• Writing as Process
• Kinds of Writing
• Grammar & Usage
• William's Style
• Online Tutors

• Links

  • APU Home
  • Housing & Residence Life
  • RANA
  • Student Affairs
  • Staff & Faculty

 Contact Us:
 ssibbald@alaskapacific.edu
 907.561.1266
 
 4101 University Drive
 Anchorage, AK 99508

 

 Advanced Search
 Site Map
 
 Log In
 

The Writing Center

Williams Style

Nominalizations:

Nominalizations are noun forms of words that usually function as other parts of speech such as verbs (actions).

Verb form: Noun form (nominalization):

Discover Discovery

Resist Resistance

Argue Argument

Believe Belief

Know Knowledge

And so on. Nominalization can cause your sentences to sound confusing or gratuitously complex.

Consider the following from the Williams book:

The Federalists’ argument that the destabilization of government was a consequence of popular democracy was based on their belief in the tendency of factions to further their self-interest at the expense of the common good.

Notice the prepositional phrases and passive voice that nominalizations made necessary in this sentence. By turning the nominalizations into verbs (actions), the meaning of the sentence is clarified in many ways:

The Federalists argued that popular democracy destabilized government because they believed that factions tended to further their self-interest at the expense of the common good.

Notice that to make the change, the conjunction because has been added. Often in order to clarify complex sentences that are nominalized, we must add those kinds of conjunctions that signal a causal relationship. Some other words you might use are since, when, if, provided that, so long as, though, although, unless, and so on. Consider how much clearer it is to remove prepositional phrases and add causal indicators like these conjunctions.

Now, look at the exercises on pages 59-58, 59-60, and 66,

Sometimes in order to find the characters (the doers or agents of a verb’s action), you must look beyond what’s provided by the sentence itself. Williams provides the following example:

Multivariate strategies are of more use in understanding factors that contribute to psychiatric disorder than strategies based on the assumption that the presence or absence of psychopathology is dependent on a single major gene or on strategies in which a single biological variable is studied.

The sentence contains no real characters. The next one does, however:

If we are to understand what causes psychiatric disorder, we should use multivariate strategies rather than assume that a single major gene is responsible for psychopathology or adopt a strategy in which we study only a single biological variable.

See how much clearer the sentence becomes when we know who is doing what to whom. However, our characters aren’t always people; sometimes they are abstractions such as argumentation which is a nominalization. In other words, do not be so rigid with ridding your writing of nominalization that you muddle your writing.

Active/passive Voice: Passive voice consists of two parts: a form of the verb to be plus a past participle. Is, was, were, are, will be, has been, have been, will have been are all forms of to be.

Use passive voice to:

Call attention to the receiver of the action rather than the performer:
The bear was hit with buckshot.

Point out the receiver of the action when the performer is unknown:
A wallet was stolen from the library.

Point out the receiver of the action when you want to avoid calling attention to the performer. This is called institutional passive:
The main library, student center, gymnasium and three general-use building on the Amherst campus of the University of Massachusetts were selected as graffiti sources.

Change the following into passive voice:

An ambulance took a boy to the hospital yesterday. (2) The boy ate a toy. (3) The doctors removed the toy without any problems. (4) The doctors observed the boy for one night. (5) The parents took the boy home the next day.
It’s obvious that the active voice provides more clarity for the reader. That said, choosing active over passive is not always the best idea. One thing to consider is what characters (including abstractions) you want your readers to recognize as the main characters of a sentence. Put those characters in the subject position even if you must use a passive verb.

Cohesion:

Good writers place old information in the first part of a sentence and new information in the second part of the sentence. The reason for this is to build a base of knowledge for the reader that guides her from one idea to another.

Here is an example from the North article on indoor air quality:

• From the referrals, I made visitations to 29 residences. During the visit, I conducted an interview with home occupants and completed a survey. The survey was used to determine the nature of the problem, to collect information on house characteristics, and to collect information on occupants and their habits.

Notice how North begins this section with active voice and first person, but the last sentence is passive voice, with no obvious agent of the action. Why?

Here is another example from the Williams book:

• Some astonishing questions about the nature of the universe have been raised by scientists exploring black holes in space. The collapse of a dead star into a point perhaps no larger than a marble creates a black hole. So much matter compressed into so little volume changes the fabric of space around it in puzzling ways.

  Some astonishing questions about the nature of the universe have been raised by scientists exploring black holes in space. A black hole is created by the collapse of a dead star into a point perhaps no larger than a marble. So much matter compressed into so little volume changes the fabric of space around it in puzzling ways.

In the first example above, the second sentence is in active voice, but since black holes are mention at the end of the first sentence as new information, we expect the passive sentence structure of example two instead of the active sentence structure in example one. Why?

Revise the following passage to improve its flow:

• The Hart Queen is one of the best skis for beginning skiers. A thin layer of tempered ash from the hardwood forests of Kentucky makes up its inner core. Therefore, two innovations for strength and flexibility are built into its outer construction. Also, two sheets of ten-gauge steel reinforce a layer of ash for increased strength. A wrapping of fiberglass thus surrounds the two steel sheets for increased flexibility. In fact, most conventional bindings can be used with the Queen. The Salomon Double is the best, however: A cushion of foam and insulation firmly cradles the foot and ankle, yet freedom of movement is still permitted.

