출처: http://eduhow.tistory.com/entry/영어-쓰기의-8부-능선-관사-the-a-용법-예제

(유학생이 쓰는) 영어 쓰기의 8부능선, 관사 뛰어넘기

영어학습자료 2011/04/05 22:55
유학 4년차, 영어 쓰기가 많이 익숙해진 지금도 매번 지적받는 사항이 있으니 그것은 관사, 그중에서도 정관사와 부정관사(a / the)의 사용입니다. 영어 쓰기를 공부할 때 그냥 무턱대고 많이 쓰다보면 나아지는 부분도 있지만, 관사만큼은 유학 초기나 지금이나 별 차이가 없는 것 같습니다. 외국 친구들에게 물어보면 "그냥 감으로 아는 것이지 설명하기 힘들다"고 하니 그 역시 별로 도움이 안됩니다.  더 읽으시기 전에 관사 용법에 대한 다음 테스트를 풀어보세요. 주요 문제 몇가지에 대한 해설은 글을 읽으시면서 찾으실 수 있습니다.

관사 용법 테스트 :
http://a4esl.org/q/h/9901/cw-articles.htm
http://a4esl.org/q/h/vm/fampeople.html 

관사, 대강 쓰면 안될까?

관사야 어떻게 쓰던지 의미전달은 되니 적당히 쓰면 안되냐고 하실지도 모르겠습니다. 하지만 글로벌한 전문가로 성장하기를 원한다면 그렇게 넘길 수는 없습니다. (해외 기업 취업 관련해서는 Filldream님의 블로그를 참고하세요) 관사 사용은 너무나 빈번히 일어나므로 제대로 숙지하지 못할 경우 (특히 학계의 대부분을 차지하는 영어권 독자들에게) 글 자체에 대한 부정적인 이미지를 형성하기 때문입니다. 저의 경우, 예전에 지도교수님이나 다른 리뷰어에게 논문 Draft를 보냈을 때, 관사 실수때문에 글의 내용에 제대로 집중하기 힘들다는 말을 들은 적이 있습니다. 글의 내용에 대해 커맨트를 받아야 할 상황에서 관사 교정만 잔뜩 받은적도 있습니다.  (관련 포스팅 참조)

이처럼 사소하지만 무시할 수 없는 부분이다보니, 관사 사용에 자신이 없을 경우 작성한 글을 원어민 친구들에게 Proofreading받게 됩니다. 미국 생활 초기에는 이런 식으로 어느 정도는 해결할 수 있지만, 작성하는 글의 양이 많아질수록, 전문 분야의 글일수록 이는 점점 어려워집니다. 글을 봐줄 수 있는 친구를 항상 찾을 수 있는것도 아니고, 이메일 등 모든 글에 있어서 그렇게 할 수는 없기 때문입니다. 나중에 높은 위치에 올라 조직 전체에 메일을 보내야 할 일이 생겼을 때, 관사 실수를 남발한다면 리더로서 좋은 모습이 아닐 것입니다.

관사, 재대로 알아 보자

그래서, 관사의 용법을 한번 제대로 공부해보기로 결심을 했습니다.  사실 학교에서 혹은 문법책에서 수없이 공부했던 내용일진데, 그렇게 공부하고도 제대로 사용하지 못한다는 것은 그동안의 접근법에 무언가 문제가 있다는 반증이라고 생각했습니다. 그래서 영문/언어학 전공의 선생님들의 개인지도를 받을 수 있는 MIT Writing Center에 일주일 간격으로 수차례 약속을 잡았습니다. 저의 계획은 관사 용법에 대한 개별적인 규칙의 암기가 아닌, 일종의 사고의 틀(mental framework)을 형성해보자는 것이었습니다.
 
 Step 1 : 기본 규칙을 숙지하자

이렇게 전문가의 지도를 받기로 했지만, 명색이 박사과정 학생이 문법의 기본 규칙부터 물어볼 수는 없다고 생각해서 사전 학습을 했습니다. 우선 정관사가 '특정한'  대상을, 그리고 부정관사가 '임의의' 대상을 지칭한다는 것 정도는 아실 겁니다. (관련 포스팅 참조)  화자와 청자라는 관점에서 설명하자면, 정관사는 보통 화자와 청자 모두에게 알려진 대상을, 그리고 부정관사는 그렇지 않은 대상을 가리킵니다. 이 글을 쓰는 과정에서 관사 사용에 대한 많은 자료를 찾았는데, 그중 가장 많은 도움을 받은 자료가 관사 사용법을 요약해놓은 다음 다이어그램입니다. (이를 포함하는 원문은 여기서 보실 수 있습니다.)
 

어떤 일이든 일단 전체를 관통하는 큰 그림을 아는 것은 큰 도움이 됩니다. 관사는 (대부분) 명사 앞에 붙는 것이니 명사의 종류만 알면 이 표를 사용해 해결할 수 있는 것입니다. 예컨데 대문자로 시작하는 명사는 Proper Noun으로, 그리고 셀수없는 물질 / 추상명사는 Uncountable Noun으로 간주하고 해당 규칙을 적용하면 됩니다.

위 표에서 불분명한 부분이 General vs. Specific한 명사를 구분하는 방법입니다. 처음 등장한 단수명사앞에 a를, 그 이후에 이를 다시 지칭할 경우 the를 사용하는 것은 아시겠지만, 처음 사용되는 명사이더라도 수식어나 문맥을 통해 한정되는 경우가 있습니다. 우선 수식어의 경우 어떤 수식어가 뒤어 오느냐에 따라 한정되는 정도가 다른데,  전치사 of가 뒤에 오는 경우가 가장 한정적이며, for / in / at등 다른 전치사, that절, to부정사의 순으로 한정의 의미가 약해집니다. 전치사 of의 수식을 받는 명사에 대부분 the를 붙이는 이유입니다.
The equipments of the health club was clean in general. (of는 앞에오는 명사를 강하게 한정하기에 the를 붙입니다.)
You must sign an agreement to join the club (to는 약한 한정의 의미를 갖기에 an을 붙입니다.)

또한 General vs. Specific의 구분이 Uncountable vs. Countable을 선행한다는 것을 기억합시다. 즉, 비가산명사(water, dirt, sand)라도 구체적인 대상을 가리키는 경우 the를 앞에 붙이게 됩니다.
He drank water. (water는 특정한 물을 지칭하지는 않습니다.)
He fill the cup with some water. And he drank the water. (물질명사인 water가 앞에 사용된 특정한 water를 지칭합니다.)

때로는 General vs. Specific의 구분을 위해 해당 분야에 대한 정확한 지식을 알아야 할 때도 있습니다. 노벨상에 대한 정확한 지식이 없다면 다음 문장에서 정확한 관사를 사용하기 어려울 것입니다.
Einstein won the Novel Prize in Physics in 1921. (해당 년도의 물리학 노벨상은 단일하기에 the를 씁니다.)
Roentgen won a 1901 Novel Prize. (해당 년도의 노벨상은 여러개이니, 그중 하나를 가르키기 위해 a를 씁니다.)

Step 2 : 보조 규칙을 익히자

영어에는 이러한 기본 규칙을 보완하는 추가적인 규칙이 존재합니다. 사례를 통해 이를 알아봅시다. 우선, 고유명사가 일반명사로 사용되는 경우가 있습니다.
I want to drink a Coke. (고유명사인 Coke가 콜라 한병이라는 일반명사로 사용됩니다.)
Mother Teresa was a Roman Catholic nun. (Roman Catholic은 고유명사가 아니라, nun을 수식하는 형용사입니다.)

소유격은 정관사와 같이 쓰지 않습니다. 소유격 자체가 '한정'의 의미를 담고있기 때문이라고 합니다.
Mother Teresa received her novel Peace Prize in 1979.
Einstein is known for his theory of relativity.
Einstein is known for the theory of relativity. (소유격이 없다면 the를 써야합니다.)

이밖에도 많은 규칙이 존재합니다만, '뉴욕의사의 백신영어' 저자이신 고수민님의 글을 비롯한 온라인상의 자료를 글미에 소개하는 것으로 대신할까 합니다. 단, 문법 규칙이라는 것은 적용범위가 넓고 예외상황이 적은 경우에만 유용하다는 점을 기억합시다. 이런 의미에서 스스로 글을 쓰면서 자주 의문점을 느꼈던 규칙이 아니라면, 일일히 암기하기보다는 Step 3에서 설명하는대로 '직관'력을 키우는 것이 바람직하다는 생각입니다.

 Step 3 : 나머지는 '직관'으로 해결하자

 관사 사용이 규칙대로 된다면, 지금처럼 난제는 아니었을 겁니다.  하지만 관사 사용에는 수많은 예외 및 관용어구가 존재합니다. 이를 각각 모두 기억하는 것은 불가능에 가까울 뿐 아니라, 막상 필요할 때 제대로 활용하지 못하는 결과를 낳게 됩니다. 문법책에서 가르치는 관사 용법이 그렇게 길고 복잡한 것은 이런 예외상황을 모두 규칙으로 가르쳤기 때문이라고 생각합니다. 예컨데, 고유명사앞에 the를 붙이는 '예외상황'에 대한 다음 '규칙'을 살펴봅시다.

Use the with the proper noun (name) of a historical event, historical period, highway, building, hotel, museum, river, ocean, sea, point on a globe (Examples: the Equator or the East), desert, forest, gulf, or peninsula. Only use the with the name of a country if the name is plural, as in the Netherlands, or if it is a phrase, such as the Dominican Republic.
위에서 열거하는 열 몇가지 경우를 모두 암기하는 일은 (80년대) 수험 영어에서나 필요했을 일입니다. 실제 영어 쓰기에서는 자신의 전문분야에 대해 쓰는것이 보통일테니 위 단어를 쓸일이 많지 않을뿐더러, 어디에서나 인터넷을 사용할 수 있는 요즘은 필요할 때마다 검색을 통해 정확한 용례를 파악할 수 있기 때문입니다. 게다가 South Africa (남아공)의 경우에는 the를 앞에 붙이지 않으니, 위 규칙이 절대적인 것도 아닙니다.

또한, 앞서 설명한 '규칙'에도 적용이 애매한 사례가 종종 발생합니다. 앞서 General vs. Specific을 구분하는 규칙을 설명했지만, 종종 그 구분이 문맥을 통해 이루어지기도 합니다. 아래 문장을 살펴보면서, 밑줄친 부분에 왜 the가 필요한지 생각해봅시다. 참고로 제가 치른 온라인 테스트의 틀렸던 문제에서 발췌한 문장입니다.
Look for a health club near your house, and check out the exercise instructors and personal trainers. You should evaluate the equipment as well.

제가 Writing Center선생님께 물어본 결과 앞 문장에서 a health club이 등장했기에, 이 문장의 exercise instructors는 거기 소속의 사람일 것이며, 따라서 충분히 specific한 의미를 지니기 때문에 the를 써야하는 것이라고 합니다. 이처럼 of절과 같은 명확한 단서가 없는 경우에도 문맥에 따라 정관사를 사용해야 합니다. 

관사 교육에 대한 또다른 오해는 많은 경우 '하나의 정답'이 존재하는 것처럼 설명된다는 것입니다. 관사에 대한 서적에서 발췌한 다음 문장을 살펴봅시다. 책에서는 the가 정답이라고 가르치고 있지만, 나라에 따라서는 다수의 공용어가 사용되는 경우도 있을 것입니다. 그런 의미에서 a dominant native language역시 틀린 답은 아니라는 것이 제가 상담한 선생님의 말씀이었습니다.
In some countries, English is the dominant native language.

