in antithesis. E.g. Man proposes: God disposes.

The full stop

THE full stop denotes the end of a sentence. It is also used after initials and abbreviations, but check your HOUSE STYLE for newspaper practice varies.

Other marks

1. The exclamation mark.

Use this only when it forms part of a title (of a film, etc.) or after an exclamation.
E.g. A beard, you say!

2. The question mark.

This should be used after a direct query. E.g. He asked: “Are you coming?”

(Note the question mark is inside the quotation marks because the whole question is quoted.)

If the question is not part of the quotation it comes outside the quotation.

E.g. Have you read “Pilgrim’s Progress”?

3. Quotation marks (inverted commas).

Use these for titles of books, plays, etc., only where this is consistent with House Style.

Use these also for direct quotes. E.g. He asked: “Are you coming?”

Where a quote comes within a quote use single commas inside. E.g. He asked: “Have you read ‘Pilgrim’s Progress’?”

4. The parenthesis.

This can take the form of: (i) Brackets. E.g. If we believe (as we should) that syntax is important, we should master it.

(ii) The long dash. E.g. If we believe—as we should—that syntax is important, we should master it.

The long dash is to be preferred because it keeps the sentence more fluent.

5. The hyphen.

The hyphen, or short dash, is used:

(i) For compound nouns. E.g. mother-in-law.

(ii) For compound titles. E.g. Adjutant-general.

(iii) For compound nouns which are made up of verbs and prepositions. E.g. call-up, get-together.

(iv) To link a suffix with a proper noun. E.g. pre-Christian.

(v) For compound adjectives. E.g. a black-bearded beggar (the beggar has a black beard). NOT a black bearded beggar (this means the black beggar has a beard).

(vi) To link numbers. E.g. Ninety-nine.

(vii) To distinguish between meanings. E.g. Re-cover (cover again); recover (regain).

(viii) To avoid clumsy juxtapositions of vowels or consonants. E.g. co-operation, snail-like.

(ix) Where the word looks odd without the hyphen. E.g. NOT rerun BUT re-run.

6. The apostrophe.

This has two uses:

(i) To denote a missing letter (or letters). E.g. don’t, can’t fo’c’s’le.

(ii) As a mark to denote the genitive or possessive case. E.g. Jacob’s ladder.

Possessives

Rules:

1. Before the S if it is singular; after the S if it is plural (E.g. boy’s and boys’).

2. Where the plural changes the ending of the word and thus has no S, the apostrophe goes before the S which is added (E.g. man’s, men’s).

Following this rule can produce some clumsy possessives, but this is unavoidable.

You cannot write: Strauss’ waltzes. It must be: Strauss’s waltzes.

However, if two men named Strauss are involved, you don’t write:

Strauss’s waltzes or Strausss’ waltzes; you simplify it to Strauss’ waltzes, because the plural of Strauss is Strauss.

3. Avoid double apostrophes:

The Inkmakers’ Society’s conference (write: The conference of the Inkmakers’ Society).

4. Avoid clumsy possessives:

The Vicar of Downtown, the Rev Owen Brown’s book (again invert it: The book by the Rev Owen Brown, Vicar of Downtown).

5. Avoid confusion with quotation marks, particularly single quotes.

You cannot write: In ‘The Times’s’ opinion.

It should be; In the opinion of ‘The Times’.

N.B. Possessive of WHO is WHOSE not WHO’S. Possessive of IT is ITS not IT’S.

Revised by John Bottomley 2020

About this training module

Ted Bottomley and Anthony Loftus were both journalists and training managers at the Express & Star group of newspapers in the UK. The group has given this site permission to publish the module (above), which is one of six taken from the book ‘A journalist’s guide to the use of English’, first published in July 1971 but still relevant today. You can find links to all six chapters below.

Ted Bottomley spent his whole working life in newspapers and more than 25 years in journalism. He was a former weekly newspaper editor, and had a long association with the National Council for the Training of Journalists. He was a member of the Publishing and Editorial Training Committee of the Printing & Publishing Industry Training Board. In the UK journalists still compete to try to win the prestigious ‘Ted Bottomley Award’.

Anthony Loftus was a high court reporter and film and music critic before becoming the Editorial Training Officer of the Express & Star group. He was a member of the Institution of Training Officers and the Association of Lecturers in Journalism, and the chair of the West Midlands Regional Training Committee of the National Council for the Training of Journalists.

You can read more about the book, the men behind it, and how it has been revised and updated by Ted Bottomley’s son, John, a newspaper journalist for 40 years.

The six chapters of ‘A journalist’s guide to the use of English’

• Chapter 1: The use of English
• Chapter 2: The essence of style
• Chapter 3: Word Power
• Chapter 4: Spelling
• Chapter 5: Syntax and sentence construction
• Chapter 6: Punctuation

The post Punctuation first appeared on Media Helping Media.

Introduction

Chapter 5 from the book ‘A journalist’s guide to the use of English’

A GOOD VOCABULARY IS ESSENTIAL FOR THE journalist, because, as we have stressed, words are the raw materials of communication. But word power alone is not enough; we also need to master syntax, the craft of construction, before we can be effective writers.

If the construction is faulty, the communications bridge is weakened. It follows, therefore, that we must know not only the meaning of words but also their function in a particular context. Confusing the function leads to error in sentence construction and a consequent loss, or ambiguity, of meaning.

It is for this reason that we have stated that a knowledge of syntax is the foundation of a good style. We have also stated that the good reporter is the person who is in the right place at the right time and who has the right word ready. We have examined what constitutes the right word. We shall now consider how to put the right word in the right place.

It is assumed that every journalist should have a basic knowledge of English grammar, but this assumption is becoming more suspect each year. Grammar is no longer regarded as a vital ingredient of secondary education. There may be good ground for the educationists to state that grammar, as such, is no longer essential for everyday life. But where everyday life involves written communication, as it does for the journalist, then the premise is faulty.

It is no part of our purpose, however, to write a complete introduction to English grammar.
All that we can do in this comparatively brief consideration is to examine those areas where errors are frequently made; to give examples of these pitfalls and to state the rules for avoiding them. Some of the rules stated may seem very basic but all refer to errors that occur frequently. Indeed, this study has been prepared to answer a need exposed by analysis of common faults.

Sentence construction 1

A SENTENCE is a group of words expressing a complete thought.

Definition: A sentence must have a verb and a subject, either stated or understood.

Rule: The verb is the most important part of the sentence, for it is this which gives the sentence its meaning (verb is derived from the Latin word verbum which means word). The verb expresses action or a state of being. which is related to the subject.

Sentences come in four types:

E.g. The News Editor has been promoted – statement (called the indicative by the grammarian).

E.g. Promoted, you say! – exclamation.

E.g. Why hasn’t the Deputy Editor been promoted? – question.

E.g. Give the Deputy Editor the job – command (traditionally called the imperative).

The subject is easy to find in the statement – the News Editor has been promoted

In the exclamation or question one has to invert the sentence to find the subject (i.e. convert each into a statement):
– you say promoted.
– the Deputy Editor  hasn’t been promoted, why not?

In the command the subject is understood:
– you give the Deputy Editor the job.

Pitfall:

The most common error (often, unhappily, a deliberate one is to write a “sentence” that is incomplete, by leaving out either subject or verb.

E.g. The story may read: “The new cruise liner sailed majestically down the river. She has been built with all the care that skilled craftsmen could give her. And the stamp of their reputation.”

