To start in style is to start with words. Which words should you choose to help accumulate, for you, a certain style? Word origins may play a role–and these are things you already sort of know just from being a writer and speaker of English, for however long you have been doing that. Below, I outline (mostly with the help of Jeanne Fahnestock’s Rhetorical Style book that is basically my Bible) how word origins relate to different kinds of stylistic decisions writers might make.
Here is what English sounded like about 1,000 years ago:
The influences on English are extensive and are continuing—English has become a global language over the last 50 or so years and there will be/are a lot of borrowings, split dialects, etc. as a result of various world Englishes influencing the more standardized forms we hear and read in the media and in professional contexts.
The “Core” of English Words
For the version of English we speak today, in terms of vocabulary rather than syntax/sentence structure, the words that come from what you just heard are primarily from the “core” English words of the Anglo-Saxon and Scandinavian influence on English.
These words are some of the connective tissue of English that we rely on so often today: a, can, the, to, is, etc.
But also other very common words are from this core: warn, think, car. And many of the closest to material reality: bread, milk, sun.
The most frequent words we use come from this core. The more people use the core vocabulary, the more likely readers will find it as simple and straightforward.
For some speakers, these are the words that are associated with early memories of speaking English and are the sorts of words they are most accustomed to using.
French Influence
After the Norman Conquest (i.e., France colonizing England way back), French had a large influence on the development of English. French, for a long time, was exclusively the language of the state (and, thus, of writing). However, over time, borrowings occurred that influenced English speaking and writing quite a bit.
Many borrowings from Old French, today, are associated with elevation, elegance, beauty, etc. Words like: autumn, glory, stunning, capture, cherish, adorned, accented, auburn, authenticity, acquire.
These are the sorts of words that are more likely to be used in perfume commercials, romantic texts, or anything that might want to sound a bit elevated in terms of grace/class/etc.
Latin and Greek Influence
Several centuries from the early 1000s through the Renaissance and further out, much scholarship was written exclusively in Latin and some Greek. Thus, many of the words associated with knowledge and with formality are borrowings from Latin and Greek.
Words like substance, corporeal, composite, finite, sentient, cerebral, fact, explain, necessitate, crisis, appropriate, external, scheme, system, obstruction all come from Latin and Greek.
Take-Aways: “Formality”
It is not always true that core words are perceived as “simple and concrete” or French words are always “elevated” or that Latin/Greek are always “scholarly” (e.g., “practice” is fairly simple word from French), but this rule generally applies.
Why think about this? A common stereotype about professional and academic writing is that you should try to sound “formal.” This is sort of true, but it is difficult to pin down exactly what this means.
Further, it often conflicts with another stereotype that professional and academic writing should be “clear, direct, concise, etc.” What is true is that depending on the situation, you might want to be more formal, or more informal, or more concrete, or more abstract…or, well, probably a combination of all of these.
Here are some examples of synonyms across core, French, and Latin/Greek:
walk/ stroll/ ambulate
hate/loathing/antipathy
fix/ correct/ emend
Using different words for tone
One tactic you can take for “formal” styles is that you can write formally but then restate the same thing informally. This can both take on the tone that you wanted to have but also put things in a way that might be more easily apprehended (or, understood!).
For instance, here’s a sentence I might write:
Systemic-functional linguistics (SFL) is built on the assumption that language is a social semiotic system. SFL is about what a language can do in a given context, rather than what it “is,” which makes it a good partner for rhetoric.
The first sentence has several words derived from French (systemic, system, social), Latin (functional, linguistics), and Greek (semiotic). It does have some core, too, (built, on, the, that, is, a ), but only “built” makes much more central meaning whereas “on,” “the,” “that,” “is,” and “a” all fill roles to connect the sentence together.
The second sentence restates the first, but uses much more core language to explain further but also amplify to emphasize what the point is. Here, core words like “about,” “what,” “it,” “‘is,'” “which,” “makes,” “good,” “can,” and “do” play a large role in the point of this sentence: this theory of language is about how people use language rather than what language is and thus helpful theory for studying rhetoric. There is Latin (“context”), French (“partner”, “language”), and Greek (“rhetoric”) here, but they play more minor roles.
