Vocabulary used

My students think I use pompous words (well, except they wouldn't call it that because they don't know what pompous means.) They are clueless when I write "ambiguous" on the board and have no idea what I'm talking about when I say that the average person's lexicon is diminishing.

I don't often think about whether the words I use will be beyond people's understanding. I pick the words that I think are most appropriate-- those with the meaning that best fits what I'm trying to say. I'll say presumptuous where as my students would just say stuck up. Should I dumb down my writing for readers... or use the word that I think is best?

As for my classroom, I keep using the Big Words and usually string them together with one or more synonyms so that attentive students can pick up the meaning. I'd rather bring them up then bend down to them.

Now, if the plot is lacking, that's a separate problem. One can write a crappy, holey plot with simple sentences and more commonly used words same as they can with complex sentences and college-level words. I don't think they are necessarily related.

I don't really know if I care, to be brutally honest. My books won't appeal to everyone, and if I am successful ahead, then those that take exception to the use of visceral verbiage won't read any more of my books.

Besides, writing simple is really really hard. It's probably the hardest kind of writing, and the ones that can do it, like Hemingway and Steinbeck, go on to be proclaimed geniuses. For us down here that hover above the status of hacks and wannabes, it's probably the other extreme that we need to worry about. Using to many words.

Like I've just done, to express the simple sentence 'There's nothing wrong with writing simple, if you can do it."

I'd say it really depends, like Clair mentioned, how the vocabulary assists the story. If it only serves to be a thick, gooey hummus through which you must plow to get to the plot, then the usage of upper diction doesn't do a whole lot.

I think that your vocabulary should depend on what you're writing. Using "big" words definitely is legitimate and can work, but often--more often in unpublished work, but sometimes in published books--I see "big" words being used awkwardly and unnaturally because that's what the writer thinks she's supposed to do.

I write using the words I know. I don't deliberately use arcane or obscure words. My vocabulary belongs to me and if it includes exactly the right word, that's the word I'm going to use, regardless of whether Joe Blow's ever seen it before. How am I supposed to predict which words you're familiar with or not?

There's a difference between simple and economic. I consider Hemingway's work economic, far from simple. He just used the fewest words (and commas) possible to convey strong images. Nothing simple there; that's difficult.

Simple writing is what I learned in third grade: The cat sat in hat.

There's nothing wrong with using words with more than three syllables. Expand your vocabulary. Learn the language and use it. There's so many words that mean so many things and sometimes there is the perfect word. Who cares if it's fancy-pansy. Use it. You can't please everybody; don't even try.

Eddyz Aquila said:

It seems to me that whenever I pick up a thriller novel (commercial ones) they all seem to start with pompous words and synonyms which only server to complicate the story even more, particularly for those who do not understand the words used in the first 5 pages. But for some, it continues for the whole book and it can get annoying sometimes. Looks like the author is trying to impress too much with his language skills that he forgets about the plot itself.

What's wrong with a simple vocabulary? By simple I mean commonly used words, lots of synonyms, nothing is repeated but nothing too fancy or exquisite. Would it bring the "literary value" of the work down? Would it make it plain boring because it's not sophisticated?

Click to expand...

imo obviously fancy words get in the way of the voice. Seems to me some writers confuse "literary" with wordiness, which always inspires me to leave the book in the store. An authentic, no-bullshit voice draws me in.

This is a curious paradox. Do the readers with overly simplistic vocabularies really read that much, because one way we increase our vocabulary is by reading. If not, should be dumb down our writing to appeal to people who likely don't read that much anyway? [note this doesn't apply to someone reading in a non-native language.] Most readers have decent heads on their shouders. A huge mistake a writer can make is to under-estimate the intellectual abilities of his/her readers. So what next? Dumb down the plot? Make sure every little twist is underlined and highlighted so people who have a third grade reading aptitude will get them?

As writers we should be chosing the best words for a specific passage, and the common nature of the candidate word should not be at the top of the filter for that selection.

I find it strange that writers should be encouraged to limit the lifeblood of their craft--words.

If a writer is using big words for the sake of using big words, it will usually be obvious to most readers.

A good writer who finds that a best word is an uncommon one should have enough context clues in the surrounding prose that an enlightened reader will be able to get the gist without reaching for the thesaurus. And even if he/she does have to make that reach, gee...so sorry to force you to learn a new word.
[the following example is dedicated to thinker, scarlet, and maryn] If I refer to a slathering vulva, and the reader is unfamiliar with both of those words, he/she should be able to get enough information from the surrounding prose to see that those words do not refer to a well-polished Swedish automobile, but rather to something quite smegmatic.

Monosyllabic isn't. (Many larger words are made up of common roots and pre-/suffixes so the readers can easily figure them out).

A challenging read is not a bad read as long as the challenges flow well with the story.