 
즉, 많은 경우 관사 사용은 옳고 그름의 문제라기보다는 '화자의 의도'를 얼마나 잘 전달하느냐의 문제라는 것입니다. 예컨대 윗 문장에서 the를 썼다면 해당 화자는 나라별 공용어는 하나라는 자신의 관점을 독자들에게 전달하는 것입니다. 이런 측면에서 관사 용법에 무작정 규칙을 적용하기보다는, 자신의 표현의도에 따라 적절한 선택을 할 수 있는 '감각'을 키우는 것이 바람직할 것입니다.

이런 이유에서 통/번역 등 영어 구사를 직업으로 하지 않는 일반인에게는 Step 2까지의 규칙을 외우는 것으로 충분하다고 생각합니다. 그리고 그 이상의 상황에 대해서는 '지식'이 아닌 '직관'을 통해 해결하는 편이 더 나을 것입니다. 좋은 영문을 많이 접함으로써 관사 사용에 대한 감각을 키우는 것입니다. 제가 상담을 받았던 선생님께서는 뉴욕타임즈 기사와 같은 좋은 영문을 '소리내서' 읽는 방법을 추천하셨습니다. 시청각을 모두 동원하여 관사의 용법을 느낌으로 익히는 것입니다. 이런 방식은 실제 네이티브 스피커들이 관사를 익히는 방법이기도 합니다.

글을 마치며

이 글에서는 영어 쓰기 완성에 있어서 가장 난제라고 할 수 있는 관사에 대해 다루어 보았습니다. 지금까지 관사 용법에 대한 필수적인 규칙을 몇가지 소개하였지만, 문법책의 구절을 외는 것 보다 '감각'을 익히는 것이 중요하다는 말씀을 드렸습니다. 우리가 영어를 처음에 접하는 것이 학교공부를 통해서이다보니, 자꾸 '공부' 마인드로 영어를 대하게 되고, 이것이 영어 학습에큰 장애가 되지 않나 합니다.

이 글을 작성하면서 온라인상의 수많은 자료를 참조했습니다. (예문의 출처를 일일히 밝히지 못한 점 죄송하게 생각합니다.) 그중 도움이 많이 되었던 글을 아래 소개합니다. 특히 관사에 관해서는 아래에도 링크한 '뉴욕의사' 고수민님 영어 포스팅을 추천합니다. '영어전문가'가 되기위한 영어학습 방법과 일반인의 영어학습 방법이 달라야 한다는 주장에 공감합니다. Filldream님의 영어 강의에도 원어민처럼 듣고 말하는데 도움이 되실 내용이 많습니다.

< 관사 사용법 가이드 >
위에 사용한 다이어그램을 포함하는 관사 사용 가이드 (영문)
'뉴욕의사'의 관사 용법 시리즈 (1편)
네이버 블로그 : 정관사 the의 용법

저는 영어 전문가도 아니고, 한국에서 태어나 중학교때 영어 공부를 시작한 평범한 유학생입니다. 많은 부분 제가 공부한 내용을 정리하기 위한 목적으로 쓴 글이지만, 저를 포함하여 관사 용법에 대해 '본능적인 공포감'을 느끼는 많은 분들께 도움이 되었으면 하는 바램입니다.

마지막으로 아래 질문에 대한 독자님들의 의견을 구할까 합니다. 댓글이나 다음 글을 통해 답변드리도록 노력하겠습니다.

-. 관사 이외에 영어 쓰기에서 어려운 부분은 무었입니까?
-. 관사 공부에 가장 도움을 받은 자료가 있다면 무엇입니까?
-. 특히 햇갈리는 관사의 용법이 있다면 무엇입니까?

Source : http://edu.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2011/06/23/2011062300292.html

[대니얼 변의 SAT 멘토링] '나만의 스토리' 에세이에 정확히 표현을
조선일보

2011.06.22 15:24

FLEX 컬리지 프렙 원장
오늘은 학생들이 실제 쓴 에세이를 통해 잘 쓴 글과 그렇지 않은 글의 차이를 살펴보자. 첫번째 학생은 자신의 리더십 경험에 대해 글을 썼다. 중학교 때부터 리더십 활동이 많은 학생이었으며 현재는 학생회장의 자리를 맡고 있다.

"그 말이 리더십의 이해에 또 새로운 시각을 제공하였다. 지금까지는 학교 축제에서 선배들보다 더 잘하고, 주니어 프롬을 위해 기금을 모으고, 모두를 위해 재미있는 무비 나이트를 준비하는 게 전부였다. 하지만 이제 리더십이 그 이상이라는 것을 알게 되었다. 어떤 경험도 헛되게 하지 않고 말과 행동으로 남을 복돋우는 것, 그것이 바로 내 리더십의 중심이 되어야겠다."

결말을 멋지게 내주었고 솔직한 글이겠지만, 사실 자기 자신에 대한 이야기를 잘 알리지는 못하였다. 이 학생은 10살 때 처음으로 반장 선거에 나서면서 선거본부로 아버지의 자동차 뒷좌석을 사용했고 학교에서 4년 내내 반장 등을 맡아 학생회에 참여했다. 학생회장이 될 때는 제일 친한 친구의 죽음이라는 슬픔을 딛고 일어나 당선된 소중한 경험을 했다. 그러나 이 에세이로는 이런 이야기를 알 수 없다. 이 에세이의 문제는 자신만의 이야기를 표현하지 않았다는 것이다. 입학 사정관의 관점에서 보면 자신의 이야기보다는 리더십이 어떤 것인지에 대한 논평에 불과하다.

두번째 학생은 자신의 특별 활동에 대한 이야기를 썼다.

"2차 세계 전쟁에 직접 참전했던 비에넨필드 씨와 같은 분들에게서 전쟁에 대해 직접 배웠다. 코디네이터로서의 의무도 있었지만, 프로젝트의 기금 모음 책임자라는 직책도 같이 맡았다. 전쟁 이야기(War Stories) 프로젝트를 위해 군중 앞에서 연설한 적도 있지만 200개 이상의 기업체에 편지를 보내기 위해 주소를 찾고 침이 다 마르도록 우표를 붙이며 밤을 지샌 것이 가장 기억에 남는다."

두 번째 학생의 경우 헌신하는 모습을 더 정확히 표현했다는 것이 포인트다. 200개의 편지를 쓰고 침이 마르도록 우표를 붙인 모습에서 헌신의 모습을 찾을 수 있다. 이 에세이의 첫 문단은 알츠하이머에 걸린 자신의 할아버지를 간호하는 과정에서 War Stories 프로젝트를 시작하게 된 동기를 풀어냈다. 두 번째 학생의 에세이가 첫 번째 학생의 에세이보다 높은 평가를 받는 이유는 더 개인적인 이야기로 시작했다는 것이다. 이런 시작을 통해 정이 많은 자신의 모습과 지원서의 큰 부분을 차지하는 War Stories 프로젝트의 시발점을 동시에 표현하고 설명했다. 또한 이 특별활동이 자신에게 진정 의미 있는 활동이라는 것도 간접적으로 알린 것이다.

모든 이의 성격과 인생, 경험이 다르듯 학생들도 자신만의 내용과 목소리를 찾는 것이 중요하다. 이상적인 지원자의 모습이 하나만이 아니듯 이상적인 에세이 역시 한 모습만으로 존재하는 것이 아님을 기억하자. 반대로 가장 좋은 에세이는 글쓴이의 관심사를 실례를 통해서 한 번 더 보여줄 수 있는 그런 글임을 명심하자.

Source : http://edu.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2011/06/09/2011060900334.html

[대니얼 변의 SAT 멘토링] '에세이'라는 캔버스에 자기 색 입혀라
조선일보 | 대니얼 변 FLEX 컬리지 프렙 원장

2011.06.09 03:01

여름이 다가오면 에세이 준비를 시작할 시즌을 맞는다. 전 세계의 수험생은 자신을 최대한 빛내고 수만 명의 지원자와의 경쟁에서 이기기 위한 500개의 단어를 찾기 위해 많은 밤을 지새울 것이다.

칼리지 에세이를 빈 캔버스라고 생각해 보자. 대학은 학생들에게 이 캔버스를 채워 달라고 요구한다. 하지만 흰 캔버스를 그림으로 채운다는 것은 그리 쉬운 일이 아니다. 캔버스에 어떤 그림이 그려져 있나에 따라 그림의 주인공이 누구인지는 물론이고 대학 공동체에 어떤 영향을 끼칠지도 알 수 있기 때문이다. 바꾸어 말하면 첫째는 자신의 능력을 잘 보여줄 수 있는 내용이 무엇인가를 알아야 하고, 두 번째는 어떻게 읽는 사람의 흥미를 끌어낼 것인지를 고민해야 한다.

먼저, 칼리지 에세이는 개인의 이야기임을 명심하자. 입학 사정관들은 지원서에서 지원자의 진짜 모습을 떠올리고 싶어한다. 하지만 여러 가지 사실만 나열을 해서는 그 모습을 떠올리기가 쉽지가 않다. 매년 3만여 명의 학생들이 지원하는 스탠퍼드 대학의 경우에도 모든 지원자가 원하는 만큼 대학이 개인에 관심을 가질 수가 없다. 따라서 스스로 다른 지원자보다 더 두드러진 모습을 보여야 한다. 예를 들어, 음악에 출중한 학생은 자신이 피아노를 얼마나 사랑하는지에 대해 쓸 수 있을 것이다. 하지만 대학의 입장에선 그 학생의 음악적 능력 자체가 어떤 가치를 갖는지에 관심이 있다. 따라서 피아노를 사랑한다는 내용보다는 덜 좋은 환경에서 자란 학생들에게 피아노를 가르친 경험이 더 좋은 소재가 될 수 있다. 음악을 통한 시민 봉사 정신을 보여주는 것이 효과적일 수 있다는 것이다.

확실히 알아야 할 것은 입학 사정관이 좋아할 것 같은 소재와 실제로 입학 사정관이 원하는 글은 상당한 차이가 있다는 것이다. 여전히 대다수의 학생은 에세이를 쓸 때 이력서를 쓰듯 성취한 모습과 수준 높은 단어로 강한 인상을 남기려 한다. 하지만 그런 내용은 지원서의 다른 부문에서 찾을 수 있기에 사실상 기회를 하나 날려 버리는 셈이다. 입학 공통원서(Common Application)에 나와 있는 '칼리지 에세이는 학교 수업, 성적, 시험 점수, 그 외 객관적인 정보를 떠나 그 학생을 더 잘 이해하기 위한 수단이다'라는 점을 명심하라. 에세이는 지원서 다른 곳에선 찾을 수 없는 색다른 모습을 보여줄 유일무이한 기회이다.

FLEX의 입학 사정관들은 이구동성으로 말한다. "에세이를 읽기 시작하면서 이 학생이 나를 어떻게 현혹시킬 것인지, 어떻게 웃길 것인지 생각하지 않는다. 단지 이 학생은 도대체 누구인가를 알고 싶을 뿐이다."

출처: http://edu.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2011/04/28/2011042800299.html

[대니얼 변의 SAT 멘토링] SAT 에세이, 논리적 근거 제시하라
조선일보 | 대니얼 변 · FLEX 컬리지 프렙 원장

2011.04.27 15:26

미국에서는 작문(writing)을 음악, 미술처럼 예능의 한 분야로 분류한다. 그림이나 음악처럼 글쓴이와 읽는이 사이에도 개인적이고 주관적인 소통이 이뤄지기 때문이다. 에세이(essay)라는 단어는 논설문, 수필, 담론 등 여러 가지 스타일과 장르를 포함한다. 이 때문에 모든 에세이를 평가할 수 있는 공통적인 표준은 없다. 하지만 철자법, 문법, 정확한 어휘 등 모든 글이 기본적으로 갖춰야 하는 기준은 에세이에도 적용된다.

