Writers' Vocabulary - Faulkner vs Hemingway

[Zeb_Carter]

Personally, I write what I would like to read. I use what I think is the correct word(s) to convey the meaning to the reader and tell the story.

I start reading a story that has more words and flourishes than an announcement of the King taking the throne...back click. Simply tell the story. Unless of course it's a period piece, but I don't write period pieces.

I might have a large vocabulary, but my readers might not. Why confuse them with words that can be conveyed by simpler words.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Hmm, I've not read Faulkner and I've not read Hemingway. I wonder if Patrick White and Kurt Vonnegut run to a similar analogy?

 

[Carnal_Flower]

I see the point but I don't think Faulkner is a good choice. He did not use complex, technical archaic words. He's very hard to read sometimes because of how he messed with time, perspective and narrative. If anything he chose extremely colloquial language, spoken words, and he did not strive for clarity.

If he had a character with unclear thoughts he would try to reproduce the mess and confusion, not clean it up.

A lot of his stuff esp his shirt stories are perfectly straightforward. But vocab really isn't the issue.

As to the OP question, it's lit...

Hmm, I've not read Faulkner and I've not read Hemingway. I wonder if Patrick White and Kurt Vonnegut run to a similar analogy?

 

[NOIRTRASH]

MORE
http://library.guilford.edu/c.php?g=111810&p=723924

 

[NOIRTRASH]

IMHO Hemingway and Faulkner each wrote ONE book worth a damn.

HEMINGWAY:THE OLD MAN AND THE SEA

FAULKNER: A LIGHT IN AUGUST

 

[TxRad]

As in all things, use the KISS principle.

Keep It Simple Stupid.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

Yes, Absalom, Absalom is a worthless work of literature no one should ever read.

IMHO Hemingway and Faulkner each wrote ONE book worth a damn.

HEMINGWAY:THE OLD MAN AND THE SEA

FAULKNER: A LIGHT IN AUGUST

 

[Carnal_Flower]

Hmm there are some wordy passages there in Faulkner. I must have blanked those out.



QUOTE=NOIRTRASH;80892140]MORE
http://library.guilford.edu/c.php?g=111810&p=723924[/QUOTE]

 

[rjordan]

??? That's got the trend turned around from what I posted. It presumably is because the increased pace of the world in the electronic era has led to readers wanting it shorter and more simple--the way Reader's Digest called it half a century ago.

I made up a "conclusion" just like the conclusion that the general reading level in popular literature is going down because of computers/internet. It's a popular anecdote in some publishing circles, but it doesn't say much.

rj

 

[MindsMirror]

We both have large vocabularies and no telling how much overlap. ( 80-90% by various test estimates - here's one http://testyourvocab.com).

So the difficulty is in knowing what others don't know. What might be simple for some might be difficult for others. There are a surprisingly large number of small one or two syllable words that fall into the more difficult category.

Are there off-line tools to check the difficulty level of what you've written? -MM

 

[NotWise]

Are there off-line tools to check the difficulty level of what you've written? -MM

The are common tools both online and offline for checking the reading level of text, but the common measures do not check the difficulty of the vocabulary. They use sentence length and word length (measured either as syllables or as number of words) and are calibrated to different kinds of text. The Flesch-Kindcaid reading level, for instance, is very popular, but it was calibrated for technical manuals with a limited range of reading difficulty. It probably shouldn't be used with fiction.

If you use any Unix-like system then the two utilities "diction" and "style" are readily available for off-line use. "style" checks reading difficulty and word usage. "diction" looks for grammatical errors and common word usage problems. I image that are similar utilities for Windows and that there probably are also utilities to check the vocabulary.

 

[MindsMirror]

If you use any Unix-like system then the two utilities "diction" and "style" are readily available for off-line use. "style" checks reading difficulty and word usage. "diction" looks for grammatical errors and common word usage problems. I image that are similar utilities for Windows and that there probably are also utilities to check the vocabulary.

We tried those command line tools a few years ago, but they don't really isolate vocabulary. We've also tried the Linguist add-on for LibreOffice, but its very basic and again it isn't focused on the level of the vocabulary being used.

 

[Hypoxia]

I just gargled for WINDOWS DICTION CHECK. The first return is LanguageTool.Org with downloads:

* For LibreOffice and OpenOffice (56 MB, Requires Java 8+)
* Stand-alone for your Desktop (92 MB, Requires Java 8+)
* For Firefox, Browser Add-on
* For Chrome, Browser Add-on

I've not tried it but it seems a likely place to start. I'll grab that OpenOffice package now.

 

[NOIRTRASH]

Generally speaking, avoid words with 3 or more syllables (adverbs are the great offenders), and don't write stories that read like SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN.

 

[Kantarii]

As in all things, use the KISS principle.

Keep It Simple Stupid.

KISS? And here I thought you were going to bust out singing "God of Thunder", "Detroit Rock City", or "Heaven's on fire". Kant

"The spell you're under will slowly rob you of your virgin soul!"