Writers should always write for the readers, and while this means the writer should not choose big words to make him/her appear to be intellectually cool, it doesn't mean he/she should avoid large words if those words are the best ones for the chosen passage, and the best way to express that part of the story.

Reading is not a total free ride. If the story is a good one, it will require the reader to use his/her brain.

Always use the best word. The simple word is not always best. A wider vocabulary gives you a wider range of expression. Even if the nuances will be lost on some readers.

I usually write in first person or close third person limited, so I choose the words my POV character would use, anything from the esoteric to the simple, the elevated to the vulgar. Some characters have a limited range. Others have a huge range and can drop "scintillating" one moment and "shit" the next.

David Wisehart said:

Always use the best word. The simple word is not always best. A wider vocabulary gives you a wider range of expression. Even if the nuances will be lost on some readers.

Click to expand...

What he said.

Use whatever vocabulary is most appropriate for the story and characters you're telling.

I've given this a lot of thought, and have come to the conclusion that I'll never be one to write sentences strung together with powerful, high-falutin' words. What I will do, is try to be zen to the scene and describe everything in perfect detail so that the reader is not left wondering what shade of pink I meant or what it sounded like when the ice hit the cold glass. That, to me, is the most honest way for me to write.

folkchick said:

I've given this a lot of thought, and have come to the conclusion that I'll never be one to write sentences strung together with powerful, high-falutin' words. What I will do, is try to be zen to the scene and describe everything in perfect detail so that the reader is not left wondering what shade of pink I meant or what it sounded like when the ice hit the cold glass. That, to me, is the most honest way for me to write.

Click to expand...

And if a sentence full of high-falutin' words is the best way to do that, it's the best way to do that

Likewise for simple words.

folkchick said:

I've given this a lot of thought, and have come to the conclusion that I'll never be one to write sentences strung together with powerful, high-falutin' words. What I will do, is try to be zen to the scene and describe everything in perfect detail so that the reader is not left wondering what shade of pink I meant or what it sounded like when the ice hit the cold glass. That, to me, is the most honest way for me to write.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but automatically equating "high falutin'" words with vague writing and simple words with writing clarity is total crap. Words are only as good or as bad as the words that surround them. And just because a reader (or a few) may not immediately know the definition of a word, that doesn't make that word less detailed, less exact, less valuable, or "more pink." And as far as I know, the contribution of a word to perfect writing detail has nothing to do with the number of syllables in that word.

Phaeal said:

"scintillating" one moment and "shit" the next.

Click to expand...

A succinct description of my writing.

caw

You write scintillating shit, too?

I love mes an intellectual protagonist who doesn't mind throwing around some sailor-speak.

I oscillate between titillating to hot while swinging between picturesque and pretty while writing about fornication and fucking.

I read a lot. I read practically everything I can get my hands on. Shit, when I was hospitalized when I was 14, the only books at my disposal were medical dictionaries. I read them.
I like learning new words. I use "big words" a lot if I'm talking about something serious, because they convey the best meaning. If I have to explain what they mean, so be it, someone is learning something. I like teaching, too.
I think verbiage can, and should, be used to thicken a story. I mostly use it to enhance a character's personality, such as my MC--she's a gutter punk. Homeless for years. She's not someone that the average reader would think of as terribly intellectual, but as the story goes on and she grows apart from the underground scene, the language used in narrative as well as dialogue becomes more adult-sounding.

ChainsawLicker said:

Shit

Click to expand...

Watch your language!

We only talk about defecation here.

kuwisdelu said:

Watch your language!

We only talk about defecation here.

Click to expand...

Yeah, what Ku said. And if you don't like it, may you quickly become coprophagous.

Eddyz Aquila said:

It seems to me that whenever I pick up a thriller novel (commercial ones) they all seem to start with pompous words and synonyms which only server to complicate the story even more, particularly for those who do not understand the words used in the first 5 pages. But for some, it continues for the whole book and it can get annoying sometimes. Looks like the author is trying to impress too much with his language skills that he forgets about the plot itself.

What's wrong with a simple vocabulary? By simple I mean commonly used words, lots of synonyms, nothing is repeated but nothing too fancy or exquisite. Would it bring the "literary value" of the work down? Would it make it plain boring because it's not sophisticated?

Click to expand...

I like simple language, but you have to use the best word, the right word, even if it's a foot long.

It may be that the words you think of as pompous are simple, everyday language to the writer. Can't say, but I read a lot of thrillers, and I don't remember reading one that started off with what I'd call pompous words. The ones I read, at least, generally have a pretty simple writing style and vocabulary.

Can you give an example of such an opening?

Sorry, didn't realize we were playing trump.

NeuroFizz said:

Yeah, what Ku said. And if you don't like it, may you quickly become coprophagous.

Click to expand...

Yeah, we're not a bunch of fecophiliacs here.

kuwisdelu said:

Yeah, we're not a bunch of fecophiliacs here.

Click to expand...

Speak for yourself.