What about the stamp of their reputation? What is it doing? Remember, a sentence must have a verb.

E.g. Less objectionable is the omission of the subject. “The old man lay down. And died” In this example he is understood. The words and died could have been added to the first sentence. They are disjoined to give emphasis to the finality of it all.

However, this technique should be used very sparingly and in the right place. However, beware of the chatty columnist’s “ Met a man last week” type of construction.

Objects

ALL SENTENCES should have a subject (either expressed or understood) and a verb, but not all sentences have an object. Indeed some verbs cannot have an object.

Definition: The object is the person or thing which receives the action of the verb.

E.g. The journalist (subject), writes (verb), headlines (object).

Writes is thus a transitive verb for the action has crossed over to the object. But if nothing receives the action of the verb, the verb is intransitive.

E.g. The journalist (subject) smiles (verb)

This is a complete statement unless one adds the word rarely and that is an adverb telling us how often the journalist smiles. It is not an object.

Again transitive verbs can be used intransitively where no object is given.

E.g. The reporter (subject) writes (verb)

Objects may be either direct or indirect.

E.g. The reporter (subject) sent (verb) the story (object) to the Editor (indirect object)

The main (direct) object is the story for this received the action.

The secondary (indirect) object is the Editor who received, not the action, but the object itself.

The concept of ‘case’

SUBJECTS, objects and indirect objects are the roles in which parts of speech may occur. However, the grammarian does not call them “roles”. They are called cases.

The subject is in the nominative case.

The direct object is in the accusative case.

The indirect object is in the dative case.

However, as there is no distinction in form between the accusative and dative, we may use English terms and think simply of the subjective case and the objective case.

The complement

ONLY those verbs which express an action (active verbs) take an object. Inactive verbs express a state of being (or existing and take a complement, for each half of the sentence complements the other.

Inactive verbs may be described as linking verbs for they link two balancing halves of a sentence. The most common of these is the verb to be in its various forms – am, is, are; was, were, etc. But there are others such as seem, appear, become, and verbs like taste, smell, feel, look, but only when the verb is inactive.

E.g. He (subject) feels (verb) ill (complement) BUT He (subject) feels (verb) the cloth (object)

Summary

A sentence must have a verb and a subject (stated or understood). Active verbs take an object; inactive verbs take a complement. Both the subject and the complement are in the subjective case; objects (either direct or indirect) may be described as being in the objective case.

It is also necessary to know that prepositions (with, by, on, etc.) are followed by nouns or pronouns in the objective case. The importance of this will be seen when we consider pitfalls affecting the use of pronouns and prepositions.

Sentence construction 2

THERE is one other very common pitfall area in sentence construction and that concerns the agreement of the subject and the verb.

The verb must agree with the subject in person and number.

E.g. (Person): I give BUT He gives.

E.g. (Number): Spelling is important,  – BUT – Spelling and Syntax are important.

Agreement in person is an easy matter, for the verb changes only in the third person singular.

Agreement in number, however, has several complications, al! involving possible pitfalls. So several more rules must be stated.

Rules:

1. Double subjects require a plural verb form, but words joined to a single subject by a preposition do not affect the verb.

E.g. Spelling and syntax are important –  BUT – Spelling, with syntax, is important.

2. If two subjects are linked by either-or or neither-nor the verb agrees with the subject nearer it.

E.g. Neither the News Editor, nor any of the reporters, have received the call.

3. If one subject is affirmative and the other negative the verb agrees with the affirmative.

E.g. The Editor, not the reporters, was having lunch.

4. Nouns, plural in form but singular in meaning, take a singular verb.

E.g. Mumps is unpleasant.

5. Plural subjects describing a unit of measurement are treated as singular.

E.g. Thirty folios is a lot of copy.

6. The word number is treated as singular when it refers to a mathematical figure, but as plural when it means a few.

E.g. A number is printed on each keyboard – BUT – A number of keyboards are required.

7. Singular pronouns and adjectives (e.g. each, one, everyone, another) take a singular verb form, BUT None can be either singular or plural.

E.g. Have you any bananas? No, there are none – BUT – Have you any beer? No, there is none.

Here and there cannot be subjects of sentences. They are adverbs.

E.g. Here are your tickets (subject – tickets).

There is your ticket (subject – ticket).

Note: These sentences are inverted.

Parts of speech

AS SOON as we discuss parts of a sentence (e.g. subject, object, complement) we become involved with parts of speech. There are eight of these: noun, adjective, pronoun, verb, adverb, preposition, conjunction, interjection (or exclamation). We can forget about the interjection; it should never appear except in a title (e.g. “Oh! Calcutta!”).

However, the seven others all produce problems which we shall look at in turn, before considering further pitfalls in sentence construction.

Verbs 1

IN DISCUSSING sentence construction, we have stressed that the verb is the most important part of the sentence. Verbs are the words which provide the motive power for the sentence.

The engine can run at tick-over speed, in which case the verb is simply expressing a state of existence (i.e. I smile). Or the engine can give directions to the sentence. These verbs are transitive verbs and take an object.

We have seen that verbs can be transitive or intransitive and we have also seen that transitive verbs can be used intransitively.

E.g. I paint pictures (transitive). I paint (intransitive).

In addition, we have said that verbs can be linking verbs (e.g. the verb to be) in which case they take a complement.

It is also necessary to recognise three other attributes of the verb-voice, tense and mood.

Voice:

Verbs can be used actively or passively. This is called their voice.

Generally speaking the active voice makes for more effective prose and certainly should be used in headline writing, although there are exceptions to this rule (E.g. Kennedy shot).

Be on your guard against the double passive (E.g. the point is sought to be evaded) and such monstrosities.

Tense:

There are three basic times (present, past and future) and three basic actions (simple, completed and continuing) and these give nine different tenses as the following table shows:

Simple

Present: I see
Past: I saw
Future: I shall see

Continuing

Present: I am seeing
Past: I was seeing
Future: I shall be seeing

Completed

Present: I have seen
Past: I had seen
Future: I shall have seen

Traditionally the continuing tense is called the imperfect and the completed is called the past perfect, but the names are unimportant.

Three other tenses can be formed where there is a mixture of continuing and completed action:

Present: I have been seeing.
Past: I had been seeing
Future: I shall have been seeing.

Pitfalls:

There are two main pitfalls, which occur in the use of tenses:

1. Mixing past and present tenses in narrative reporting. (The present tense is often used for impact, as in captions.)

E.g. Armstrong steps on to the moon.

When this form is used it must be used consistently. One cannot then say:

He hesitated with one foot on the ladder.

2. The second main source of trouble is the failure to place tenses in their chronological order, particularly when using reported speech.

E.g. The speaker may say: “I am in favour of nuclear disarmament because I have witnessed the effects of radiation.”

In reported speech the present simple and present completed tenses must become past simple and past completed: He was in favour …. because he had witnessed.

Mood:

Verbs can be used in several different ways. These are called moods. The three main forms are:

1. Indicative – statement, question or answer.

2. Imperative – command.

3. Subjunctive – supposition.

The verb forms in the tables of tenses on the previous page (to change to mentioned earlier) were all in the indicative mood.

The imperative mood produces just two forms – “see” and “be seen”.

E.g. (You) See the cashier about your wages. (You) Stand up and be seen.

However, it is the subjunctive mood which produces the pitfalls.

