Ambiguity leaves mystery in a message
Published: Friday, February 22, 2013 at 4:30 a.m.
Last Modified: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 at 5:24 p.m.
You could fill a library with textbooks that stress the value of using simple words and short sentences. This column warns about the danger of going overboard. Minimizing words can lead to weaker, incomplete expression of your thoughts; worse yet, this practice can produce non-sentences that leave the reader or listener groping for your meaning.
Ernie Mazzatenta, a Hendersonville resident, teaches managerial communication and public speaking at
Montreat College. He also serves as a
community mediator at The Mediation
Center in Hendersonville.
To illustrate the merits of a medium-length sentence, let’s turn to humorist Woody Allen. He once wrote, “The talent for being happy is appreciating and liking what you have, instead of what you don’t have.”
Mr. Allen could have ended the sentence after “what you have.” But he enriched it by adding “what you don’t have.”
This column (1) begins with three short sentences in need of improvement and (2) follows with examples of non-sentences (fragments) that lack substance.
Consider these short sentences:
u Johnnie is a good son. (Why?)
u Plan B is worth trying. (Why?)
u You can depend upon Clem, our paperboy. (Why?)
Instead of supplying informative messages, these short sentences offer incomplete, ambiguous thoughts. (Recall that “ambiguous” means capable of being understood in two or more possible ways.) Be advised: Recipients of short sentences shouldn’t have to guess at their meaning. Many such sentences cry out for elaboration or restatement.
Here are possible restatements that clear the air:
u Even without being asked, my son Johnnie always sweeps the kitchen floor and washes the dishes after supper.
u In my opinion, Plan B should be tried because it is sensible, economical and easy to implement.
u I can’t recall a single time when Clem, our paper boy, has not delivered the daily newspaper by 6 a.m.
Observe how these longer sentences introduce clarity and preciseness.
You probably know folks who speak and write in vague, ambiguous ways. I believe they do a distinct disservice to their recipients and to themselves. Such terse language may mislead, frustrate, require additional explanation and thus slow the flow of a discussion, speech or piece of writing. In addition, excessive use may cause recipients to question the English language skills of the speaker or writer.
So far, we’ve looked at short sentences that could be improved. Now let’s turn briefly to non-sentences (fragments) requiring additional explanation:
u Instead of “Sounds interesting,” try “With superstar Will Goodbody playing the lead, I suspect the movie is well worth taking in.”
u Instead of “Cool, really cool,” try “Paula, your self-confidence, in the face of scorching criticism, inspires me.”
u Instead of “Works for me,” try “I am confident that I can integrate this additional duty into my work schedule.”
Notice the gains in clarity and substance?
To be sure, fragments do play a role in some plays, books, movies, TV commercials and printed advertisements. In those instances, the writers are often striving to convey informality, folksiness, humor or even an utter lack of education. Such writers are given dramatic license to amuse, shock or otherwise entertain.
But in everyday communication to inform or instruct — when speaking or writing to friends, family, business associates and work groups — let’s avoid abrupt, telegraphic language. Say what you really mean by crafting sentences that are grammatically complete, precise, substantive and, thus, far more likely to be understood. That may take a bit of extra effort, but isn’t understanding the outcome you seek?
If you are tempted to speak in fragments or use them in email — because you are comfortable with them — be conscious of the effect they are likely to have on your audience. What kind of impression are you going to make? Will you be seen as competent, communicative, trustworthy? Bear in mind this single thought: Your writing is you.
This column ends with a fairly long sentence for your consideration. Computer pioneer Bill Gates once wrote: “I’m a great believer that any tool has profound effects in terms of how people can learn from each other and how they can achieve the kind of freedoms that they’re interested in.”
Mr. Gates could have ended after “has profound effects.” Would shorter have been better?
Note: The sentence fragments discussed today are only one type. They are about missing words and resulting ambiguity. Such fragments are commonly found in both speech and writing. Another common type of fragment is caused by erroneous injection of a period within a sentence. These periods create both grammatical and punctuation problems in writing. They will be treated in a future column.
Reader comments posted to this article may be published in our print edition. All rights reserved. This copyrighted material may not be re-published without permission. Links are encouraged.