SAT에 나오는 에세이는 25분 내에 작성해야 하는 논설문이다. 이는 대학 지원서에 많이 나오는 수필 형식이나 더 독창적인 글, 예를 들어 영어 수업에서 많이 쓰는 소설이나 설명문 형식의 글과는 전혀 다른 장르의 글이다. SAT의 에세이는 글 자체의 설득력만으로 평가된다. 예를 들어, 한 학생이 자신의 에세이를 뒷받침하는 이야기를 허위로 만들었어도 주관사인 칼리지보드는 절대 감점할 수 없다. 사실의 진위가 아니라 주장과 논리의 설득력만으로 평가하는 것이다.

SAT 에세이는 800점 만점의 SAT 작문의 약 3분의 1인 250점을 차지한다.(나머지 550점은 문법문제) 2명의 채점관이 5개의 항목을 각 6점 만점으로 채점한다. 기준이 되는 5개의 항목은 다음과 같다.

▶주어진 주제를 효과적이고 통찰력 있게 분석하고 자신의 관점을 뒷받침하기 위해 알맞은 이유, 예시 및 증거를 제공한다.

▶문단의 연결과 내용의 정리가 잘 되어 있고 글의 초점이 확실하다.

▶다양하고 정확한 단어 사용을 통해 언어구사의 숙련도를 보여준다.

▶다양한 문장구조를 사용한다.

▶문법, 철자법, 사용법 등의 오류가 없다.

항목별로 2명의 채점관 점수를 합하여 12점 만점으로 채점한다. 단, 두 채점관의 점수가 1점 이상 차이가 있으면 세 번째 채점관이 재채점을 한다. 이 에세이 점수는 문법 부문의 기록과 합쳐서 800점 만점의 작문 부문 점수로 환산한다. 아예 글을 쓰지 않거나 주제에서 완전히 벗어나는 내용을 쓰지 않는 한 0점을 받지는 않는다.

대부분의 학생이 에세이 때문에 많은 걱정을 하지만 평가하는 데 표준화된 항목이 존재하기 때문에 적절한 지도를 제대로 받는다면 좋은 점수를 획득하는 것은 그리 어렵지 않다. 효과적인 SAT 에세이 준비를 위한 포인트는 다음과 같다.

1. 시험에서 자주 등장하는 주제와 형식을 두루 익히자.

2. 자주 나오는 주제로 자신의 주장을 펼치는 연습을 하자. 찬성, 반대 어떤 편도 상관은 없다.

3. 자신의 주장을 뒷받침해 줄 예시를 몇 개 생각해 보자.

4. 연습! 연습! 연습! 많은 학생이 알면서도 글로 표현하지 못할 때가 잦다. 연습을 통해 글을 작성하고 완성하는 과정을 익혀야 한다.

지난 10년의 SAT 지도 경험과 노하우의 결정판인 FLEX 컬리지 프렙의 SAT 프로그램은 가장 많이 등장하는 SAT 에세이 주제를 분석해 매번 성공적인 에세이를 쓸 수 있도록 만들어져 있다. 학생들은 각 주제에 맞는 내용을 시간 내에 생각하고 정리하여 FLEX의 에세이 형식에 맞춰 글을 완성하도록 구성되어 있으며, 반복 연습을 통해 그 능력을 개발하고 향상시키는데 초점이 맞추어져 있다.

출처: http://edu.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2010/08/12/2010081200561.html

[쿠도스 유학 컨설팅] 에세이 고득점 비법 'Why·How'에 있다
조선일보 | 사무엘 황 쿠도스 유학컨설팅 수석 컨설턴트

2010.08.12 03:26

SAT 준비
미국대학에 진학하려면 많은 조건이 필요하다. 학교 내신, 시험성적, 교사 추천서, 리더십과 봉사활동(extracurricular activities), 에세이 등이다. 이들 중 가장 중요한 것은 학교 내신이다. 국제 학생들이 반드시 봐야 하는 시험은 TOEFL, SAT I 그리고 SAT II다.

TOEFL(Test of English as a Foreign Language) 시험은 모두가 잘 알고 있듯이 국제학생들이 치러야 하는 영어 실력 평가 시험이다.

SAT I 시험은 수학(Math), 독해(Critical Reading), 작문(Writing) 총 3개로 나누어지는데 각 section 당 800점, 총 2400점이 만점이다. 한국 학생들의 SAT I 수학 성적은 대부분 만점에 가깝다. SAT I 수학은 Geometry와 Algebra I/II만 끝낸다면 문제없이 볼 수 있는 시험이다. SAT I Writing 점수는 800점 만점에서 30%는 에세이, 70%는 49개의 객관식 문제가 차지한다. SAT 에세이는 학교 에세이와는 다르게 에세이에 대해서 따로 점수를 주기 때문에 에세이 점수를 높이 받을 수 있는 요령만 터득한다면 점수가 잘 나오는 편이다. 그 요령은 한두 가지가 아니겠지만 그중에서도 가장 중요한 것은 2장의 에세이 종이를 다 채우는 것이다. 다음으로 중요한 것은 대주제문(Thesis)이 확실하게 두 가지 질문에 대한 답을 제시해야 한다. Why? (왜 내가 이런 주장을 하는 건지) 그리고 How? (어떻게 내가 이에 대해 주장할 것인지) 에세이 공부에 도움이 될 수 있는 것은 중학교 때부터 뉴욕타임스를 읽는 것이다. 특히 Opinions Section의 기사를 하루에 2개 정도 읽으면 많은 도움이 된다. SAT 시험에서만 나오는 문법은 반드시 공부를 해야 한다. SAT에서 중요하게 여기는 16개 문법 콘셉트가 있는데 이것들은 반드시 문제를 풀기 전에 공부해야 한다. SAT Reading은 총 67개의 객관식 문제가 있는데 그 중 19문제는 단어실력을 평가하는 문제이고 나머지 48문제는 읽는 객관식 문제들이다. SAT 단어는 대략 만개에 달하는데 단어와 Root Words를 완벽하게 외우면 별문제 없이 풀 수 있다. 그렇다면 단어는 어떤 단어가 좋을까? 처음 시작하는 단계에서 지금 현재 SAT 책 중 가장 정리가 잘 되어 있는 책은 Barron's에서 만드는 SAT 책인데, 이 책에 있는 3500개 단어를 먼저 외우는 게 좋다. 그렇다면 많은 학생이 어려워하는 Reading의 두 번째 부분은 어떻게 공부하면 좋을까? 그 방법은 독서에 있다. 중학교 때부터 SAT I 을 만드는 College Board가 추천해주는 미국의 클래식 책들을 읽으면 많은 도움이 된다.

SAT II 시험은 여러 과목별로 나누어져 있는데 대부분 상위권 대학들은 2개 과목의 시험점수를 요구한다. 이과 쪽으로 갈 학생들은 반드시 수학과 과학 과목 중 하나를 봐야 한다. 문과 쪽으로 공부할 계획이면 수학 한 과목을 보고, US History, World History, Literature 중에서 1개를 선택하는 것이 좋다.

출처: http://edu.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2011/05/19/2011051900294.html

[대니얼 변의 SAT 멘토링] 문법 익혀 문제에 적용한다면… 쓰기는 'OK'
조선일보 | 대니얼 변 FLEX 컬리지 프렙 원장

2011.05.18 16:20

 
SAT 시험은 배우고 연습해서 준비하면 마스터할 수 있는 시험이다. 특히 SAT 쓰기(Writing) 섹션은 더욱 그렇다. 10학년 때 미국으로 이민 온 제니의 사례는 이를 증명해주는 완벽한 케이스다.

제니는 FLEX에서 SAT 공부를 시작했다. 공부에 대한 의지는 있었지만, 원어민이 아니어서 SAT 시험의 영어 부문을 공부하는데 상당한 어려움을 겪고 있었다. 그녀가 FLEX를 찾은 것은 12학년을 앞둔 여름방학 때였다. 목표는 브라운대 로드 아일랜드 스쿨 오브 디자인(Brown-RISD) 프로그램에 지원하기 위해 12학년 10월까지 2100점을 받는 것이었다. 다른 학원에서 수업을 들었지만 1800점에도 못 미치는 점수이었기에 우리로서도 달성 가능한 점수인지 가늠하기가 쉽지 않았다.

FLEX에서는 먼저 제니의 기존의 총점 1780점(CR 520, W 580, M 680)에서 목표점수인 2100점(CR 600, W 720, M 780)을 획득하기 위한 과목별 구체적 전략을 세웠다. 쓰기 점수 향상 목표를 다른 부분보다 높게 설정한 것이 중요한 포인트이었다. 제니는 특히 문법 부문을 집중적으로 피고들었다.

800점만점인 쓰기 부문 중 약 3분의 2인 550점 정도는 문법 문제로 이루어져 있다. 나머지 약 250점 정도가 작문인 에세이 부문이다. 에세이 쓰기를 걱정하는 학생들은 제니처럼 문법 공부에 집중하여 체계적으로 준비하면 좋은 점수를 얻을 수 있다. 반대로 문법 문제에서 좋은 점수를 얻지 못하면 쓰기 부문에서 고득점을 기대하는 것 자체가 어려운 일이다.

SAT 문법 문제는 아주 기술적이며 정형적인 패턴을 가지고 있다. 그러므로 영어를 감으로 구사하는 미국인보다 체계적으로 영어 공부를 한 외국인이 유리한 경우가 종종 있다. SAT 에세이의 경우도 글 쓰는 스타일에 대한 평가보다는 논리적인 서술을 요구하는 시험이므로 외국인도 쉽게 고득점을 받는 것이 가능하다.

제니는 12학년 10월 재시험에서 CR 630, W 770, M 740 총점 2140점을 받았다. 그리고 한해 20명도 채 안되는 Brown-RISD 프로그램에 합격했다. 다른 아시안 학생들처럼 수학(Mathematics) 점수가 가장 높을 것이라고 예상했으나 쓰기 점수가 더 좋은 결과를 보였다.

FLEX에서는 SAT 시험을 위해 꼭 필요한 10가지 문법을 정리해서 수업하고 있다. 이들 문법을 확실하게 익히고 문제에 적용할 수 있으면 쓰기 성적은 쉽게 향상시킬 수 있다. 예를 들어 SAT 문법은 ACT 시험과 달리 구두법에 대해 문제를 내지 않는다. 또한 철자법이나 대문자 사용법도 시험에 포함하지 않는다. 따라서 철자법이 틀려서 정답이 되는 경우는 없으므로 이 같은 보기는 피해야 한다. 이처럼 객관식 문법 문제는 바른 접근 방법을 익힌다면 영문법을 아주 깊이 공부하지 않아도 좋은 성과를 얻을 수 있다.

영작문 고급과정에 있는 분이라면 꼭 한 번 읽어볼 만한 E-book입니다. 우리가 영문법에서 전형적으로 다루는 내용들도 많이 나옵니다. 역시 영문법은 영작문과 불가분의 관계에 있군요.  *참고로 이책은 지은이 사후 50년이 지나 저작권이 소멸된 책입니다.
---------------------------------------------------------------

How to Write Clearly.

RULES AND EXERCISES

ON

ENGLISH COMPOSITION.

BY THE

REV. EDWIN A. ABBOTT, M.A.,

HEAD MASTER OF THE CITY OF LONDON SCHOOL.

THE AUTHOR'S COPYRIGHT EDITION.