Rules:

1. The verb-forms for the subjunctive mood are the same for all verbs (except to be) apart from a small change in the third person singular, present tense.

E.g. “She has faith” becomes “If she have faith.”

“He finds” becomes “Should he find.”

2. With the verb to be the following alterations occur:

Pitfalls:

The confusion in recognising the subjunctive occurs in three ways:

1. The use of the verb be is not always a subjunctive. It is often a corruption of should be. (Simple future tense.) E.g. I move that the matter be discussed (should be).

2. Where the past subjunctive is not really past at all; but has to do with supposing not with pastness.

E.g. If that were my headline I would re-write it. (Subjunctive.) If that was your headline yesterday you perpetrated a libel. (Indicative, simple past tense.)

N.B.: Use were for the supposed, untrue or impossible situation. E.g. If 1 were you. If I were king.

3. The subjunctive need not be prefaced by if. It may be prefaced by such words as:

Imagine you were king.

As though you were on the board.

Just suppose you were the Editor.

Nouns

HALF the words in your dictionary are common nouns. They are the names given by man to places, things, emotions and states. Uncommon or proper nouns are the names given to persons or special places or things (e.g. George, London, Tuesday).

Common nouns are called abstract nouns when they refer to abstract things such as qualities (beauty, honesty), emotions (anger, pity), states (friendship, childhood) and processes (day-dreaming, bird-watching).

Collective nouns is the term given to collections of things/people (e.g. forest, crew, flock).

The most common pitfalls in use of nouns concern plurals, possessives, collectives and gerunds – which are not, in fact, nouns at all.

Possessives: These are discussed in notes on the Apostrophe in the section on Punctuation.

Collectives: Generally, a collective should be treated as singular, but if the result sounds silly make it into a plural and make sure the verb agrees.

E.g. The Cabinet is determined. – Correct for Cabinet is a single body.

The Cabinet is discussing. – Incorrect. A single entity cannot discuss.

The Cabinet is divided. – Correct. It must be unified (i.e. one) before it can be divided.

The Cabinet are agreed. – Correct. It takes more than one to agree (c.f. Discussing).

Rule: If both a single and a plural application occur in the same sentence, choose the most suitable and stick to it. Don’t be pedantic; do be consistent.

Exception: Sport – a team is always treated as plural E.g. Chelsea were defeated.

Gerunds

Definition: GERUNDS are verbs in participle form used as nouns.

Pitfalls: Participles act as adjectives; gerunds act as nouns.

E.g. A running man (participle, adjective). Running is his hobby (gerund, noun).

N.B. Because gerunds are equivalent to nouns, they require a possessive case in certain instances.

E.g. I saw her running (objective because running is a participle describing her). She was keen on her running (possessive, because running is a gerund).

Adjectives

Definition: ADJECTIVES are used to describe or limit the meaning of a noun, pronoun or other adjective by indicating which, how many or what kind.

The most common adjectives are: the definite article (the) and the indefinite article (a, an).

Demonstrative adjectives identify the noun or pronoun (this, that, these, those). If these words are used without a noun they become pronouns (e.g. Those were the days).

Possessive adjectives show ownership (my, your, our, etc.), NOT to be confused with mine, yours, ours which are pronouns.

N.B.: In English adjectives do not change their ending in order to agree with the noun as to number or gender. Nor do we make them agree when we use nouns as adjectives. E.g. Trade unions NOT Trades unions.

Adjectives of number: The main problems, however, occur in the use of adjectives of number, adjectives of degree and absolute adjectives.

Rule: Fewer refers to number, less to degree or quantity.

E.g. Fewer strawberries in the fields results in less fruit in the shops.

Adjectives of degree: These adjectives are used to compare one noun with another. E.g. The curry is hot (hot is an adjective joined by a linking verb is to the noun curry).

In this sentence the adjective hot is a positive statement, but there are degrees of heat.

Definition: The degrees of comparison are positive, comparative and superlative.

E.g. The curry is hot (positive). The curry is hotter (comparative). The curry is hottest (superlative).

Pitfalls: The superlative is used only where three or more things are compared.

E.g. He is the younger of the two brothers. (Comparative degree because only two brothers are compared.)

She is the eldest of the three sisters. (Superlative degree because three sisters are compared)

N.B. Elder, eldest are used where there is a family relationship; otherwise older and oldest are used.

E.g. He is the oldest of the club members.

Pitfall: The form to be used in adjectives of degree also causes confusion.

Rules:

1. Where there is one syllable in the adjective add ER, EST. E.g. cold, colder, coldest.

2. Where there are three syllables, use the words more, most (less, least). E.g. Curious, more curious, most curious.

3. Where the adjective has two syllables follow idiomatic usage. E.g. Ugly, uglier, ugliest – BUT – hopeful, more hopeful, most hopeful.

Absolute adjectives: Some adjectives cannot be compared because the quality of the adjective is absolute.

E.g. A thing is either perfect or less than perfect. It cannot be more or most perfect. It is equally ludicrous to write more fatal.

The following are further examples of absolute adjectives:

Absolute,
Basic,
Complete,
Empty,
Essential,
Final,
Full,
Ideal,
Impossible,
Obvious,
Pure,
Unique,
Ultimate

Colours: Colours are also absolute when used as adjectives denoting quality. You should not write less red or more blue when you mean lighter red or deeper blue. However, more can be linked with a colour when referring to quantity.

E.g. I have more red paint than blue (quantity not quality).

Names and titles

WE may have been taught that names are nouns, but this is only partly true.

The Christian name is the noun (e.g. John). But the surname is adjectival in function for it describes which John. E.g. John Smith – John, the smith. John Robinson – John, the son of Robin. John Bottomley – John, who lives at the bottom of the meadow.

Pitfall: One should not write: Rev. Smith, for this is using an adjective to describe an adjective without any noun being present.

One must say

The (definite article) Rev. (adjective) John (noun) Smith (adjective)

The same applies to knights:

Sir (adjective) John (noun) Smith (adjective)

However, one cannot apply the same logic where Lord and Lady are used, because the use or omission of the Christian name denotes a different rank.

Indefinite article: The simplest adjective is the indefinite article a or an.

Rule: Use an where the noun begins with a vowel or silent h.

E.g. an hour, an honourable intention NOT an hotel because it is now acceptable to sound the H.

Definite article: Do not write: Death occurred yesterday. Write: The death occurred yesterday.

Prepositions

THERE are two “rules” about the use of prepositions: one should be remembered; the other ignored, for it is not a rule at all.

Rule: Prepositions take an object. (The importance of this will be seen when we consider pitfalls in the use of pronouns.)

Non-rule: “Never use a preposition to end a sentence with.”

This sentence, of course, breaks its own rule and in so doing makes its point; prepositions at the end of a sentence can make a sentence very ugly. However, contriving to avoid using a preposition at the end of a sentence can be just as clumsy.

E.g. Consider the Churchillian: “ This is something up with which I shall not put”.

The answer is to use some common sense, remembering the criteria that language should be easy to understand and should sound well. If your sentence does not meet those criteria, re-cast it. If the use of a preposition at the end of a sentence is unavoidable, it does not matter provided that the sentence reads easily. In any case, you will be in good company, for all the great English stylists have broken this so-called rule.

Idiomatic usage: The most common error in handling prepositions is to use the wrong one. This is not so much a matter of rule as of idiomatic usage.

