Words and Phrases to Kill: a writing thread

[gauchecritic]

Gauche, if all else fails, you could fall back on my method of determining whether something is passive or active: I run it through my MS Word STYLE & GRAMMAR checker. It does a surprisingly good job of finding dem passive little bastards. Of course, then it's up whether to give 'em the thumbs up and let well enough alone or the old thumbs down and try a rewrite.

Rumple Foreskin

Which is probably the reason that I don't understand what it's about. Whenever I've used the checker it comes back with about 3 or maybe 4 passive constructions and I can't really see any reason to change them.

 

[Guest]

Great thread, definitely going in the archives.

As for this passive voice business, I've never quite understood it, either. I always have a handful come up, but can never think of a better way to put them, so just leave 'em as is.

 

[Rumple Foreskin]

Which is probably the reason that I don't understand what it's about. Whenever I've used the checker it comes back with about 3 or maybe 4 passive constructions and I can't really see any reason to change them.

Lou said something similar. And in those cases, they shouldn't be. Passive isn't a nasty word, and shouldn't trigger an automatic deletion. It's a subjective call, a matter of style. However, most agents and editors seem to think active voice makes for a better read than passive and recommend keeping its use to a minimum.

Sometimes it's a tough call. In the story I'm working on for the Earth Day contest, this is one of the sentences I used in the first draft to describe the protag: Truth be told, she was also very attractive in a ripe, luscious, earth mother, knee-buckling erotic, Sophia Loren sort of way.

According to Word, that sentence is passive. This is a possible, active alternative: It didn’t hurt that men found her attractive, in a ripe, luscious, earth mother, knee-buckling erotic, Sophia Loren sort of way.

Rumple Foreskin

 

[BlackShanglan]

The problem with Word is that it's moderately useful, but can get things wrong. I think that your sentence was fine the first way. The worst grammar I've ever seen was in a paper in which the author uncritically accepted all Word changes.

Alas, there is no real shortcut in grammar.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

Frankly, I'm surprised that anyone uses the MSWord grammar checker. It hates my style, and so I hate it right back.

I use it only to look for double periods and obvious gaffes like that.

 

[carsonshepherd]

I don't have a grammar checker on my WP. Don't want one. That's why I have an editor

 

[Rumple Foreskin]

carsonshepherd: I don't have a grammar checker on my WP. Don't want one. That's why I have an editor

--

dr_mabeuse: Frankly, I'm surprised that anyone uses the MSWord grammar checker. It hates my style, and so I hate it right back.

I use it only to look for double periods and obvious gaffes like that.

--

BlackShanglan: The problem with Word is that it's moderately useful, but can get things wrong. I think that your sentence was fine the first way. The worst grammar I've ever seen was in a paper in which the author uncritically accepted all Word changes.

--

May wild jackasses defile the grave of my maternal grandmother if I ever suggest anyone uncritically accept the Word spelling & grammar checker suggestions. However, if it's been set-up properly, casual fiction, and the user has told it what to check and what to leave alone, it can help some people. I like using it to check for reading ease and grade levels in addition to passive use.

Different strokes for different folks. (Of course, some of us here at AH are way more different than most folks.)

Rumple Foreskin