There are a few instances where wording could be more concise or accurate.
1) Let's start with the very first sentence of this paper.
"A lot of people wonder what is the purpose of government, why is it there anyway?"
This is a run-on sentence that suddenly turns into a question. Correct use of punctuation always helps a reader understand what a writer wants to say. If you take what is written already and say it out loud, you could surmise that the writer was trying to write this:
A lot of people wonder, "What is the purpose of government? Why is it there, anyway?"
I know that this technically isn't changing any of the words, but this punctuation breaks up the sentence into distinct clauses. While it may not feel organic to the person writing, it will definitely feel more organic for the reader in terms of processing meaning.
2) The second sentence of the paper does a bit of rambling.
"This is a good question because even though many people think they know what the purpose of government is, other people disagree and this sometimes can cause government to not be affective."
You can cut out some excess words and get this:
"This is a good question because many people disagree on what the purpose of government is. This can sometimes cause the government to not be as effective as it could be."
This is overall more succinct. You can remove the thought about people knowing the purpose of government, because it's implied when you go on to say that people can disagree on what the purpose is. You can then take the two remaining ideas of the sentence—people disagreeing on the purpose, and the government not being as effective because of this—and make those into two shorter, more easily understandable statements.
Additionally, affective was used when effective should have been used. Let's make that our next point
3) Always know when to use affect(ive) or effect(ive). Using the wrong one will definitely bother certain readers. In this paper, affective was used incorrectly in this sentence:
"...and this sometimes can cause government to not be affective."
In this case, the writer should have used effective. Effective means that something produces the result you want (which in this context, is definitely how you would want a government to be). When something is affective, it expresses or is influenced by emotions (this could also describe a government, but not in the context the writer is using).
4) "The constitution also makes the courts have the power to decide when things are done like the constitution wants and when they are not constitutional."
This sentence is very repetitive and needs a second read-through to be understood. An improved sentence could be:
"In addition, the constitution gives the courts power to decide what is constitutional and what is unconstitutional."
This is more straightforward, and takes definitional phrases like, "when things are done like the constitution wants" and converts them into the word they're defining: "constitutional."
5) People all are wanting to be equal and this menes that government must do what the people tell them to do. Why else do people vote them in office? What good would it be if it did not do what the people want for it to do?
These few sentences are a bit of a mess. Redundant/unnecessary words are all over the place, "means" is spelled as "menes," the word "government" is used when the writer means to say members of the government, and "it" is used to refer to multiple subjects. A more concise version could be:
"Everyone wants to be equal, and this means that government officials must do what the people want. Why else would they be voted into office? What good would it be if government officials did not listen to what the people want?"
The impact of rhetoric often depends on whether or not a paper like this is composed correctly.
There are also a number of instances where wording and compositional factors could be changed to sound more competent or professional.
1) An all-around rule for sounding professional in writing is to avoid the phrase "I think," especially at the beginning of sentences. This can undermine the writer's command of their words, because to the reader, "thinking" something is less assured than "knowing" something. There are a few "I think"s in this paper, but this section has one directly following the other:
"I think the purpose of government is to do what the people tell them to do, that is why they elected them. I think government is the worker that works for the people who tell them what they want them to do by the way they vote at the election poll."
Good substitutes for "I think" could be "One could say that...", "In my opinion...", or "It is my belief that...".
There are more issues within that quoted section, but let's move on to another point.
2) Another phrase to avoid is "I don't like." It sounds a bit immature, like a child saying "I don't like that!" It is used in the paper here:
"I don’t like it when people in the congress don’t do what the constitution said."
A better way to phrase this idea could be:
"Many people would be upset by congress members going against what the constitution says."
3) Using transitional phrases and having some variation in sentence beginnings would give the paper a better overall flow. In #2 from the examples of how to be more concise/ accurate, we ended up with the following:
"This is a good question because many people disagree on what the purpose of government is. This can sometimes cause government to not be as effective as it could be."
This section can be even further improved by variation of sentence beginning! Both sentences begin with "This," and neither uses a transitional phrase. An improvement would be:
"This is a good question because many people disagree on what the purpose of government is. Consequently, the government may sometimes not be as effective as it could be."
By changing up the second sentence with a transitional phrase, you've not only brought in some variety, but connected the ideas of the two sentences even more! Transitional phrases, when used correctly, will always help a writer sound like they have greater control over their words.
4) "This is because people in Washington are always fighting over things that don’t matter very much but don’t pay enough attention to solving problems."
This is an opinion statement, and it needs to be written as an opinion. For example:
"In my opinion, this is due to people in Washington fighting over unimportant issues, instead of focusing on solving problems."
This gets rid of unnecessary words, and makes it clear that the statement is the writer's firm opinion.
5) "I think if government was doing everything it was supposed to be doing, more people would be equal in their jobs they have, more people would be equal in the how much money they make, more people would be equal in the house they live in, and more people would be treated equal in their lives."
An improved version of this very long sentence could be:
"If the government was doing everything it was supposed to be doing, more people would be equal in their employment, in how much money they earn, in their housing situations, and in their lives."
The "I think" was unnecessary because it undermines the confidence of the statement and the repetition of "more people would be" was unnecessary because it only needs to be written once at the beginning of the list to apply to each item on the list. "Employment" is also a more competent and concise term for "jobs they have," as well as "housing situation" for "the house they live in."
Or, to be more concise myself, this statement needed to be more concise. That way, it will have more impact.
No comments:
Post a Comment