The following is a list for your guidance:

abhorrence of
absolve from
accord with
acquiesce in (not to)
adapt to (purpose)
adapted for (by nature)
affinity between (not to)
agree on (a point)
agree to (a proposal)
agree with (a person or opinion)
aggravated by
alien from (not to)
amenable to
arise from (not out of)
averse to
bestow upon
(the mind) boggles at (not with)
change for (a thing)
change with (a person)
chary of
compare with (not to)
compatible with
confer on (but bestow upon)
conform to (but in conformity with)
connive at
consider (no preposition; do not use as)
convenient for (purpose)
convenient to (person)
comprise (no preposition; do not use of)
correspond with (person)
correspond to (thing)
consequent upon
deficient in
die of (not from)
derogatory (to)
different from (not to; nor than which is a conjunction)
differ from (things or persons, in a comparative sense)
differ with (a person when disagreeing)
dissent from (not to)
distaste for
equal to
exception to
glad at (a piece of news)
glad of (a possession)
guiltless of
impatient for (things)
impatient with (persons)
inculcate upon someone (not inculcate someone with)
independent of (not from)
indicative of
ineligible for
inflict upon
infuse into (not with)
inspired by
instil into
irrespective of
martyr for (a cause)
martyr to (a disease)
oblivious of
part from (persons)
part with (things)
prefer to
prevail against (things)
prevail on (persons)
profuse in
pursuant to
reconcile to (thing)
reconcile with (person)
satisfied with
similar to
taste of (food)
taste for (arts)
thirst for or after (knowledge)
unconscious of

N.B.: Avoid compound prepositions. E.g. in connection with, in regard to

Some are worse than others; the worst constitute some of the greatest abominations in English usage.

Pronouns

MOST of the pitfalls in the use of personal pronouns arise from a failure to recognise in which case the pronoun is, although the problem is rarely seen or defined as such. Briefly, what is in doubt is the ending of the pronoun.

This difficulty arises because it is unfashionable to talk about case in relation to the English Language. But an understanding of case answers the difficulty.

Rule:

1. If a first person pronoun is the subject or complement of a sentence, it is in the subjective (nominative) case and the form I.

2. If a first person pronoun is the direct object, it is in the objective (accusative) case and the form is Me.

3. If a first person pronoun is the indirect object, it is in the objective (dative, this time) case and the form is Me.

You and me: More often than not you and me is correct. But how do you recognise when it is right?

First of all, forget the you. This does not change its form and so it is no help; it only gets in the way of your thinking. Simply think about the I and me.

E.g. (You and) I are going for a walk. I = subject = subjective (nominative) case.

Will the ball hit (you or) me? Me = object = objective (accusative) case.

Will he give the ball to (you or) me? Me = Indirect object = objective (dative) case.

On the other hand modern usage has over-ruled the pedantic form:

It is I, I am he.

Because the verb to be takes a complement I and He are in the subjective (nominative) case, but everyone says “It’s me”. However, these forms are primarily used in speech not in writing.

Another source of confusion is found where two pronouns are linked. A common error is to construct a sentence like this:

The Editor gave he and I the afternoon off.

Consider these statements singly:

The Editor gave him the afternoon off. The Editor gave me the afternoon off.

Hence, the Editor gave him and me the afternoon off.

Pitfall:

Should we say between you and me or between you and I.

The answer is that between is a preposition and all prepositions (e.g. with, by, in, from) take an object. So this needs the objective (accusative) case and it must be between you and me. If in doubt, try another preposition. Would you say with I? No, it must be with me.

Who and whom: Now let us look at the pitfall that arises over the use of who and whom. Again the same rules apply.

E.g. Who will come with me? Who = he = subject = nominative case.

Whom did he kick? Whom = him = object = accusative case.

By whom was he kicked? Whom = him = of preposition by = accusative case

To whom shall I give it? Whom = him = Indirect object = dative case.

The simplest test is to substitute he for him. If he is right, it should be who. If him is right, it should be whom.

Conjunctions

A FREQUENT source of error is to confuse conjunctions with prepositions, particularly in such constructions as:

He is as tall as me. She is older than me.

Both these are incorrect. The correct form is :

He is as tall as I (am). She is older than I (am).

Verbs 2

Compound verbs: Verbs may be simple (I saw) or compound (I was seeing).

Compound verbs comprise auxiliary words (was, would be, might, etc.) and participles (seen, seeing).

Pitfalls:

1. to be afraid of splitting them.

E.g. “You must occasionally use conjunctions to link one idea with another.”

This is idiomatic and more precise than the form: “You must use conjunctions occasionally.”

2. On the other hand, avoid splitting compound verbs by whole phrases or clauses. This makes reading and understanding difficult.

E.g. “You must, if you are to write effective sentences which can be readily understood by the reader, whatever his intelligence, use conjunctions.”

Shall and will: The rule is quite complex but the following is a rough and ready guide:

Shall is used with the first person verb form (singular and plural) and will with the second and third person (singular and plural) verb forms.

E.g. I shall, We shall – BUT – He will, You will, They will

These forms should be inverted only when extra emphasis is required.

1. You shall succeed. 2. I will succeed.

Non-finite verbs:

Verbs can be finite.

E.g. I walk; I am walking

or non-finite (participles used as adjectives; gerunds and infinitives).

Gerunds and infinitives: We have seen how easily the gerund can be confused with the adjectival participle, but the gerund can also be confused with the infinitive.

E.g. We can write:

I am able to meet him.
I am competent to perform the operation.
It is sufficient to perform one task.
It is adequate to assume.

Each of these italicised words is followed by an infinitive but similar words require a gerund.

We can write:

“Sufficient to perform (infinitive) – BUT – We must write: “equal to performing (gerund).

This is largely a question of idiomatic use but it is possible to give a few examples of where a gerund may be needed:

E.g. after a noun or pronoun:

“with a view to his performing” (notice the possessive)

after an adjective:

“equal to performing” (note: to is a preposition; it is not part of the verb)

after a verb:

“The Chancellor is able to introduce a new tax” (infinitive) – BUT – “The Chancellor is committed to introducing a new tax” (gerund)

Pitfalls:

1. Failing to use the infinitive. E.g. Try to get – NOT – Try and get.

2. The infinitive is not always prefaced by to.

E.g. I taught him to cook.
I saw him write.
I wanted him to sing.
I heard him shout.
I asked him to depart.
I watched him go.

All are infinitives. There is no logical reason for this but certain verbs (e.g. see, hear, need, know, observe, let, watch, feel, etc.) do not require to in the infinitive form.

Split infinitive: There are occasions when the split infinitive can be the lesser of two evils. And the alternative evils are ambiguity and artificiality. Let us consider these separately.

1. Ambiguity:

Which of these is the lesser evil?

The object is to further cement trade relations (split infinitive)

OR

The object is further to cement trade relations. (In the latter we don’t know if a further object or further cementing is implied.)

2. Artificiality, where the artificial avoidance of a split infinitive upsets the rhythm of the sentence.

Which of these do you prefer?

(a)   “The modifications are intended to better equip candidates.”
(b)   “The modifications are intended to equip better candidates.”
(c)   “The modifications are intended better to equip candidates.”

(a)   is the split infinitive
(b)   better has now become an adjective, we have now got superior candidates
(c)   is obviously contrived and artificial.

So choose (a). It is the simplest, the sanest and it sounds most pleasant.