BOSTON:
ROBERTS BROTHERS.
1883.

University Press: John Wilson & Son.
Cambridge.

PREFACE.

Almost every English boy can be taught to write clearly, so far at least as clearness depends upon the arrangement of words. Force, elegance, and variety of style are more difficult to teach, and far more difficult to learn; but clear writing can be reduced to rules. To teach the art of writing clearly is the main object of these Rules and Exercises.

Ambiguity may arise, not only from bad arrangement, but also from other causes—from the misuse of single words, and from confused thought. These causes are not removable by definite rules, and therefore, though not neglected, are not prominently considered in this book. My object rather is to point out some few continually recurring causes of ambiguity, and to suggest definite remedies in each case. Speeches in Parliament, newspaper narratives and articles, and, above all, resolutions at public meetings, furnish abundant instances of obscurity arising from the monotonous neglect of some dozen simple rules.

The art of writing forcibly is, of course, a valuable acquisition—almost as valuable as the art of writing clearly. But forcible expression is not, like clear expression, a mere question of mechanism and of the manipulation of words; it is a much higher power, and implies much more.

[Pg 6]

Writing clearly does not imply thinking clearly. A man may think and reason as obscurely as Dogberry himself, but he may (though it is not probable that he will) be able to write clearly for all that. Writing clearly—so far as arrangement of words is concerned—is a mere matter of adverbs, conjunctions, prepositions, and auxiliary verbs, placed and repeated according to definite rules.[1] Even obscure or illogical thought can be clearly expressed; indeed, the transparent medium of clear writing is not least beneficial when it reveals the illogical nature of the meaning beneath it.

On the other hand, if a man is to write forcibly, he must (to use a well-known illustration) describe Jerusalem as "sown with salt," not as "captured," and the Jews not as being "subdued" but as "almost exterminated" by Titus. But what does this imply? It implies knowledge, and very often a great deal of knowledge, and it implies also a vivid imagination. The writer must have eyes to see the vivid side of everything, as well as words to describe what he sees. Hence forcible writing, and of course tasteful writing also, is far less a matter of rules than is clear writing; and hence, though forcible writing is exemplified in the exercises, clear writing occupies most of the space devoted to the rules.

Boys who are studying Latin and Greek stand in especial need of help to enable them to write a long English sentence clearly. The periods of Thucydides and Cicero are not easily rendered into our idiom without some knowledge of the links that connect an English sentence.

There is scarcely any better training, rhetorical as well as logical, than the task of construing Thucydides into [Pg 7]genuine English; but the flat, vague, long-winded Greek-English and Latin-English imposture that is often tolerated in our examinations and is allowed to pass current for genuine English, diminishes instead of increasing the power that our pupils should possess over their native language. By getting marks at school and college for construing good Greek and Latin into bad English, our pupils systematically unlearn what they may have been allowed to pick up from Milton and from Shakespeare.

I must acknowledge very large obligations to Professor Bain's treatise on "English Composition and Rhetoric," and also to his English Grammar. I have not always been able to agree with Professor Bain as to matters of taste; but I find it difficult to express my admiration for the systematic thoroughness and suggestiveness of his book on Composition. In particular, Professor Bain's rule on the use of "that" and "which" (see Rule 8) deserves to be better known.[2] The ambiguity produced by the confusion between these two forms of the Relative is not a mere fiction of pedants; it is practically serious. Take, for instance, the following sentence, which appeared lately in one of our ablest weekly periodicals: "There are a good many Radical members in the House who cannot forgive the Prime Minister for being a Christian." Twenty years hence, who is to say whether the meaning is "and they, i.e. all the Radical members in the House," or "there are a good many Radical members of the House that cannot &c."? Professor Bain, apparently admitting no exceptions to his useful rule, amends many sentences in a manner that seems to me intolerably harsh. Therefore, while laying due stress on the utility of the rule, I have endeavoured to point out and explain the exceptions.

[Pg 8]

The rules are stated as briefly as possible, and are intended not so much for use by themselves as for reference while the pupil is working at the exercises. Consequently, there is no attempt to prove the rules by accumulations of examples. The few examples that are given, are given not to prove, but to illustrate the rules. The exercises are intended to be written out and revised, as exercises usually are; but they may also be used for vivâ voce instruction. The books being shut, the pupils, with their written exercises before them, may be questioned as to the reasons for the several alterations they have made. Experienced teachers will not require any explanation of the arrangement or rather non-arrangement of the exercises. They have been purposely mixed together unclassified to prevent the pupil from relying upon anything but his own common sense and industry, to show him what is the fault in each case, and how it is to be amended. Besides references to the rules, notes are attached to each sentence, so that the exercises ought not to present any difficulty to a painstaking boy of twelve or thirteen, provided he has first been fairly trained in English grammar.

The "Continuous Extracts" present rather more difficulty, and are intended for boys somewhat older than those for whom the Exercises are intended. The attempt to modernize, and clarify, so to speak, the style of Burnet, Clarendon, and Bishop Butler,[3] may appear ambitious, and perhaps requires some explanation. My object has, of course, not been to improve upon the style of these authors, but to show how their meaning might be expressed more clearly in modern English. The charm of the style is necessarily lost, but if the loss is recognized both by teacher and pupil, there is nothing, in my opinion, to [Pg 9]counterbalance the obvious utility of such exercises. Professor Bain speaks to the same effect:[4] "For an English exercise, the matter should in some way or other be supplied, and the pupil disciplined in giving it expression. I know of no better method than to prescribe passages containing good matter, but in some respects imperfectly worded, to be amended according to the laws and the proprieties of style. Our older writers might be extensively, though not exclusively, drawn upon for this purpose."

To some of the friends whose help has been already acknowledged in "English Lessons for English People," I am indebted for further help in revising these pages. I desire to express especial obligations to the Rev. J. H. Lupton, late Fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge, and Second Master of St. Paul's School, for copious and valuable suggestions; also to several of my colleagues at the City of London School, among whom I must mention in particular the Rev. A. R. Vardy, Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge.

Before electrotyping the Fourth and Revised Edition, I wish to say one word as to the manner in which this book has been used by my highest class, as a collection of Rules for reference in their construing lessons. In construing, from Thucydides especially, I have found Rules 5, 30, 34, 36, 37, and 40a, of great use. The rules about Metaphor and Climax have also been useful in correcting faults of taste in their Latin and Greek compositions. I have hopes that, used in this way, this little book may be of service to the highest as well as to the middle classes of our schools.

[Pg 10]

CONTENTS.

[Pg 11]

INDEX OF RULES.

I. CLEARNESS AND FORCE.

WORDS.

1. Use words in their proper sense.

2. Avoid exaggerations.

3. Avoid useless circumlocution and "fine writing."

4. Be careful in the use of "not ... and," "any," "but," "only," "not ... or," "that."

4 a. Be careful in the use of ambiguous words, e.g. "certain."

5. Be careful in the use of "he," "it," "they," "these," &c.

6. Report a speech in the First Person, where necessary to avoid ambiguity.

6 a. Use the Third Person where the exact words of the speaker are not intended to be given.

6 b. Omission of "that" in a speech in the Third Person.

7. When you use a Participle implying "when," "while," "though," or "that," show clearly by the context what is implied.

8. When using the Relative Pronoun, use "who" or "which," if the meaning is "and he" or "and it," "for he" or "for it." In other cases use "that," if euphony allows. Exceptions.

9. Do not use "and which" for "which."

10. Equivalents for the Relative: (a) Participle or Adjective; (b) Infinitive; (c) "Whereby," "whereto," &c.; (d) "If a man;" (e) "And he," "and this," &c.; (f) "what;" (g) omission of Relative.

10 a'. Repeat the Antecedent before the Relative, where the non-repetition causes any ambiguity. See 38.

11. Use particular for general terms. Avoid abstract Nouns.

11 a. Avoid Verbal Nouns where Verbs can be used.

12. Use particular persons instead of a class.

13. Use metaphor instead of literal statement.

14. Do not confuse metaphor.

14 a. Do not mix metaphor with literal statement.

14 b. Do not use poetic metaphor to illustrate a prosaic subject.

ORDER OF WORDS IN A SENTENCE.

15. Emphatic words must stand in emphatic positions; i.e., for the most part, at the beginning or the end of the sentence.

15 a. Unemphatic words must, as a rule, be kept from the end. Exceptions.

[Pg 12] 15 b. An interrogation sometimes gives emphasis.

16. The Subject, if unusually emphatic, should often be transferred from the beginning of the sentence.

17. The Object is sometimes placed before the Verb for emphasis.

18. Where several words are emphatic, make it clear which is the most emphatic. Emphasis can sometimes be given by adding an epithet, or an intensifying word.

19. Words should be as near as possible to the words with which they are grammatically connected.

20. Adverbs should be placed next to the words they are intended to qualify.

21. "Only"; the strict rule is that "only" should be placed before the word it affects.

22. When "not only" precedes "but also," see that each is followed by the same part of speech.

23. "At least," "always," and other adverbial adjuncts, sometimes produce ambiguity.

24. Nouns should be placed near the Nouns that they define.

25. Pronouns should follow the Nouns to which they refer, without the intervention of any other Noun.

26. Clauses that are grammatically connected should be kept as close together as possible. Avoid parentheses. But see 55.

27. In conditional sentences, the antecedent or "if-clauses" must be kept distinct from the consequent clauses.

28. Dependent clauses preceded by "that" should be kept distinct from those that are independent.

29. Where there are several infinitives, those that are dependent on the same word must be kept distinct from those that are not.

30. The principle of Suspense.

30 a. It is a violation of the principle of suspense to introduce unexpectedly at the end of a long sentence, some short and unemphatic clause beginning with (a) "not," (b) "which."

31. Suspense must not be excessive.

32. In a sentence with "if," "when," "though," &c., put the "if-clause," antecedent, or protasis, first.

33. Suspense is gained by placing a Participle or Adjective, that qualifies the Subject, before the Subject.

34. Suspensive Conjunctions, e.g. "either," "not only," "on the one hand," &c., add clearness.

35. Repeat the Subject, where its omission would cause obscurity or ambiguity.

36. Repeat a Preposition after an intervening Conjunction, especially if a Verb and an Object also intervene.

37. Repeat Conjunctions, Auxiliary Verbs, and Pronominal Adjectives.

37 a. Repeat Verbs after the Conjunctions "than," "as," &c.

[Pg 13]

38. Repeat the Subject, or some other emphatic word, or a summary of what has been said, if the sentence is so long that it is difficult to keep the thread of meaning unbroken.

39. Clearness is increased, when the beginning of the sentence prepares the way for the middle, and the middle for the end, the whole forming a kind of ascent. This ascent is called "climax."

40. When the thought is expected to ascend, but descends, feebleness, and sometimes confusion, is the result. The descent is called "bathos."

40 a. A new construction should not be introduced unexpectedly.

41. Antithesis adds force and often clearness.

42. Epigram.

43. Let each sentence have one, and only one, principal subject of thought. Avoid heterogeneous sentences.

44. The connection between different sentences must be kept up by Adverbs used as Conjunctions, or by means of some other connecting words at the beginning of the sentence.

45. The connection between two long sentences or paragraphs sometimes requires a short intervening sentence showing the transition of thought.

II. BREVITY.

46. Metaphor is briefer than literal statement.

47. General terms are briefer, though less forcible, than particular terms.

47 a. A phrase may sometimes be expressed by a word.

48. Participles may often be used as brief (though sometimes ambiguous) equivalents of phrases containing Conjunctions and Verbs.