Not only do readers judge writing to be coherent when writers begin with old information and end with new, but they also judge writing to be coherent when they can easily and quickly locate the "topic" of individual sentences and see how a strings of such topics in a passage constitute a logical set. The following hamper a sentence from quickly getting to the topic:

Metadiscourse (And, therefore, politically speaking, in Eastern states since 1980, acid rain has become a serious problem.)

Nominalizations (Attempts at explanations for increases in this year’s elections of voter participation were offered.)

Readers want the topics located near the beginning of a sentence—usually as a noun in the subject position. Following the pattern of placing old information first, readers can also recognize this old information—a topic—in adjectives, verbs and objects—as long as it’s placed close to the beginning of a sentence. See Williams examples under "Two Qualifications," in the 5^th edition, page 117.

Now look at the first two exercises in 5.2 and 5.5—5^th edition pages 112 and 118.

The Difference Between Metadiscourse and Subcategories, Hedging and Intensifiers:

The reference in writing to the author’s acts of thinking and writing or to their acts of reading and understanding is called metadiscourse—discourse about discourse. Often metadiscourse describes actions writers are taking rhetorically—explain, show, argue, claim, deny, suggest, add, contrast, summarize, for example. Other times, metadiscourse is a part of the discourse such as sequential clues or logical connections—first, second, therefore, however, if so. Sometimes the metadiscourse is for the reader’s benefit: consider now, recall, imagine. Most often certain sections of research or academic papers will show more metadiscourse that others. Why?

Here’s an example of metadiscourse run amok:

• The last point I would like to make is that in regard to men-women relationships, it is important to keep in mind that the greatest changes have occurred in the way they now work with one another.

Another type of metadiscourse that occurs frequently in academic writing is language that refers to another study: it has been observed, found to exist, noticed, and so on. Notice how writers you respect and admire in your field use metadiscourse and try to emulate their examples. Frequently the best writing in terms of grammar and clarity is sacrificed to a particular set of convention in a field. (For your literature review, read through the items in your bibliography that refer to past studies and notice if these scholarly papers use this type of metadiscourse.)

Hedging is actually a subcategory of metadiscourse because hedging is about the writing or study itself. Hedging is when an author qualifies his conclusions as a nod to civility or as a recognition that his study may not represent the apex of truth and the end of research in that field. Here are some examples of words that work as hedges: suggests, seems, many, most, often, sometimes, possibly, perhaps, appears, to a certain extent, and so on. There are many, many more. Simply watch for text that appears to back off from proclaiming a victory of complete knowledge.

Where does hedging most often occur in an academic paper? Why?

Hedging is again a matter of convention. In the field of English studies, for example, hedging is discouraged. Most other studies couch their terms of disagreement in softer language than English studies. Consider the fact that literary criticism usually has one author, the exact wording of the text is important, and it’s unlikely that research will disclose new facts about the words themselves. In other words, consider how literary criticism differs from empirical studies.

Intensifiers are less frequently used in scholarly writing. Examples include words like obviously, undoubtedly, certainly, of course, basic, fundamental, proves, establish, it is clear and so on. The most common intensifier is a lack of hedging:

• Americans believe that the federal government is intrusive and authoritarian.

Now look at exercise 8.5, page 179 in the 5^th edition.

Subordination:

Sentences frequently have levels of generalization or importance.
Consider the following subordinate sentences:

1. He dipped his hand in the bichloride solution and shook them, (main clause)
2. a quick shake, (noun cluster)
3. fingers down (absolute)
4. like the fingers of a pianist above the keys. (prepositional phrase)
---Sinclair Lewis

1. Joad’s lips stretched tight over his teeth for a moment, and
1. he licked his lips,
2. like a dog, (prepositional phrase)
3. two licks, (noun cluster)
4. one in each direction from the middle. (noun cluster)
---John Steinbeck

If each part of the sentence depends for meaning on the previous part, then it is subordinate.
Imagine moving part four in the above sentence to right below part one. It would not make sense;
that’s because it depends for meaning on parts two and three.

On the other hand, if parts of the sentence carry equal weight and do not depend so rigidly
for meaning on the previous part, the sentence is called coordinate. Consider the following
coordinate sentences:
1. He could sail for hours,
2. searching the blanched grasses below him with his telescopic eyes, (verb cluster)
2. gaining height against the wind, (verb cluster)
2. descending in mile-long, gently declining swoops when he curved and rode back,
2. never beating a wing. (verb cluster) (verb cluster)

Notice how you can move any of the twos to any other two position without
sacrificing the sense of the sentence.

Here is a mixed sequence—mixed coordination and subordination:

1. It was as though someone, somewhere, had touched a lever and shifted gears, and
1. the hospital was set for night running,
2. smooth and silent,
2. its normal clatter and hum muffled,
2. the only sounds heard in the whitewalled room distant and unreal:
3. a low hum of voices from the nurses’ desk,
4. quickly stifled,
3. the soft squish of rubber-soled shoes on the tiled corridor,
3. starched white cloth rustling against itself, and outside,
3. the lonesome whine of wind in the country night and
3. the Kansas dust beating against the windows.
Generate your own sentences according to the patterns above:
She raised the book above her head and brandished it . . .
(follow a 1, 2, 3, 4, subordinate sequence).

He could diet for months . . . . .
(follow a 1, 2, 2, 2, 2 coordinate sequence).

His knuckles whitened as he gripped the arm of the seat . . .
(follow a 1, 1, 2, 3, 4, sequence).