Adverbs

Definition: JUST as adjectives describe (or limit) nouns and pronouns, adverbs describe (or limit) verbs, adjectives and other adverbs.

Pitfalls: There are several pitfalls that can arise if they are positioned incorrectly.

1. To make them into adjectives, as in the example quoted above: “the modifications are intended to equip better candidates”.

2. To make the adverb qualify the wrong verb.

E.g. Correct: You must occasionally use conjunctions to link one idea with another.

E.g. Incorrect: You must use conjunctions occasionally to link one idea with another.

(Here occasionally qualifies to link instead of must use. Hence we have occasionally linking instead of occasionally using.)

Often the best guide is to follow the idiomatic form where the meaning, by common usage, is clear.

3. Complements can be separated from the verb, but try to avoid a sentence where the adverb separates the object from its verb.

E.g. Incorrect: They have interpreted rightly the situation. Correct: They have interpreted the situation rightly.

N.B. Beware of irrelevant adverbs. Consider the cliche leave severely alone where severely has no meaning. You cannot be severe in this negative way.

Sentence construction 3

MOST of the pitfalls in sentence construction stem from a disorderly mind, for they are breaches of good order. Even simple sentences can make nonsense.

E.g. For the second time in a week a woman was drowned in her bath at Blanktown.

A sentence can also be silly because it is too orderly:

E.g. Injured fighting a fire at a Downtown fish shop last night Downtown fireman George Shaw, of Upper Street, Downtown, was treated at the Downtown General Hospital.

Quite clearly this did not happen in Blanktown but does one need all this repetition?

The main sources of error, however, occur in four main areas:

1. The non-sequitur (double sentences where the second statement has no logical relationship with the first half; hence, it does not follow sensibly).

2. The incorrect positioning of a phrase.

3. The incorrect positioning of a clause.

4. The misrelated or unrelated participle.

Let us have a look at them.

The non-sequitur:

E.g. A new pension scheme will be introduced next year and it is expected that by the year 2000 there will be twice as many octogenarian pensioners as there were in 1970.

This implies, quite wrongly. that the new pension scheme will lead to greater longevity. The ideas are unrelated and should be expressed as separate statements.

Misplaced phrase: E.g. Betty Blott was charged with stealing a purse at Downtown Magistrates’ Court today.

Misplaced clause: E.g. After his car had crashed at Blanktown a fireman had to be called to release the driver.

Whose car? The fireman’s?

Misrelated participle: E.g. Walking across the road, the car ran over him. (Walking across the road is a phrase which is intended to describe him; positioned as it is, it describes the subject – i.e. the car.)

The sentence should read: Walking across the road, he was run over by the car.

Rule: Participles used in this way are adjectives. Hence, participial phrases are adjectival in function and must be related to the correct noun or pronoun. They must not be left dangling. Consider the following:

1. Participial phrase (correct) – Having rested, the troops marched on.

2. Dangling or misrelated participle (incorrect) – Having rested, the march continued.

3. Absolute phrase (correct) – The troops having rested, the march continued.

Defining phrases and clauses

Another common pitfall is the wrong use of commas in defining phrases and clauses (see also Punctuation).

Consider the difference in meaning between these two sentences:

1. The reporters aware of the deadline worked fast.
2. The reporters, aware of the deadline, worked fast.

The first example means that only those reporters aware of the deadline worked fast. The second means that all the reporters were aware of the deadline and all worked fast.

In the first instance the phrase aware of the deadlines defines, limits and restricts.

In the second instance, the same phrase describes or comments in a non-restrictive way.

The same distinctions occur where clauses are used:

1. The reporters who were aware of the deadline worked fast and

2. The reporters, who were aware of the deadline, worked fast.

Rule:

If the phrase or clause defines, omit the commas. If the phrase simply extends the information by giving additional descriptions, include the commas. (The distinction is that commas enclose a phrase or clause which can be left out without changing the meaning.)

That and which: We have come to regard these two words as interchangeable, although grammatically they are not.

Rules:

1. That should be used with the defining clause (i.e. where the commas are omitted).

E.g. The house that Jack built.

2. Which should be used where the clause is non-defining (i.e. where the commas are used).

E.g. In the island of South Uist, which I have just visited, there is not one single tree.

N.B. – That can also replace who in a defining clause.

E.g. The reporters that were aware of the deadline worked fast.
(This substitution of that for who makes the defining function more apparent.)

Revised by John Bottomley 2020

About this training module

Ted Bottomley and Anthony Loftus were both journalists and training managers at the Express & Star group of newspapers in the UK. The group has given this site permission to publish the module (above), which is one of six taken from the book ‘A journalist’s guide to the use of English’, first published in July 1971 but still relevant today. You can find links to all six chapters below.

Ted Bottomley spent his whole working life in newspapers and more than 25 years in journalism. He was a former weekly newspaper editor, and had a long association with the National Council for the Training of Journalists. He was a member of the Publishing and Editorial Training Committee of the Printing & Publishing Industry Training Board. In the UK journalists still compete to try to win the prestigious ‘Ted Bottomley Award’.

Anthony Loftus was a high court reporter and film and music critic before becoming the Editorial Training Officer of the Express & Star group. He was a member of the Institution of Training Officers and the Association of Lecturers in Journalism, and the chair of the West Midlands Regional Training Committee of the National Council for the Training of Journalists.

You can read more about the book, the men behind it, and how it has been revised and updated by Ted Bottomley’s son, John, a newspaper journalist for 40 years.

The six chapters of ‘A journalist’s guide to the use of English’

• Chapter 1: The use of English
• Chapter 2: The essence of style
• Chapter 3: Word Power
• Chapter 4: Spelling
• Chapter 5: Syntax and sentence construction
• Chapter 6: Punctuation

The post Syntax and sentence construction first appeared on Media Helping Media.

The nuts and bolts of communication

Chapter 3 from the book ‘A journalist’s guide to the use of English’

PRECISION IN WRITING DEPENDS ON WORD POWER, without this, communication is impaired. Words and phrases are the nuts and bolts which hold the communications bridge together. The writer must, therefore, learn to recognise the exact words and phrases needed to convey meaning to the reader. And the writer must also be ruthless in rejecting any word or phrase which shows signs of fatigue through over-use.

The development of word power comes only with practice. It requires an inquiring mind and a careful attitude. Carefulness means more than simply trying to avoid careless mistakes. It also involves being concerned about quality, about taking a professional pride in one’s craftsmanship as a writer.

This is an attitude of mind that cannot be taught; it can only be caught. However, it may be helpful to point out common pitfalls.

Exaggeration

MANY errors occur because the writer overstates the case in an effort to achieve impact, and this, perhaps, is the most common occupational hazard which the journalist faces. It is this striving for effect which makes every Good Samaritan into a hero, every accident into a horror, every disturbance into a fracas, every confusion into chaos and every blaze into an inferno (in fact, a synonym for hell). It is this which leads the reporter to write of a ‘flu outbreak decimating the school population (the word means to select by lot and put to death one in ten), or of a noisy meeting being a shambles (the word means slaughterhouse).

A knowledge of word derivation helps in selecting the right word, so if you find yourself using these strong words, look them up in the dictionary and discover what they really mean.

Missed metaphors

JUST as irritating to the reader are those words used metaphorically where more direct speech would be better.

E.g. BANK RATE HITS NEW CEILING

Here the word ceiling is used to mean a limit, which it does not. The word hits suggests something solid and immovable whereas events in recent years have demonstrated that the Bank Rate is far from fixed. This sort of over-statement should be avoided.