49. Participles, Adjectives, Participial Adjectives, and Nouns may be used as equivalents for phrases containing the Relative.

50. A statement may sometimes be briefly implied instead of being expressed at length.

51. Conjunctions may be omitted. Adverbs, e.g. "very," "so." Exaggerated epithets, e.g. "incalculable," "unprecedented."

51 a. The imperative may be used for "if &c."

52. Apposition may be used, so as to convert two sentences into one.

53. Condensation may be effected by not repeating (1) the common Subject of several Verbs; (2) the common Object of several Verbs or Prepositions.

54. Tautology. Repeating what may be implied.

55. Parenthesis maybe used with advantage to brevity. See 26.

56. Brevity often clashes with clearness. Let clearness be the first consideration.

[Pg 14]

CLEARNESS AND FORCE.

Numbers in brackets refer to the Rules.

WORDS.

1. Use words in their proper sense.

Write, not "His apparent guilt justified his friends in disowning him," but "his evident guilt." "Conscious" and "aware," "unnatural" and "supernatural," "transpire" and "occur," "circumstance" and "event," "reverse" and "converse," "eliminate" and "elicit," are often confused together.

This rule forbids the use of the same word in different senses. "It is in my power to refuse your request, and since I have power to do this, I may lawfully do it." Here the second "power" is used for "authority."

This rule also forbids the slovenly use of "nice," "awfully," "delicious," "glorious," &c. See (2).

2. Avoid exaggerations.

"The boundless plains in the heart of the empire furnished inexhaustible supplies of corn, that would have almost sufficed for twice the population."

Here "inexhaustible" is inconsistent with what follows. The words "unprecedented," "incalculable," "very," and "stupendous" are often used in the same loose way.

3. Avoid useless circumlocution and "fine writing."

"Her Majesty here partook of lunch." Write "lunched."

"Partook of" implies sharing, and is incorrect as well as lengthy.

So, do not use "apex" for "top," "species" for "kind," "individual" for "man," "assist" for "help," &c.

4. Be careful how you use the following words: "not ... and," "any," "only," "not ... or," "that."[5]

[Pg 15]

And. See below, "Or."

Any.—"I am not bound to receive any messenger that you send." Does this mean every, or a single? Use "every" or "a single."

Not.—(1) "I do not intend to help you, because you are my enemy &c." ought to mean (2), "I intend not to help you, and my reason for not helping you is, because you are my enemy." But it is often wrongly used to mean (3), "I intend to help you, not because you are my enemy (but because you are poor, blind, &c.)." In the latter case, not ought to be separated from intend. By distinctly marking the limits to which the influence of not extends, the ambiguity may be removed.

Only is often used ambiguously for alone. "The rest help me to revenge myself; you only advise me to wait." This ought to mean, "you only advise, instead of helping;" but in similar sentences "you only" is often used for "you alone." But see 21.

Or.—When "or" is preceded by a negative, as "I do not want butter or honey," "or" ought not, strictly speaking, to be used like "and," nor like "nor." The strict use of "not ... or" would be as follows:—

"You say you don't want both butter and honey—you want butter or honey; I, on the contrary, do not want butter or honey—I want them both."

Practically, however, this meaning is so rare, that "I don't want butter or honey" is regularly used for "I want neither butter nor honey." But where there is the slightest danger of ambiguity, it is desirable to use nor.

The same ambiguity attends "not ... and." "I do not see Thomas and John" is commonly used for "I see neither Thomas nor John;" but it might mean, "I do not see them both—I see only one of them."

That.—The different uses of "that" produce much ambiguity, e.g. "I am so much surprised by this statement that I am desirous of resigning, that I scarcely know what reply to make." Here it is impossible to tell, till one has read past "resigning," whether the first "that" depends upon "so" or "statement." Write: "The statement that I am desirous of resigning surprises me so much that I scarcely know &c."

5. Be careful how you use "he," "it," "they," "these," &c. (For "which" see 8.) The ambiguity arising from the use of he applying to different persons is well known.

"He told his friend that if he did not feel better in half an hour he thought he had better return." See (6) for remedy.

Much ambiguity is also caused by excessive use of such phrases as in this way, of this sort, &c.

"God, foreseeing the disorders of human nature, has given us certain passions and affections which arise from, or whose objects are, these disorders. Of this sort are fear, resentment, compassion."

Repeat the noun: "Among these passions and affections are fear &c."

Two distinct uses of it may be noted. It, when referring to something that precedes, may be called "retrospective;" but when to something that follows, "prospective." In "Avoid indiscriminate charity: it is a crime," "it" is retrospective.[6] In "It is a crime to give indiscriminately," "it" is prospective.

The prospective "it," if productive of ambiguity, can often be omitted by using the infinitive as a subject: "To give indiscriminately is a crime."

6. Report a speech in the First, not the Third Person, where necessary to avoid ambiguity. Speeches in the third person afford a particular, though very common case, of the general ambiguity mentioned in (5). Instead of "He told his friend that if he did not feel better &c.," write "He said to his friend, 'If, I (or you) don't feel better &c.'"

7. When you use a Participle, as "walking," implying "when," "while," "though," "that," make it clear by the context what is implied.

"Republics, in the first instance, are never desired for their own sakes. I do not think they will finally be desired at all, unaccompanied by courtly graces and good breeding."

Here there is a little doubt whether the meaning is "since they are, or, if they are, unaccompanied."

That or when.—"Men walking (that walk, or when they walk) on ice sometimes fall."

It is better to use "men walking" to mean "men when they walk." If the relative is meant, use "men that walk," instead of the participle.

When the participle precedes the subject, it generally implies a cause: "Seeing this, he retired." Otherwise it generally has its proper participial meaning, e.g. "He retired, keeping his face towards us." If there is any ambiguity, write "on seeing,"—"at the same time, or while, keeping."

8. When using the Relative Pronoun, use "who" and "which" where the meaning is "and he, it, &c.," "for he, it, &c." In other cases use "that," if euphony allows.

"I heard this from the inspector, who (and he) heard it from the guard that travelled with the train."

"Fetch me (all) the books that lie on the table, and also the pamphlets, which (and these) you will find on the floor."

An adherence to this rule would remove much ambiguity. Thus: "There was a public-house next door, which was a great nuisance," means "and this (i.e. the fact of its being next door) was a great nuisance;" whereas that would have meant "Next door was a public-house that (i.e. the public-house) was a great [Pg 18]nuisance." "Who," "which," &c. introduce a new fact about the antecedent, whereas "that" introduces something without which the antecedent is incomplete or undefined. Thus, in the first example above, "inspector" is complete in itself, and "who" introduces a new fact about him; "guard" is incomplete, and requires "that travelled with the train" to complete the meaning.

It is not, and cannot be, maintained that this rule, though observed in Elizabethan English, is observed by our best modern authors. (Probably a general impression that "that" cannot be used to refer to persons has assisted "who" in supplanting "that" as a relative.) But the convenience of the rule is so great that beginners in composition may with advantage adhere to the rule. The following are some of the cases where who and which are mostly used, contrary to the rule, instead of that.

Exceptions:—

9. Do not use redundant "and" before "which."[8]

"I gave him a very interesting book for a present, and which cost me five shillings."

In short sentences the absurdity is evident, but in long sentences it is less evident, and very common.

"A petition was presented for rescinding that portion of the bye-laws which permits application of public money to support [Pg 19]sectarian schools over which ratepayers have no control, this being a violation of the principle of civil and religious liberty, and which the memorialists believe would provoke a determined and conscientious resistance."

Here which ought grammatically to refer to "portion" or "schools." But it seems intended to refer to "violation." Omit "and," or repeat "a violation" before "which," or turn the sentence otherwise.

10. Equivalents for Relative.

(a) Participle.—"Men thirsting (for 'men that thirst') for revenge are not indifferent to plunder." The objection to the participle is that here, as often, it creates a little ambiguity. The above sentence may mean, "men, when they thirst," or "though they thirst," as well as "men that thirst." Often however there is no ambiguity: "I have documents proving this conclusively."

(b) Infinitive.—Instead of "He was the first that entered" you can write "to enter;" for "He is not a man who will act dishonestly," "to act." This equivalent cannot often be used.

(c) Whereby, wherein, &c., can sometimes be used for "by which," "in which," so as to avoid a harsh repetition of "which." "The means whereby this may be effected." But this use is somewhat antiquated.

(d) If.—"The man that does not care for music is to be pitied" can be written (though not so forcibly), "If a man does not care for music, he is to be pitied." It is in long sentences that this equivalent will be found most useful.

(e) And this.—"He did his best, which was all that could be expected," can be written, "and this was all that, &c."

(f) What.—"Let me repeat that which[9] you ought to know, that that which is worth doing is worth doing well." "Let me repeat, what you ought to know, that what is worth doing is worth doing well."

(g) Omission of Relative.—It is sometimes thought ungrammatical to omit the relative, as in "The man (that) you speak of." On the contrary, that when an object (not when a subject) may be omitted, wherever the antecedent and the subject of the relative sentence are brought into juxtaposition by the omission.

10 a'. Repeat the Antecedent in some new form, where there is any ambiguity. This is particularly useful [Pg 20]after a negative: "He said that he would not even hear me, which I confess I had expected." Here the meaning may be, "I had expected that he would," or "that he would not, hear me." Write, "a refusal, or, a favour, that I confess I had expected." See (38).

11. Use particular for general terms.—This is a most important rule. Instead of "I have neither the necessaries of life nor the means of procuring them," write (if you can with truth), "I have not a crust of bread, nor a penny to buy one."

In philosophy and science, where the language ought very often to be inclusive and brief, general and not particular terms must be used.

11 a. Avoid Verbal Nouns where Verbs can be used instead. The disadvantage of the use of Verbal Nouns is this, that, unless they are immediately preceded by prepositions, they are sometimes liable to be confounded with participles. The following is an instance of an excessive use of Verbal Nouns:

"The pretended confession of the secretary was only collusion to lay the jealousies of the king's favouring popery, which still hung upon him, notwithstanding his writing on the Revelation, and affecting to enter on all occasions into controversy, asserting in particular that the Pope was Antichrist."

Write "notwithstanding that he wrote and affected &c."

12. Use a particular Person instead of a class.

"What is the splendour of the greatest monarch compared with the beauty of a flower?" "What is the splendour of Solomon compared with the beauty of a daisy?"

Under this head may come the forcible use of Noun for Adjective: "This fortress is weakness itself."

An excess of this use is lengthy and pedantically bombastic, e.g., the following paraphrase for "in every British colony:"—"under Indian palm-groves, amid Australian gum-trees, in the shadow of African mimosas, and beneath Canadian pines."

13. Use Metaphor instead of literal statement.

"The ship ploughs the sea" is clearer than "the ship cleaves the sea," and shorter than "the ship cleaves the sea as a plough cleaves the land."

[Pg 21]

Of course there are some subjects for which Metaphor should not be used. See (14 a) and (14 b).

14. Do not confuse Metaphor.

"In a moment the thunderbolt was upon them, deluging their country with invaders."

The following is attributed to Sir Boyle Roche: "Mr. Speaker, I smell a rat, I see him brewing in the air; but, mark me, I shall yet nip him in the bud."

14 a. Do not introduce literal statement immediately after Metaphor.

"He was the father of Chemistry, and brother to the Earl of Cork."

14 b. Do not use poetic metaphor to illustrate a prosaic subject. Thus, we may say "a poet soars," or even, though rarely, "a nation soars to greatness," but you could not say "Consols soared to 94½." Even commonplace subjects may be illustrated by metaphor: for it is a metaphor, and quite unobjectionable, to say "Consols mounted, or jumped to 94½." But commonplace subjects must be illustrated by metaphor that is commonplace.