This can frequently be a good move, especially in places you feel obligated to be high on the spectrum of formality, jargon, technical language, etc.
Another thing to try: Synonymia is deliberate use of many synonyms. If you want to work your prose up to a place of elevation or scholarly tone, you could start from the core and go to borrowings or vice versa. Moving from elevation/scholarly to core is essentially the above style example.
You might do this across a passage (e.g., starting your essay with more French/Latin/Greek derived words and then ending with more core by the end to drive a point home; you might use core to grab attention at beginning of essay before ending with more “scholarly” language toward the end).
You could also do this in a sentence with a list. For instance:
So ambulate, take a stroll, stride on down, just walk out here.
So what is the point here?
The main idea is that, usually, it doesn’t make much sense to get caught up in figuring out if you should be “formal” or “informal.” All languages and contexts for language use typically are a mix of formal/informal, let alone other stylistic labels you might use (e.g., reassuring, warm, intimidating, humorous).
Let’s try some stuff here
In a comment below, take a sentence that you wrote in QSR1 or QSR2 and rewrite it in one of two ways followed by a brief explanation. Choose one of the options below:
- Rewrite as two sentences. The first sentence will sound more formal/scholarly/elevated. The second sentence will sound more informal/concrete/direct. Feel free to look up some word origins to help you out! Take one or two more sentences to explain how this might be effective and why you made the choices you made.
- Use synonymia and rewrite a sentence that uses a bunch of synonyms that either uses a bunch of scholarly/elevated words to start before working to core words, or take the other direction and work from the core down. Take one or two more sentences to explain how this might be effective and why you made the choices you made.
Once you did your rewriting and explaining in a comment below, click the “Click here to continue” button to move on to the next page in the module.
1. “I think it’s the difference in values that is apparent when comparing the author’s culture and mine. ”
Formal: I presume it is attributed to the variation in values that becomes discernible when the author’s culture is juxtaposed with that of mine.”
Informal: When I compare my culture with the author’s culture, I see that we share different values.
I think that whenever writing, it is wise to consider the audience. In this case, my audience is mostly student, so it makes sense to use a more colloquial style to convey my ideas.
2. “To sum up, I am a combination of various things; one particular thing does not define me. ”
synonymia: To sum up, or to recapitulate, I am a combination, or in other words, an amalgamation of various things; one particular thing does not define or circumscribe me.
In this case, I think it is redundant to use synonymia. My idea is pretty a pretty simple one, so might as well to just put it simply.
1. To fully develop a piece of writing, it may take several attempts until the work is fully completed.
Formal : To precisely articulate a piece of writing, several occurences are necessary until the duty is fufilled.
Informal : You need to write something a lot of times until its right
I personally do not enjoy the more formal way of writing. I think there is a point in where I begin to feel the things that I am writing are not personal to me and instead it is me trying to come off smarter than I really am.
2. “I was ultimately hurting myself instead of trying to be the best possible writer that I could be.”
Synonymia : I was ultimately, in the long run, hurting myself instead of trying to be the best possible, feasible, attainable writer that I could be.”
I personally like the use of synonymia, I think that It adds a new element to our writing that can expand it and make the reader more interested in the things that we are trying to portray.
“While undergoing the vigorous process of revision there are many key parts to remember.
Informal: When doing revision there are a lot of important parts.
Formal: Whilst undergoing the robust task of revision, ’tis essential to recall its various segments.
I feel that this has taught the use of formal words can make a sentence sound much more educated. While an informal sentence gets straight to the point without drawing any attention.
1. “To effectively implement this, a writer must develop the eye of an analytic reader.”
Formal: To expertly achieve this, a writer must establish the perception of an inquisitive reader.
Informal: To productively complete this, a writer must adopt the point of view of a rational reader.