Over-worked words and phrases

THE SEARCH for the short word for a headline has created a specialised subs’ vocabulary which makes every inquiry into a quiz, every debate into a row and every investigation into a probe. Fortunately, the trend towards the lower case headline has eased the demands of the count and there is no more scope for words that are not quite so threadbare as these.

But, whereas the headline writer is always searching for the short word. the writer often uses compound words or prepositional phrases where the short word would be better.

E.g.

adjacent to for near
at this point in time for now
in consequence of for because

These are just as unnecessary as those adverbial phrases such as: with regard to, by and large.

Try to avoid vague abstract words such as: case, instance, character, nature, condition, etc. There will be occasions when these words have to be used, but prefer the concrete word whenever possible.

2020 note by John Bottomley

Use of the following words or phrases usually adds nothing to the meaning of a sentence or phrase: Totally, and also, basically, actually, literally, essentially, in terms of.

Similarly, unattractive phrases are in common use when there is a simpler, shorter alternative: Due to the fact (because), previous (earlier), kind of (somewhat), on account of (because), plus (and), lots of (many).

Never write the phrases ‘and/or’ or ‘each and every’, use one word or the other in both cases.  Avoid the use of ‘he/she’ to meet conventions of gender, use the plural term or, if this not possible, use ‘he or she.’  

Misused words and phrases

LANGUAGE suffers when words and phrases are overworked, but it suffers more when words and phrases are altogether misused. Here are a few examples:

BULLET and CARTRIDGE are often confused. Cartridges contain explosives. but bullets generally do not. In the unfired state the bullet (normally a solid piece of metal) is part of the cartridge. Behind the bullet is the explosive charge which gives the bullet its velocity and behind the charge is a small detonator. When struck by the firing pin of the weapon this ignites the charge. So don’t refer to exploding bullets when you mean cartridges. (There are such things as explosive bullets, but these are rarely used.)

CALIBRE refers to the internal diameter of the barrel of a gun or small arms weapon. It is a unit of measurement – not weight. Hence, it is wrong to write of high-calibre bombs.

CHRONIC is a word that is frequently misused. It does not mean severe and is, in fact, the opposite of acute. Chronic means lingering. People suffering from an acute illness are normally treated in a general medical or surgical ward. The chronic sick are often incurable and are cared for in a chronic sick ward. Often these are old people and are geriatric patients. (Geriatric relates to that branch of medicine which deals with the diseases of old age. The opposite is paediatric – i.e. relating to the branch of medicine which deals with illnesses afflicting children.)

Nurses are in charge of patients. Patients are in the charge of nurses. Do not confuse the two phrases,

Another phrase that causes a lot of trouble is under way. A ship weighs anchor, but it is then under way.

Confusion also occurs in treating words as synonymous when they are not:

ALIBI is not a synonym for excuse; it means being in another place at the same time.

AGGRAVATE is not a synonym for annoy. Aggravation makes things worse (literally, to make things heavy); things that annoy irritate people.

FLAUNT does not mean the same as flout. “ Dockers flaunt court order” means that the dockers are waving the order about in a proud or provocative manner. The word should be flout – i.e. to express contempt by word or act.

LAY is frequently confused with lie. Lay cannot be used intransitively; it must have an object (E.g. “Lay down your arms “). One cannot say: “Make the men lay down “. It must be: “Make the men lie down ‘. (The verb lie is intransitive, expressing a state of being.)

Confusion also arises in the use of the prepositions between and among. Between refers to two people; among to more than two. So don’t share anything between three people.

2020 note by John Bottomley

Some common English words are in danger of losing their meaning through determined and lazy misuse. Slang words like ‘cool’ will come and go but the original meaning of these words will always remain in use. 

The fact that ‘amazing’ and ‘unbelievable’ are now used as synonyms for ‘good’ or ‘enjoyable’ in common speech should not trouble the journalist, nor should the annoying use of ‘like’ as a filler or interjection (care should be taken however in its use in quotes).

Similar but different

THERE are many pairs of words in the English language, where spelling or pronunciation is very similar but where meanings are entirely different. The pitfall here is not that the words are mistakenly thought to be synonyms, but that the unwary writer uses one in mistake for the other and thus produces an entirely different meaning. Most books on style or grammar give fairly comprehensive lists of these. The 18 pairs that follow are among those which are most frequently confused.

ALTERNATIVE (adjective) =  an available substitute

ALTERNATE (adjective) = In turns, every other one
(In ‘American English’ alternate is used to mean alternative)

COMPLEMENT (verb) = something that completes or enhances

COMPLIMENT (verb) = praise

CONTINUOUS (adjective) = without break

CONTINUAL (adjective) = recurring ( with breaks)

CREDIBLE (adjective) = believable

CREDULOUS (adjective) = believing too easily

DEFICIENT (adjective) = short of, without

DEFECTIVE (adjective = in poor or damaged condition

DEPRECATE (verb) = express wish against or disapproval of

DEPRECIATE (verb) = lower in value (intransitive verb) or disparage (transitive verb)

DISINTERESTED (adjective) = impartial, with no financial interest, with no axe to grind

UNINTERESTED (adj) = without any concern for a particular thing

ENSURE (verb) = to secure that something will happen, to make safe or secure

INSURE (verb) of a thing or person = to make sure that damages are paid in the event of loss, injury or damage

EVERYONE (pronoun) of people = all, everybody

EVERY (adjective)
ONE (pronoun)
= one of a defined number group
= every single thing or person.

EVOLVE (verb) = work out or develop

DEVOLVE (verb-intransitive) = is handed down to

EXPLICIT (adjective) = stated in detail

IMPLICIT (adjective) = implied but not very firmly stated

FARTHER (adverb) refers to distance

FURTHER (adverb or adjective) refers to quantity or distance

FORGO (verb) = abstain from

FOREGO (verb) = precede

ILLUSIVE (adjective) = deceptive

ELUSIVE (adjective) = baffling, escaping from

INFER (verb) = deduce, conclude

IMPLY (verb) = Insinuate, hint

INGENIOUS (adjective) = cleverly contrived

INGENUOUS (adjective) = frank, open

ORDINANCE (noun) = a law or decree

ORDNANCE (noun) = military weapons of all kinds

STORY (noun) = account given of an incident

STOREY (noun) = horizontal division in a building

This list is not meant to be exhaustive. Watch for similar pairs and master their meanings. Only in this way will you achieve precision in the use of vocabulary.

Redundant words

MANY words that are used are superfluous. These may be adjectives (like new innovation or added bonus) or they may be prepositions.

E.g.
Tighten up 
Clean up
Fill up

Never fill a bottle half-full. That is nonsense. Half-fill it.
Often the use of redundant words sterns from the fact that the writer does not know the meaning of the word he is using.

E.g. comprise of (comprise = consists of) or raze to the ground (raze = completely destroy, level with the ground)

2020 note by John Bottomley

The following words in brackets are also redundant in: (as to) whether, considered (to be), (so as) to, yellow etc (in colour).

Vogue words

IT IS difficult to explain how some words-such as fabulous, empathy, charisma, escalation – have become fashionable.

Perhaps a writer of prominence uses one to illustrate a point or an attitude. Then it is taken up and used with meaningless frequency by journalists and broadcasters who are anxious to be considered smart or who have become too idle to develop their own vocabulary.