ORDER OF WORDS IN A SENTENCE.

15. Emphatic words must stand in emphatic positions; i.e. for the most part, at the beginning or at the end of the sentence. This rule occasionally supersedes the common rules about position. Thus, the place for an adverb, as a rule, should be between the subject and verb: "He quickly left the room;" but if quickly is to be emphatic, it must come at the beginning or end, as in "I told him to leave the room slowly, but he left quickly."

Adjectives, in clauses beginning with "if" and "though," often come at the beginning for emphasis: "Insolent though he was, he was silenced at last."

[Pg 22]

15 a. Unemphatic words must, as a rule, be kept from the end of the sentence. It is a common fault to break this rule by placing a short and unemphatic predicate at the end of a long sentence.

"To know some Latin, even if it be nothing but a few Latin roots, is useful." Write, "It is useful, &c."

So "the evidence proves how kind to his inferiors he is."

Often, where an adjective or auxiliary verb comes at the end, the addition of an emphatic adverb justifies the position, e.g. above, "is very useful," "he has invariably been."

Exceptions.—Prepositions and pronouns attached to emphatic words need not be moved from the end; e.g. "He does no harm that I hear of." "Bear witness how I loved him."

N.B. In all styles, especially in letter-writing, a final emphasis must not be so frequent as to become obtrusive and monotonous.

15 b. An interrogation sometimes gives emphasis. "No one can doubt that the prisoner, had he been really guilty, would have shown some signs of remorse," is not so emphatic as "Who can doubt, Is it possible to doubt, &c.?"

Contrast "No one ever names Wentworth without thinking of &c." with "But Wentworth,—who ever names him without thinking of those harsh dark features, ennobled by their expression into more than the majesty of an antique Jupiter?"

16. The subject, if unusually emphatic, should often be removed from the beginning of the sentence. The beginning of the sentence is an emphatic position, though mostly not so emphatic as the end. Therefore the principal subject of a sentence, being emphatic, and being wanted early in the sentence to tell us what the sentence is about, comes as a rule, at or near the beginning: "Thomas built this house."

Hence, since the beginning is the usual place for the subject, if we want to emphasize "Thomas" unusually, we must remove "Thomas" from the beginning: "This house was built by Thomas," or "It was Thomas that built this house."

Thus, the emphasis on "conqueror" is not quite so strong in "A mere conqueror ought not to obtain from us the reverence that is due to the great benefactors of mankind," as in "We ought [Pg 23]not to bestow the reverence that is due to the great benefactors of mankind, upon a mere conqueror." Considerable, but less emphasis and greater smoothness (19) will be obtained by writing the sentence thus: "We ought not to bestow upon a mere conqueror &c."

17. The object is sometimes placed before the verb for emphasis. This is most common in antithesis. "Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are ye?" "Some he imprisoned, others he put to death."

Even where there is no antithesis the inversion is not uncommon:

"Military courage, the boast of the sottish German, of the frivolous and prating Frenchman, of the romantic and arrogant Spaniard, he neither possesses nor values."

18. Where several words are emphatic, make it clear which is the most emphatic. Thus, in "The state was made, under the pretence of serving it, in reality the prize of their contention to each of these opposite parties," it is unpleasantly doubtful whether the writer means (1) state or (2) parties to be emphatic.

[Pg 24]

If (1), "As for the state, these two parties, under the pretence of serving it, converted it into a prize for their contention." If (2), write, "Though served in profession, the state was in reality converted into a prize for their contention by these two parties." In (1) parties is subordinated, in (2) state.

Sometimes the addition of some intensifying word serves to emphasize. Thus, instead of "To effect this they used all devices," we can write "To effect this they used every conceivable device." So, if we want to emphasize fidelity in "The business will task your skill and fidelity," we can write "Not only your skill but also your fidelity." This, however, sometimes leads to exaggerations. See (2).

Sometimes antithesis gives emphasis, as in "You do not know this, but you shall know it." Where antithesis cannot be used, the emphasis must be expressed by turning the sentence, as "I will make you know it," or by some addition, as "You shall hereafter know it."

19. Words should be as near as possible to the words with which they are grammatically connected. See Paragraphs 20 to 29. For exceptions see 30.

20. Adverbs should be placed next to the words they are intended to affect. When unemphatic, adverbs come between the subject and the verb, or, if the tense is compound, between the parts of the compound tense: "He quickly left the room;" "He has quickly left the room;" but, when emphatic, after the verb: "He left, or has left, the room quickly."[10] When such a sentence as the latter is followed by a present participle, there arises ambiguity. "I told him to go slowly, but he left the room quickly, dropping the purse on the floor." Does quickly here modify left or dropping? The remedy[11] is, to give the adverb its unemphatic place, "He quickly left the room, dropping &c.," or else to avoid the participle, thus: "He quickly dropped the purse and left the room," or "He dropped the purse and quickly left the room."

21. "Only" requires careful use. The strict[12] rule is, that "only" should be placed before the word affected by it.

[Pg 25]

The following is ambiguous:

"The heavens are not open to the faithful only at intervals."

The best rule is to avoid placing "only" between two emphatic words, and to avoid using "only" where "alone" can be used instead.

22. When "not only" precedes "but also," see that each is followed by the same part of speech.

"He not only gave me advice but also help" is wrong. Write "He gave me, not only advice, but also help." On the other hand, "He not only gave me a grammar, but also lent me a dictionary," is right. Take an instance. "He spoke not only forcibly but also tastefully (adverbs), and this too, not only before a small audience, but also in (prepositions) a large public meeting, and his speeches were not only successful, but also (adjective) worthy of success."

23. "At least," "always," and other adverbial adjuncts, sometimes produce ambiguity.

"I think you will find my Latin exercise, at all events, as good as my cousin's." Does this mean (1) "my Latin exercise, though not perhaps my other exercises;" or (2), "Though not very good, yet, at all events, as good as my cousin's"? Write for (1), "My Latin exercise, at all events, you will find &c." and for (2), "I think you will find my Latin exercise as good as my cousin's, at all events."

[Pg 26]

The remedy is to avoid placing "at all events" between two emphatic words.

As an example of the misplacing of an adverbial adjunct, take "From abroad he received most favourable reports, but in the City he heard that a panic had broken out on the Exchange, and that the funds were fast falling." This ought to mean that the "hearing," and not (as is intended) that the "breaking out of the panic," took place in the City.

24. Nouns should be placed near the nouns that they define. In the very common sentence "The death is announced of Mr. John Smith, an author whose works &c.," the transposition is probably made from a feeling that, if we write "The death of Mr. John Smith is announced," we shall be obliged to begin a new sentence, "He was an author whose works &c." But the difficulty can be removed by writing "We regret to announce, or, we are informed of, the death of Mr. John Smith, an author, &c."

25. Pronouns should follow the nouns to which they refer without the intervention of another noun. Avoid, "John Smith, the son of Thomas Smith, who gave me this book," unless Thomas Smith is the antecedent of who. Avoid also "John supplied Thomas with money: he (John) was very well off."

26. Clauses that are grammatically connected should be kept as close together as possible. (But see 55.) The introduction of parentheses violating this rule often produced serious ambiguity. Thus, in the following: "The result of these observations appears to be in opposition to the view now generally [Pg 27]received in this country, that in muscular effort the substance of the muscle itself undergoes disintegration." Here it is difficult to tell whether the theory of "disintegration" is (1) "the result," or, as the absence of a comma after "be" would indicate, (2) "in opposition to the result of these observations." If (1) is intended, add "and to prove" after "country;" if (2), insert "which is" after "country."

There is an excessive complication in the following:—"It cannot, at all events, if the consideration demanded by a subject of such importance from any one professing to be a philosopher, be given, be denied that &c."

Where a speaker feels that his hearers have forgotten the connection of the beginning of the sentence, he should repeat what he has said; e.g. after the long parenthesis in the last sentence he should recommence, "it cannot, I say, be denied." In writing, however, this licence must be sparingly used.

27. In conditional sentences, the antecedent clauses must be kept distinct from the consequent clauses.—There is ambiguity in "The lesson intended to be taught by these manœuvres will be lost, if the plan of operations is laid down too definitely beforehand, and the affair degenerates into a mere review." Begin, in any case, with the antecedent, "If the plan," &c. Next write, according to the meaning: (1) "If the plan is laid down, and the affair degenerates &c., then the lesson will be lost;" or (2) " ... then the lesson ... will be lost, and the affair degenerates into a mere review."

28. Dependent clauses preceded by "that" should be kept distinct from those that are independent.

Take as an example:

(1) "He replied that he wished to help them, and intended to make preparations accordingly."

This ought not to be used (though it sometimes is, for shortness) to mean:

(2) "He replied ..., and he intended."

In (1), "intended," having no subject, must be supposed to be connected with the nearest preceding verb, in the same mood and tense, that has a subject, i.e. "wished." It follows that (1) is a condensation of:

[Pg 28]

(3) "He replied that he wished ..., and that he intended."

(2), though theoretically free from ambiguity, is practically ambiguous, owing to a loose habit of repeating the subject unnecessarily. It would be better to insert a conjunctional word or a full stop between the two statements. Thus:

(4) "He replied that he wished to help them, and indeed he intended," &c., or "He replied, &c. He intended, &c."

Where there is any danger of ambiguity, use (3) or (4) in preference to (1) or (2).

29. When there are several infinitives, those that are dependent on the same word must be kept distinct from those that are not.

"He said that he wished to take his friend with him to visit the capital and to study medicine." Here it is doubtful whether the meaning is—

"He said that he wished to take his friend with him,

(1) and also to visit the capital and study medicine," or

(2) "that his friend might visit the capital and might also study medicine," or

(3) "on a visit to the capital, and that he also wished to study medicine."

From the three different versions it will be perceived that this ambiguity must be met (a) by using "that" for "to," which allows us to repeat an auxiliary verb [e.g. "might" in (2)], and (b) by inserting conjunctions. As to insertions of conjunctions, see (37).

"In order to," and "for the purpose of," can be used to distinguish (wherever there is any ambiguity) between an infinitive that expresses a purpose, and an infinitive that does not, e.g. "He told his servant to call upon his friend, to (in order to) give him information about the trains, and not to leave him till he started."

30. The principle of suspense. Write your sentence in such a way that, until he has come to the full stop, the reader may feel the sentence to be incomplete. In other words, keep your reader in suspense. Suspense is caused (1) by placing the "if-clause" first, and not last, in a conditional sentence; (2) by placing participles before the words they qualify; (3) by using suspensive conjunctions, e.g. not only, either, partly, on the one hand, in the first place, &c.

The following is an example of an unsuspended sentence. The sense draggles, and it is difficult to keep up one's attention.

"Mr. Pym was looked upon as the man of greatest experience in parliaments, | where he had served very long, | and was always a man of business, | being an officer in the Exchequer, | and of a [Pg 29]good reputation generally, | though known to be inclined to the Puritan party; yet not of those furious resolutions (Mod. Eng. so furiously resolved) against the Church as the other leading men were, | and wholly devoted to the Earl of Bedford,—who had nothing of that spirit."

The foregoing sentence might have ended at any one of the eight points marked above. When suspended it becomes:—

"Mr. Pym, owing to his long service in Parliament in the Exchequer, was esteemed above all others for his Parliamentary experience and for his knowledge of business. He had also a good reputation generally; for, though openly favouring the Puritan party, he was closely devoted to the Earl of Bedford, and, like the Earl, had none of the fanatical spirit manifested against the Church by the other leading men."