I find that certain words are changing the meaning of the sentence in subtle ways. I do like the formal sentence more than the informal one.
2. “I am my language, and I will not change for temporary acceptance. ”
Synonymia: I am my language, I abide with my language. I will not change for temporary acceptance.
I understand the concept of Synonymia but I find it repetitive.
“Revision cannot be compared to writing, because revision is a fundamental step of proper writing.
Revision is not to be distinguished from writing, since it is an essential piece in the process of writing properly.
Although both sentences give the exact same message, the use of different words, and their arrangement give them different tones. The original sentense just exposes information with the purpose of presenting, the modified sentence gives it a more
‘formal” harmony while still exposing opinion/information.
“I got distracted from time to time, although whenever I am in the middle of a writing piece I rarely get distracted as long as I know what to write down and have my ideas constantly flowing.”
Formal: I was distracted during the writing process, although normally, when I am in the middle of a writing piece I rarely get distracted. As long as my ideas are constantly flowing, I write exceptionally well.
Informal: I got distracted from time to time, although whenever I am in the middle of a writing piece I rarely get distracted as long as I know what to write down and have my ideas constantly flowing (no change).
My writing was already relatively informal, I shortened sentences and used more advanced words to make it more formal.
I could not find any sentences I wrote that would allow me to use Synonymia
Option 1 –
Original: “Revision makes sure your ideas are fully thought out and written so others will not only be able to read it but understand it as well”.
Formal: Revision makes certain your ideas are wholly premeditated and written so others are capable of reading the piece as well as comprehend it.
I think this format in using it to explain the writing process. Speaking in a formal way in writing might get the audience to listen to get their writing like this also.
Informal: Revision makes sure your ideas are written out clear so others can read and understand it.
This way of writing makes the message really clear. It is straight to the point and tells me why I need to revise.
“To support your work, Murray says that you must find your information with supporting meaning and then read it to see if it makes sense.”
To reinforce your composition, Murray remarks that you must identify your information with supporting context and then read for coherence.
To aid your writing, Murray says that you must find your info with supporting stuff and then see if it checks out.
The original is not one of my better sentences but I thought to choose it because it could be improved. The “elevated” version is something I would have been more likely to use for that assignment. I made the word choices without wanting to lose the meaning of the sentence. The second version is basic and comprehensible but not something I would write.
“As stated earlier, new writers are often aware that they need to rewrite and reread what they have written but most may not know how to go about the two processes.”
Formal: As mentioned previously, amateur writers struggle to reread and rewrite their work because they lack professional writing expertise.
Informal: New writers usually find it tough to revise their work because the two processes are shrouded in obscurity.
I decided to use a formal and informal sentence structure to imply that the former uses words that imply seriousness while the latter is more casual and even spontaneous.
Revision: New writers usually find it tough to revise their work because the process is shrouded in obscurity.
Original: Pretty much anyone in the world knows that Texans talk funny.
Formal: Almost everyone in the world understands that people from Texas have a unique accent.
Informal: Pretty much everybody knows that we Texas talk a bit funny.
While the formal version might make this sentence a bit more clear, the informal version gives you a taste of what it might sound like if a Texan were speaking
1. “I think language does play a huge role in your identity, and sometimes that “linguistic terrorism” starts at home….”
-Formal: The language you speak typically tends to influence your identity, both culturally and spiritually, and often times the process of “linguistic terrorism” begins at home.
-Informal: Language affects your identity and can start at home.
Typically I associate informality and being direct with getting straight to the point, whereas formality would be the opposite: saying something but saying it as smartly as you can. So I examined my sentence and thought of words that SOUND better for the formal version, and words that sound more straightforward for the informal version.
Revision is a way of correcting and improving your own writing to get the best result possible
Formal: Revision is a certain writing technique that includes the modification of one’s work to produce the best result.
Informal: Revision is a way of helping others see their mistakes or what they could alter to better their writing.
I believe the best writing is not too formal but not to informal.