 

[MindsMirror]

I just gargled for WINDOWS DICTION CHECK. The first return is LanguageTool.Org with downloads:

* For LibreOffice and OpenOffice

I've not tried it but it seems a likely place to start. I'll grab that OpenOffice package now.

We use LibreOffice and the LanguageTool add-on.
* LibreOffice is great! There is some concern that the OpenOffice package may go away. Either will run on most every operating system.
* LanguageTool add-on is very good, but doesn't help with determining the overall vocabulary level.
* Linguist add-on is okay and gives a general feel for counts and statistics, but doesn't focus in on words that might be too far off the norm.

* OpenOffice may shutdown http://fortune.com/2016/09/04/openoffice-possible-shutdown/

 

[sr71plt]

I see the point but I don't think Faulkner is a good choice. He did not use complex, technical archaic words.

Faulkner is taught as an example of dense language (and Hemingway as terse language), so I think the reference is appropriate.

I haven't read much of Faulkner, although he was all the cat's pajamas when I entered college, as he'd just left there as writer in residence--and, without knowing it, when I ultimately retired I almost bought the house where he wrote The Reivers (his last book and for which he received the Pultizer Prize). Dense writing was in style in the late 50s and early 60s.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

I've read a ton of Faulkner, taught at various levels for various reasons.

Dense, maybe, but full of archaic, technical, excessively precise words?

Maybe, in some passages of some novels I tuned out. He was not an intellectual by any means

Muddy drawers comes to mind

Faulkner is taught as an example of dense language (and Hemingway as terse language), so I think the reference is appropriate.

I haven't read much of Faulkner, although he was all the cat's pajamas when I entered college, as he'd just left there as writer in residence--and, without knowing it, when I ultimately retired I almost bought the house where he wrote The Reivers (his last book and for which he received the Pultizer Prize). Dense writing was in style in the late 50s and early 60s.

 

[NotWise]

We use LibreOffice and the LanguageTool add-on.
* LibreOffice is great! There is some concern that the OpenOffice package may go away. Either will run on most every operating system.
* LanguageTool add-on is very good, but doesn't help with determining the overall vocabulary level.
* Linguist add-on is okay and gives a general feel for counts and statistics, but doesn't focus in on words that might be too far off the norm.

I use LibreOffice and the LanguageTool. The tool works well without being a grammar nazi; it does about the same thing as the old "diction" utility but is a lot easier to use. I'm not familiar with any other tool for LibreOffice that is specific to vocabulary.

One of the nice things about the "style" and "diction" utilities is that their manuals actually explain how they work and how to interpret their results. They do also have some problems, at least one of which relates to the age of the software.

I hadn't heard that OpenOffice might go away. I do understand that when Apache picked up OpenOffice from Oracle that most of the developers went with the LibreOffice fork. LibreOffice development is fairly active; I don't know if OpenOffice is as active.

 

[Handley_Page]

I just gargled for WINDOWS DICTION CHECK. The first return is LanguageTool.Org with downloads:

* For LibreOffice and OpenOffice (56 MB, Requires Java 8+)
* Stand-alone for your Desktop (92 MB, Requires Java 8+)
* For Firefox, Browser Add-on
* For Chrome, Browser Add-on

I've not tried it but it seems a likely place to start. I'll grab that OpenOffice package now.

I can recommend "JARTE", which is free and is a 'clip-on' thing fitting over the top of Windows Notepad. It has a basic dictionary and stuff, saving the file as RTF.

And I've not read Faulkner or Hemingway, either.

 

[Tio_Narratore]

Keep it simple can be very stupid. I prefer "keep it appropriate," both for the story and for the audience. I would hardly think an osteologist (sorry, James, I know, it's five syllables), for example, would refer to "neck bone" when speaking to a peer, or even to anyone with a basic education in high school biology.

 

[Hypoxia]

I can recommend "JARTE", which is free and is a 'clip-on' thing fitting over the top of Windows Notepad. It has a basic dictionary and stuff, saving the file as RTF.

JARTE is my main editor, a simple yet powerful multi-tab tool that writes DOC, RTF, and TXT files and reads DOCX. Its WordWeb dictionary-thesaurus app is great. But it's not handy for spelling / grammar checks. I run my stories through an old version of WORD for basic screening.

 

[NOIRTRASH]

Keep it simple can be very stupid. I prefer "keep it appropriate," both for the story and for the audience. I would hardly think an osteologist (sorry, James, I know, it's five syllables), for example, would refer to "neck bone" when speaking to a peer, or even to anyone with a basic education in high school biology.

Learned people talk out their asses, to conceal the facts and their ignorance.

 

[Tio_Narratore]

Learned people talk out their asses, to conceal the facts and their ignorance.

That explains a lot about your stories, James; never use words you learned after Kindergarten.

But on a more serious note, I presume this is...

JBJ's Skeletal Anatomy Lesson

 

[NOIRTRASH]

That explains a lot about your stories, James; never use words you learned after Kindergarten.

But on a more serious note, I presume this is...

JBJ's Skeletal Anatomy Lesson

Tio I'm twice as smart as you, so don't make me embarrass you.

Youre the Coyote, and I'm the Roadrunner. Beep beep