30 a. It is a violation of the principle of Suspense to introduce unexpectedly, at the end of a long sentence, some short and unemphatic clause beginning with (a) " ... not" or (b) " ... which."

(a) "This reform has already been highly beneficial to all classes of our countrymen, and will, I am persuaded, encourage among us industry, self-dependence, and frugality, and not, as some say, wastefulness."

Write "not, as some say, wastefulness, but industry, self-dependence, and frugality."

(b) "After a long and tedious journey, the last part of which was a little dangerous owing to the state of the roads, we arrived safely at York, which is a fine old town."

Exception.—When the short final clause is intended to be unexpectedly unemphatic, it comes in appropriately, with something of the sting of an epigram. See (42). Thus:

"The old miser said that he should have been delighted to give the poor fellow a shilling, but most unfortunately he had left his purse at home—a habit of his."

Suspense naturally throws increased emphasis on the words for which we are waiting, i.e. on the end of the sentence. It has been pointed out above that a monotony of final emphasis is objectionable, especially in letter writing and conversation.

32. In a long conditional sentence put the "if-clause," antecedent, or protasis, first.

Everyone will see the flatness of "Revenge thy father's most unnatural murder, if thou didst ever love him," as compared with the suspense that forces an expression of agony from Hamlet in—

"Ghost. If thou didst ever thy dear father love—
Hamlet. O, God!
Ghost. Revenge his foul and most unnatural murder."

The effect is sometimes almost ludicrous when the consequent is long and complicated, and when it precedes the antecedent or "if-clause." "I should be delighted to introduce you to my friends, and to show you the objects of interest in our city, and the beautiful scenery in the neighbourhood, if you were here." Where the "if-clause" comes last, it ought to be very emphatic: "if you were only here."

The introduction of a clause with "if" or "though" in the middle of a sentence may often cause ambiguity, especially when a great part of the sentence depends on "that:" "His enemies answered that, for the sake of preserving the public peace, they would keep quiet for the present, though he declared that cowardice was the motive of the delay, and that for this reason they would put off the trial to a more convenient season." See (27).

33. Suspense[13] is gained by placing a Participle or Adjective that qualifies the Subject, before the Subject.

[Pg 31]

"Deserted by his friends, he was forced to have recourse to those that had been his enemies." Here, if we write, "He, deserted by his friends, was forced &c.," he is unduly emphasized; and if we write, "He was forced to have recourse to his enemies, having been deserted by his friends," the effect is very flat.

Of course we might sometimes write "He was deserted and forced &c." But this cannot be done where the "desertion" is to be not stated but implied.

Often, when a participle qualifying the subject is introduced late in the sentence, it causes positive ambiguity: "With this small force the general determined to attack the foe, flushed with recent victory and rendered negligent by success."

34. Suspensive Conjunctions, e.g. "either," "not only," "on the one hand," add clearness.—Take the following sentence:—"You must take this extremely perilous course, in which success is uncertain, and failure disgraceful, as well as ruinous, or else the liberty of your country is endangered." Here, the meaning is liable to be misunderstood, till the reader has gone half through the sentence. Write "Either you must," &c., and the reader is, from the first, prepared for an alternative. Other suspensive conjunctions or phrases are partly, for our part; in the first place; it is true; doubtless; of course; though; on the one hand.

35. Repeat the Subject when the omission would cause ambiguity or obscurity.—The omission is particularly likely to cause obscurity after a Relative standing as Subject:—

"He professes to be helping the nation, which in reality is suffering from his flattery, and (he? or it?) will not permit anyone else to give it advice."

The Relative should be repeated when it is the Subject of several Verbs. "All the pleasing illusions which made power gentle and obedience liberal, which harmonized the different shades of life, and which, by a bland assimilation, incorporated into politics the sentiments that beautify and soften private society, are to be dissolved by this new conquering empire of light and reason."

[Pg 32]

36. Repeat a Preposition after an intervening Conjunction, especially if a Verb and an Object also intervene.

"He forgets the gratitude that he owes to those that helped all his companions when he was poor and uninfluential, and (to) John Smith in particular." Here, omit to, and the meaning may be "that helped all his companions, and John Smith in particular." The intervention of the verb and object, "helped" and "companions," causes this ambiguity.

37. When there are several Verbs at some distance from a Conjunction on which they depend, repeat the Conjunction.[14]

"When we look back upon the havoc that two hundred years have made in the ranks of our national authors—and, above all, (when) we refer their rapid disappearance to the quick succession of new competitors—we cannot help being dismayed at the prospect that lies before the writers of the present day."

Here omit "when," and we at once substitute a parenthetical statement for what is really a subordinate clause.

In reporting a speech or opinion, "that" must be continually repeated, to avoid the danger of confusing what the writer says with what others say.

"We might say that the Cæsars did not persecute the Christians; (that) they only punished men who were charged, rightly or wrongly, with burning Rome, and committing the foulest abominations in secret assemblies; and (that) the refusal to throw frankincense on the altar of Jupiter was not the crime, but only evidence of the crime." But see (6 b).

37 a. Repeat Verbs after the conjunctions "than," "as," &c.

"I think he likes me better than you;" i.e. either "than you like me," or "he likes you."

"Cardinal Richelieu hated Buckingham as sincerely as did the Spaniard Olivares." Omit "did," and you cause ambiguity.

38. If the sentence is so long that it is difficult to keep the thread of meaning unbroken, repeat the subject, or some other emphatic word, or a summary of what has been said.

"Gold and cotton, banks and railways, crowded ports, and populous cities—these are not the elements that constitute a great nation."

[Pg 33]

This repetition (though useful and, when used in moderation, not unpleasant) is more common with speakers than with writers, and with slovenly speakers than with good speakers.

"The country is in such a condition, that if we delay longer some fair measure of reform, sufficient at least to satisfy the more moderate, and much more, if we refuse all reform whatsoever—I say, if we adopt so unwise a policy, the country is in such a condition that we may precipitate a revolution."

Where the relative is either implied (in a participle) or repeated, the antecedent must often be repeated also. In the following sentence we have the Subject repeated not only in the final summary, but also as the antecedent:—

"But if there were, in any part of the world, a national church regarded as heretical by four-fifths of the nation committed to its care; a church established and maintained by the sword; a church producing twice as many riots as conversions; a church which, though possessing great wealth and power, and though long backed by persecuting laws, had, in the course of many generations, been found unable to propagate its doctrines, and barely able to maintain its ground; a church so odious that fraud and violence, when used against its clear rights of property, were generally regarded as fair play; a church whose ministers were preaching to desolate walls, and with difficulty obtaining their lawful subsistence by the help of bayonets,—such a church, on our principles, could not, we must own, be defended."

39. It is a help to clearness, when the first part of the sentence prepares the way for the middle and the middle for the end, in a kind of ascent. This ascent is called "climax."

In the following there are two climaxes, each of which has three terms:—

"To gossip(a) is a fault(b); to libel(a'), a crime(b'); to slander(a''), a sin(b'')."

In the following, there are several climaxes, and note how they contribute to the clearness of a long sentence:—

"Man, working, has contrived(a) the Atlantic Cable, but I declare that it astonishes(b) me far more to think that for his mere amusement(c), that to entertain a mere idle hour(c'), he has created(a') 'Othello' and 'Lear,' and I am more than astonished, I am awe-struck(b'), at that inexplicable elasticity of his nature which enables him, instead of turning away(d) from calamity and grief(e), or instead of merely defying(d') them, actually to make them the material of his amusement(d''), and to draw from the wildest agonies of the human spirit(e') a pleasure which is [Pg 34]not only not cruel(f), but is in the highest degree pure and ennobling(f')."

40. When the thought is expected to ascend and yet descends, feebleness and sometimes confusion is the result. The descent is called "bathos."

"What pen can describe the tears, the lamentations, the agonies, the animated remonstrances of the unfortunate prisoners?"

"She was a woman of many accomplishments and virtues, graceful in her movements, winning in her address, a kind friend, a faithful and loving wife, a most affectionate mother, and she played beautifully on the pianoforte."

40 a. A new construction should not be introduced without cause.—A sudden and apparently unnecessary change of construction causes awkwardness and roughness at least, and sometimes breaks the flow of the sentence so seriously as to cause perplexity. Thus, write "virtuous and accomplished," or "of many virtues and accomplishments," not "of many virtues and accomplished;" "riding or walking" or "on foot or horseback," not "on foot or riding." In the same way, do not put adjectives and participles, active and passive forms of verbs, in too close juxtaposition. Avoid such sentences as the following:—

"He had good reason to believe that the delay was not an accident (accidental) but premeditated, and for supposing (to suppose, or else, for believing, above) that the fort, though strong both by art and naturally (nature), would be forced by the treachery of the governor and the indolent (indolence of the) general to capitulate within a week."

[Pg 35]

"They accused him of being bribed (receiving bribes from) by the king and unwilling (neglecting) to take the city."

41. Antithesis adds force, and often clearness.—The meaning of liberal in the following sentence is ascertained by the antithesis:—

"All the pleasing illusions which made power(a) gentle(b) and obedience(a') liberal(b') ... are now to be destroyed."

There is a kind of proportion. As gentleness is to power, so liberality (in the sense here used) is to obedience. Now gentleness is the check on the excess of power; therefore liberal here applies to that which checks the excess of obedience, i.e. checks servility. Hence liberal here means "free."

The contrast also adds force. "They aimed at the rule(a), not at the destruction(a'), of their country. They were men of great civil(b) and great military(b') talents, and, if the terror(c), the ornament(c') of their age."

Excessive antithesis is unnatural and wearisome:—

"Who can persuade where treason(a) is above reason(a'), and might(b) ruleth right(b'), and it is had for lawful(c) whatsoever is lustful(c'), and commotioners(d) are better than commissioners(d'), and common woe(e) is named common wealth(e')?"

42. Epigram.—It has been seen that the neglect of climax results in lameness. Sometimes the suddenness of the descent produces amusement: and when the descent is intentional and very sudden, the effect is striking as well as amusing. Thus:—

(1) "You are not only not vicious, you are virtuous," is a climax.

(2) "You are not vicious, you are vice," is not climax, nor is it bathos: it is epigram.[15]

Epigram may be defined as a "short sentence expressing truth under an amusing appearance of incongruity." It is often antithetical.

There is a sort of implied antithesis in:—

"He is full of information—(but flat also) like yesterday's Times."

"Verbosity is cured (not by a small, but) by a large vocabulary."

[Pg 36]

The name of epigram may sometimes be given to a mere antithesis; e.g. "An educated man should know something of everything, and everything of something."

43. Let each sentence have one, and only one, principal subject of thought.

"This great and good man died on the 17th of September, 1683, leaving behind him the memory of many noble actions, and a numerous family, of whom three were sons; one of them, George, the eldest, heir to his father's virtues, as well as to his principal estates in Cumberland, where most of his father's property was situate, and shortly afterwards elected member for the county, which had for several generations returned this family to serve in Parliament." Here we have (1) the "great and good man," (2) "George," (3) "the county," disputing which is to be considered the principal subject. Two, if not three sentences should have been made, instead of one. Carefully avoid a long sentence like this, treating of many different subjects on one level. It is called heterogeneous.