E.g.

Ambience Ambivalent  Archetypal Axiomatic Cachet Catalyst Charisma Conceptual Dichotomy Empathy Seminal

It has to be recognised, however, that language is constantly expanding and developing and it would be foolish to ignore what is both new and good in modern usage. But vogue words should represent a small part of the journalist’s stock in trade.

Used sparingly such words can brighten a writer’s style; used indiscriminately they tarnish it.

In deciding whether or not to use such words ask yourself:

I. Is it the exact word I need?
2. Is there an alternative which is just as valid?
3. If not, can it be understood from its context, or does it need some qualification to help the reader?

2020 note by John Bottomley

Vogue words should, by their very definition, fall in and out of fashion but the examples given above clearly were here to stay and their place in the lexicon of common use seems assured.  Today there is an even longer list of trendy words which have crept into common use, often through the cliches of ‘business speak.’ They, too, may be here to stay but care should be taken not to fall into the trap of using these vogue words when a simpler alternative is available. 

Consider the following words now used often enough to dilute their meaning or impact and note the preferable alternative: Feedback (response), iconic (long-established), utilise (use), viable (effective), artisan (homemade or rustic).

Foreign words

MANY foreign words and phrases have become an idiomatic and acceptable part of English usage. These words have achieved acceptance because they have become part of common speech and thought, despite their foreign origins They do a specific job in a way that English does not, and for that reason have become Anglicised.

For instance, where would we be without rendezvous and communique? They no longer sound strange and long ago passed into the style and tradition of our language

That we have made these words welcome alongside our own usage is another proof that English is flexible and sensible and can use the best of other languages. But the writer’s watchword must be discretion. Don’t use words borrowed from other languages when there is an ample choice in English.

E.g. Schmalz in figurative German has come to mean over-sweet or sentimental. Chic in French means stylish, elegant, smart.

The English equivalents used here are in no way inferior re the French or the German. So, why not use them?

Americanisms tend to be even uglier. Consider the use in the United States of the participle gifted where what is meant is given. The verb is to give, not to gift. However, gifted may be used as an adjective.

E.g. A gifted child.

N.B.- Never use the Latin-based donate or donated. Use give or given. Donation is permissible where you must use it, but prefer the word gift or contribution when it can be properly substituted.

The good writer ought not to be so hidebound by rules that he cannot accept new usage, but he should respect well-established English tradition and aim for harmony without affectation.

However, where a foreign word has become idiomatic in English do not be afraid to use it. Just be sure that the word does the proper job, and remember that if you do not know what the word means it is wrong to use it. You are not entitled to ask the reader to understand more than you do yourself. Readers in any case are rarely impressed by pretentious use of words, English or otherwise. Indeed they are more often irritated and annoyed.

The following is a list of words and phrases which may be regarded as acceptable in the right context (the accents should be omitted):

aide-de-camp
aperitif
attache
avant garde
baton
blase
bourgeois
brochure
carafe
cliche
clientele
commissionaire
communique
corsage
cortege
coupe
debacle
debut
debris
double entendre
echelon
elite
entree
espionage
expose
fiance (fiancee)
facade
haute couture
impasse
largesse
laisser-faire
malaise
melee
nee
negligee
nuance
precis
premiere
protege
regime
rendezvous
risque
repertoire
soiree
venue

bona fide
ad lib
sine qua non
ad infinitum
persona non grata
per se
de jure
de facto
per annum
status quo
ad nauseam
non sequitur
ex gratia
ultra vires

However, you should be very wary of using any of the following:

Lese majeste
Bete noir
Bon mot
Demode
Belles lettres
Ingenue
De rigeur
Roue
Magnifique
Deja vu
C’est la vie
Schmalz
Wunderbar
Kaput
Dolce vita
Ciao
Arrivederci

Foreign plurals

DIFFICULTY sometimes arises in the use of plurals of foreign words. The fact that many of them have become common usage in English calls for a ruling on how to deal with their plurals, which occur in everyday use much less frequently than the singular.

Where there is no obvious confusion in the use or plurals in their original form. or where such use is not unharmonious or bizarre the original form is preferable.

Singular

Addendum
Alumnus
Cactus
Beau
Bureau
Criterion
Fungus
Graffito
Memorandum
Minimum
Phenomenon
Plateau
Referendum
Spectrum
Stadium
Virtuoso

Plural

Addenda
Alumni
Cacti
Beaux
Bureaux
Criteria
Fungi
Graffiti
Memoranda
Minima
Phenomena
Plateaux
Referenda
Stadia
Spectra
Virtuosi

There are however a number of such words which are commonly used both in speech and in writing, for which we have devised our own “anglicised” plurals. This has been done by consensus among writers of all classes, in order that confusion may be avoided, and ugly words excluded from our style.

It is not possible to classify such words, but the following list may be useful in helping to decide when to use the formally correct style, which may be less than clear and harmonious; and when to adopt a reasonable alternative.

The specific context of a story or article will dictate whether or not the formal and correct spelling is demanded. In general writing, however, words such as those listed above are acceptable, and indeed, preferable to their Latin or other plurals.

The cliche

AT ALL times the writer has to make sure that words and phrases pay their way, but there is always the danger of over-working them. English is a resilient language but it can be worn out, and the most tired of all idioms is the cliche.

The cliche is the refuge of writers who are too weary to practise their craft with care and thought. And if, in searching for variety, they are too lazy to look further than the cliche, then there will be no variety in their prose at all.

The cliche is very difficult to root out. It slips into copy so easily. But writers will be on their guard if they have learnt to recognise a phrase that is already drooping with weariness.

The following are just a few examples:

A blast from the past
A game of two halves
A shot in the arm
A shot in the dark
Acid test
Any shape or form
Armed to the teeth
As good as gold
As light as a feather
At the end of the day.
Bated breath
Bitter end
Blot on the landscape
Bounce back
Bring to a head
Burning issue
Caught red-handed
Chip off the old block
Clash of the titans
Clean sweep
Clear as a bell
Cool as a cucumber
Cream of the crop
Crying need
Cross the line
David and Goliath
Dead as a dodo
Draw a blank
Dyed in the wool
Extra special
Fan the flames
Flash in the pan
Foregone conclusion
Goes without saying
Horns of a dilemma
Interesting to note
Last but not least
Leave no stone unturned
Like rats in a trap
Loose cannon
Luck of the draw
Monotonous regularity
Moving the goalposts
New lease of life
Pie in the sky
Playing the field
Pool of blood
Read between the lines
Red letter day
Skating on the thin ice
Start the ball rolling
Sour grapes
Take the bull by the horns
The blind leading the blind
The bottom line
The eleventh hour
This day and age
This point in time
True facts
Turn a blind eye
Unfinished business
Uphill battle

Some of these cliches contain redundant words, like “true facts”, “extra special”, but all are equally hackneyed and dreary by now. By avoiding them the writer will produce clearer and leaner language.

Strangely enough, moments of stress bring out trite remarks. Any reporter who has interviewed someone in a state of shock will have observed this.

But the reporter often makes the same mistake in drawing on dreary phrases just when he is trying to inject pace into bis copy. Consider the following hypothetical example (the over-worked words and phrases are italicised):

Firemen burrowed beneath the tangled wreckage of badly-damaged houses at Coventry today in search of residents several of whom it is feared may have been entombed when a crane toppled on to them from a multistorey building now in the process of erection on the Corporation’s latest high-density housing site.