44. The connection between different sentences must be kept up by Adverbs used as Conjunctions, or by means of some other connecting words at the beginning of each sentence.—Leave out the conjunctions and other connecting words, and it will be seen that the following sentences lose much of their meaning:—

"Pitt was in the army for a few months in time of peace. His biographer (accordingly) insists on our confessing, that, if the young cornet had remained in the service, he would have been one of the ablest commanders that ever lived. (But) this is not all. Pitt (, it seems,) was not merely a great poet in esse and a great general in posse, but a finished example of moral excellence.... (The truth is, that) there scarcely ever lived a person who had so little claim to this sort of praise as Pitt. He was (undoubtedly) a great man. (But) his was not a complete and well-proportioned greatness. The public life of Hampden or of Somers resembles a regular drama which can be criticised as a whole, and every scene of which is to be viewed in connection with the main action. The public life of Pitt (, on the other hand,) is," &c.

The following are some of the most common connecting adverbs, or connecting phrases: (1) expressing consequence, similarity, repetition, or resumption of a subject—accordingly, therefore, then, naturally, so that, thus, in this way, again, once more, to resume, to continue, to sum up, in fact, upon this; (2) expressing opposition—nevertheless, in spite of this, yet, still, however, but, on the contrary, on the other hand; (3) expressing suspension—undoubtedly ... but;[Pg 37] indeed ... yet; on the one hand ... on the other; partly ... partly; some ... others.

Avoid a style like that of Bishop Burnet, which strings together a number of sentences with "and" or "so," or with no conjunction at all:

"Blake with the fleet happened to be at Malaga, before he made war upon Spain; and some of his seamen went ashore, and met the Host carried about; and not only paid no respect to it, but laughed at those who did." Write "When Blake &c."

45. The connection between two long sentences sometimes requires a short intervening sentence, showing the transition of thought.

"Without force or opposition, it (chivalry) subdued the fierceness of pride and power; it obliged sovereigns to submit to the soft collar[16] of social esteem, compelled stern authority to submit to elegance, and gave a dominating vanquisher of laws to be subdued by manners. But now (all is to be changed:) all the pleasing illusions which made power gentle and obedience liberal, which harmonized the different shades of life, and which, by a bland assimilation, incorporated into politics the sentiments that beautify and soften private society, are to be dissolved by this new conquering empire of light and reason." If the words italicized were omitted, the transition would be too abrupt: the conjunction but alone would be insufficient.

BREVITY.

46. Metaphor is briefer than literal statement. See (13).

"The cares and responsibilities of a sovereign often disturb his sleep," is not so brief as "Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown," where the effect of care on the mind is assimilated to the effect of a heavy crown pressing on the head.

47. General terms are briefer, though less forcible, than particular terms. Thus: "He devours literature, no matter of what kind," is shorter than, "Novels or sermons, poems or histories, no matter what, he devours them all."

[Pg 38]

47 a. A phrase may be expressed by a word.

"These impressions can never be forgotten, i.e. are indelible."

"The style of this book is of such a nature that it cannot be understood, i.e. unintelligible."

The words "of such a nature that" are often unnecessarily inserted. See the extract from Sir Archibald Alison.

48. Participles can often be used as brief (though sometimes ambiguous) equivalents of phrases containing Conjunctions and Verbs.

"Hearing (when he heard) this, he advanced." See (7) for more instances. So "phrases containing conjunctions" means "phrases that contain conjunctions." "This done, (for, when this was done) he retired."

Sometimes the participle "being" is omitted. "France at our doors, he sees no danger nigh," for "France being" or "though France is."

49. Participles and participial adjectives may be used like Adjectives, as equivalents for phrases containing the Relative.

"The never-ceasing wind," "the clamouring ocean," "the drenching rain," are instances. The licence of inventing participial adjectives by adding -ing to a noun, is almost restricted to poetry. You could not write "the crannying wind" in prose.

50. A statement may sometimes be briefly implied instead of being expressed at length. Thus, instead of "The spirit of Christianity was humanizing, and therefore &c.," or "Christianity, since it was (or being) of a humanizing spirit, discouraged &c.," we can write more briefly and effectively, "Gladiatorial shows were first discouraged, and finally put down, by the humanizing spirit of Christianity." So instead of "The nature of youth is thoughtless and sanguine, and therefore &c.," we can write, "The danger of the voyage was depreciated and the beauty of the island exaggerated by the thoughtless nature of youth."

Sometimes a mere name or epithet implies a statement. "It was in vain that he offered the Swiss terms: war was deliberately preferred by the hardy mountaineers," i.e. "by the Swiss, because they were mountaineers and hardy." "The deed was applauded by all honest men, but the Government affected to treat it as [Pg 39]murder, and set a price upon the head of (him whom they called) the assassin." "The conqueror of Austerlitz might be expected to hold different language from the prisoner of St. Helena," i.e. "Napoleon when elated by the victory of Austerlitz," and "Napoleon when depressed by his imprisonment at St. Helena."

51. Conjunctions may be omitted. The omission gives a certain forcible abruptness, e.g. "You say this: I (on the other hand) deny it."

When sentences are short, as in Macaulay's writings, conjunctions may be advantageously omitted.

51 a. The Imperative Mood may be used for "if."

"Strip (for, if you strip) Virtue of the awful authority she derives from the general reverence of mankind, and you rob her of half her majesty."

52. Apposition may be used so as to convert two sentences into one.

"We called at the house of a person to whom we had letters of introduction, a musician, and, what is more, a good friend to all young students of music." This is as clear as, and briefer than, "He was a musician, &c."

53. Condensation may be effected by not repeating (1) the common subject of several verbs, (2) the common object of several verbs or prepositions.

(1) "He resided here for many years, and, after he had won the esteem of all the citizens, (he) died," &c. So, (2) "He came to, and was induced to reside in, this city," is shorter than "He came to this city, and was induced to reside in it."

Such condensation often causes obscurity, and, even where there is no obscurity, there is a certain harshness in pausing on light, unemphatic words, such as to, in, &c., as in the first example.

54. Tautology.—The fault of repeating the same word several times unnecessarily is called tautology, e.g.:

"This is a painful circumstance; it is a circumstance that I [Pg 40]much regret, and he also will much regret the circumstance." But the fault is not to be avoided by using different words to mean the same thing, as, "This is a painful event; it is a circumstance that I much regret, and he also will greatly lament the occurrence." The true remedy is to arrange the words in such a manner that there may be no unnecessary repetition, thus: "This is a painful circumstance, a circumstance that causes me, and will cause him, deep regret."

The repetition of the same meaning in slightly different words is a worse fault than the repetition of the same word. See, for examples, the extract from Sir Archibald Alison, at the end of the book. Thus "A burning thirst for conquests is a characteristic of this nation. It is an ardent passion that &c." Other instances are—"The universal opinion of all men;" "His judgment is so infallible that it is never deceived," &c.

55. Parenthesis may be used with advantage to brevity.

"We are all (and who would not be?) offended at the treatment we have received," is shorter and more forcible than the sentence would have been if the parenthesis had been appended in a separate sentence: "Who, indeed, would not be offended?"

Extreme care must, however, be taken that a parenthesis may not obscure the meaning of a long sentence.

56. Caution: let clearness be the first consideration. It is best, at all events for beginners, not to aim so much at being brief, or forcible, as at being perfectly clear. Horace says, "While I take pains to be brief, I fall into obscurity," and it may easily be seen that several of the rules for brevity interfere with the rules for clearness.

Forcible style springs from (1) vividness and (2) exactness of thought, and from a corresponding (1) vividness and (2) exactness in the use of words.

(1) When you are describing anything, endeavour to see it and describe it as you see it. If you are writing about a man who was killed, see the man before you, and ask, was he executed, cut down, run through the body, butchered, shot, or hanged? If you are writing about the capture of a city, was the city stormed, surprised, surrendered, starved out, or demolished before surrender? Was an army repelled, defeated, routed, crushed, or annihilated?

(2) Exactness in the use of words requires an exact knowledge of their meanings and differences. This is a study by itself, and cannot be discussed here.[17]

[Pg 41]

EXERCISES

For an explanation of the manner in which these Exercises are intended to be used, see the Preface.

A number in brackets by itself, or followed by a letter, e.g. (43), (40 a), refers to the Rules.

Letters by themselves in brackets, e.g. (b), refer to the explanations or hints appended to each sentence.

N.B..—(10 a) refers to the first section of Rule (10); (10 a') to the Rule following Rule (10).

1. "Pleasure and excitement had more attractions for him than (a) (36) (37 a) his friend, and the two companions became estranged (15 a) gradually."

(a) Write (1) "than for his friend," or (2) "than had his friend," "had more attractions than his friend."

2. "(a) He soon grew tired of solitude even in that beautiful scenery, (36) the pleasures of the retirement (8) which he had once pined for, and (36) leisure which he could use to no good purpose, (a) (30) being (15) restless by nature."

(a) This sentence naturally stops at "purpose." Also "being restless" seems (wrongly) to give the reason why "leisure" could not be employed. Begin "Restless by nature...."

3. "The opponents of the Government are naturally, and not (a) (40 a) without justification, elated at the failure of the bold attempt to return two supporters of the Government at the recent election, (b) (10 a') which is certainly to be regretted."

(a) "unjustifiably." (b) Write, for "which," either (1) "an attempt that &c.," or (2) "a failure that &c."

4. "Carelessness in the Admiralty departments has co-operated with Nature to weaken the moral power of a Government that particularly needs to be thought efficient in (a) (5) this[Pg 42] respect, (b) (29) to counterbalance a general distrust of its excessive desire (c) (47 a) to please everybody in Foreign Affairs."

(a) Write "the Navy." (b) Instead of "to" write "in order to," so as to distinguish the different infinitives, (c) "obsequiousness."

5. "(a) He was sometimes supported by Austria, who, oddly enough, appears under Count Beust to have been more friendly to Italy than (37 a) France, (30) in this line of action."

(a) Begin with "In this line of action." Why? (b) Write "than was France" or "than France was."

6. "There was something so startling in (a) (5) this assertion, (a) (4) that the discoveries of previous investigators were to be (b) (47 a) treated as though they had never been made, and (4) that one who had not yet (47 a) attained the age of manhood had superseded the grey-headed philosophers (8) who had for centuries patiently sought after the truth, (4) that (a) (5) it naturally provoked derision."

(a) "This," "that," and "it," cause a little perplexity. Write "The startling assertion that the discoveries...." (b) "ignored." (c) "a mere youth," "a mere stripling."

7. "One of the recommendations (on which very (a) (26) (47, a) much depended) of the Commission was that a council in each province should establish smaller councils, each to have the oversight of a small district, and (b) (37) report to a central council on the state of Education in (c) (5) it."

(a) Write "cardinal recommendations." Derive "cardinal." (b) Write, either (1) "and should report," or (2) "and to report." (c) Write "in its province," or "district."

8. "At this (a) (1) period an (b) (11) event (c) (1) transpired that destroyed the last hopes of peace. The king fell from his horse and died two hours after the fall (d) (30), which was occasioned by his horse's stumbling on a mole-hill, while he was on his return from reviewing his soldiers."

(a) What is a "period"? (b) Express the particular kind of event ("accident"). (c) What is the meaning of "transpired"? (d) Transpose thus: "While the king was on his return ... his horse ...; the king fell and &c." The cause should precede the effect.

9. "He determined (c) on selling all his estates, and, as soon as this was done (40 a), to (c) quit the country, (a) (33) believing that his honour demanded this sacrifice and (40) (40 a) in (b) the hope of satisfying his creditors."

(a) Begin with "Believing that &c." (b) "hoping thereby to satisfy &c." (c) "to sell" or "on quitting.".

[Pg 43]

10. "He read patiently on, Leading Articles, Foreign Correspondence, Money Article and all; (a) (43) during which his father fell asleep, and he (b) went in search of his sister."

Point out the absurdity of "during which" applied to the last part of the sentence. (a) "Meanwhile." (b) Insert "then."