Flashing lights converged on the affected houses in King William Street, Hillfields, as police, firemen and ambulancemen raced at breakneck speed to the scene of the disaster.

Meanwhile workmen from the building tore at the tortured metal of the crane with their bare hands to free those imprisoned beneath the twisted wreckage.

Three people were rushed to hospital in a waiting ambulance as the rescue workers toiled on at their grim task. Speculation was rife as to how many remained buried.

A spokesman described the scene as “like a battlefield”. It was an “absolute shambles”, he added.

Why is it that wreckage is always tangled? How does one rush in a waiting ambulance?

It is difficult to avoid the cliche when searching for the evocative word or phrase to capture the sense of urgency. But remember over-statement will destroy the very mood you are seeking to create.

Jargon

AS THE nature of work and leisure changes, it becomes necessary to use severely limited words to express what we mean when dealing with difficult or specialist subjects.

If we do not have words within our range, which adequately express what we are trying to say, we have to invent new ones, or invest old ones with a further, and, perhaps, different meaning.

The only justification for the use of jargon in reporting is that the writer is unable to find a more suitable word. When dealing with the specialist subjects jargon cannot always be avoided. The danger is that once the writer has got to know a modest amount of gobbledygook, jargon will slip unnoticed into his style.

Jargon is most noticeable in scientific, government and legal handouts. It can often be excised painlessly, without changing the meaning. Where plain English can be substituted, this should be done. Indeed the reporter should “ translate “ jargon wherever he can do so without materially altering the sense of the original.

Far too many new and ugly words are creeping into English, words which do not add much to our understanding, or clear the lines of communication more readily.

The ugliest excrescences in our language are those growths which may be described as officialese; they really are malignant.  E.g. Hospitalisation, meaning “sent to hospital”.

There are also ugly words in industry, but you cannot always avoid them. Consider the word containerisation. This has come in for criticism from a highly regarded stylist who recommends improved packing as a substitute. But this will not do, for containerisation has a precise meaning and is related to the transport industry, not to the packing industry. So, in your eagerness to root out jargon, do not break the cardinal rule of accuracy.

The industrial and commercial fields pose special problems. Many newspapers deal in some depth with these areas and their articles are read by people who are most discerning. For these people it is annoying if the reporter confuses packing with packaging or marketing with selling. The terms are not synonymous.

Again, be very careful with stories affecting industrial relations. Redundancy may appear to be a euphemism for sacking but there is a big difference between the two meanings.

In the first case the job has left the man; in the second, the man has left the job. In the first case the man has received compensation. In the second case there are overtones of stigma, suggesting incompetence or worse.

The first objective must be to achieve precision, so before you reach out for any handy synonym find out what the word really means. And then, consider the same criteria thz; were suggested in deciding whether to use vogue words c: not:

1. Is it the exact word?
2. Is there an equally valid alternative?
3. If there is no alternative, does the term need any further explanation?

Revised by John Bottomley 2020

About this training module

Ted Bottomley and Anthony Loftus were both journalists and training managers at the Express & Star group of newspapers in the UK. The group has given this site permission to publish the module (above), which is one of six taken from the book ‘A journalist’s guide to the use of English’, first published in July 1971 but still relevant today. You can find links to all six chapters below.

Ted Bottomley spent his whole working life in newspapers and more than 25 years in journalism. He was a former weekly newspaper editor, and had a long association with the National Council for the Training of Journalists. He was a member of the Publishing and Editorial Training Committee of the Printing & Publishing Industry Training Board. In the UK journalists still compete to try to win the prestigious ‘Ted Bottomley Award’.

Anthony Loftus was a high court reporter and film and music critic before becoming the Editorial Training Officer of the Express & Star group. He was a member of the Institution of Training Officers and the Association of Lecturers in Journalism, and the chair of the West Midlands Regional Training Committee of the National Council for the Training of Journalists.

You can read more about the book, the men behind it, and how it has been revised and updated by Ted Bottomley’s son, John, a newspaper journalist for 40 years.

The six chapters of ‘A journalist’s guide to the use of English’

• Chapter 1: The use of English
• Chapter 2: The essence of style
• Chapter 3: Word Power
• Chapter 4: Spelling
• Chapter 5: Syntax and sentence construction
• Chapter 6: Punctuation

The post Word power first appeared on Media Helping Media.

A journalist needs to be well-prepared when planning an interview. However, after all your research, try to keep the interview to three questions, because if you haven’t worked out in three what you want to find out from the person you are talking to you, you probably never will.

And try to avoid looking at your notes, but, instead, pay attention to what the person you are interviewing is saying, otherwise you might miss the news story. Here are a few tips for planning and executing an interview.

20 interviewing tips for journalists

1: Never give an interviewee questions in advance. It’s fine to give a general idea about the interview themes, but being too specific may limit what you can ask in the interview. It also risks being overtaken by events and allows the interviewee to rehearse answers.

2: Be on time. There’s nothing worse than keeping someone waiting.

3: Always check that your equipment is working and fully charged before you leave the office.

4: Treat the interviewee with respect whether they are a president or a man or woman in the street. A warm but not over-enthusiastic greeting is a good start.

5: Take control of the location. It’s your interview. You need to choose a place that isn’t too noisy and where there are not too many distractions.

6: You are not meant to be the centre of attention. The interview is not about you. You are there to get the perspective of the interviewee, not give your own.

7: Do the research you need to, but don’t try to cram it all into your questions. Put yourself in the shoes of a member of your audience before you start the interview. If they were here, what would they ask?

8: Ask the most important question first. The more pressed the interviewee is, the less time they will have, and the more likely that they will cut the interview short.

9: The interview is a conversation, it’s not a confrontation. You are not there to make the interviewee look stupid.

10: Try to avoid looking at notes. If you look at your notes, the interviewee may be distracted. And it’s difficult for you to read and listen at the same time.

11: Maintain eye contact at all times. Keep your body language in check. If you nod your head, your subject may take this to mean that you agree with them and assume that there is no need to explain further. You may miss the chance to discover more.  If you shake your head, or recoil with a shocked facial expression, you risk making your subject clam up. You will have shown them that you find their views offensive and so they are likely to stop short of saying even more in the same vein.

12: Try to ask a maximum of three or four questions. An interview is not a fishing expedition. If you can’t get to the essence of what you want the interviewee to say in three or four questions, change the questions.

13: There are six basic questions: what, why, when, how, where and who.

14: Shorter questions are better than longer ones. Never ask more than one question at a time. Combining questions makes it easy for the interviewee to avoid answering one altogether. Be as direct as you can without being rude.

15: Be sure of your facts. There’s nothing worse than being told you are wrong by an interviewee – especially when it’s live.

16: Listen to what the interviewee is saying. They might want to use your interview to announce something important that you were not expecting.

17: If the interviewee is not happy with the way they answered a particular question, don’t give in to appeals for them to do it again – unless there is a factual error in the answer or there is a risk of serious confusion.

18: At the end of the interview, no matter how difficult the interviewee has been, always say thank you

19: Always check the interview has been recorded before the interviewee leaves.

20: When you’re editing, don’t take answers out of context. That’s dishonest.

Related training modules

How to interview politicians

Why would anyone want to talk to a journalist?

Interviewing integrity – scenario

Interview tips for video journalists

The post Preparing for and carrying out an interview first appeared on Media Helping Media.