Guide to Better Writing

Maybe you even want ​to write your novel and get that villa in the Aegean you've had your eye on. Or maybe you just want your writing to say good things about you, your training and your organization.

If you're serious about becoming a better writer, start following this simple rule: Write in the active voice.

If you're like most people, you​ don't really know what the active voice is. You were absent that day, right?

For starters, the active voice is the opposite of the passive voice, in which the subject of a sentence plays a passive role, because something else acts upon it -- exactly the kind of grammarian flapdoodle nobody remembers.

So forget all that. Just learn to recognize and avoid the passive voice. Do this, and you'll take a giant step toward more forceful, more persuasive writing.

Here's how to recognize the passive voice: Look for forms of the verb to be that appear in combination with other verbs. These other verbs often appear with the ending "ing," but not always.

Everybody knows the forms of the verb to be:  is, am, are, was, were, be and been.

Grammar school stuff.

Check out this example of a sentence in the passive voice: "The rules were issued by the Department of Administrative Services on February 1."

Notice that the verb issued appears with a form of the verb to be, which is were in this case. The subject of the sentence is rules, but something else acts upon it (the Department of Administrative Services).

To convert this sentence to the active voice, simply get rid of the form of the verb to be, and rewrite it with the subject that actually does something:

"The Department of Administrative Services issued the new rules on February 1."

The active voice lets you express the idea more forcefully, using fewer words. Better still, it tells you exactly who or what performed the action. Simple, eh?

Check out the next egregious example of the passive voice:

"The Department of Administrative Services will be issuing rules on February 1."

In this one, the subject doesn't even act. It simply exists, like a dead bug. Note, too, that the verb issuing appears with a form of the dreaded verb to be, which in this case is be.

To fix it, rewrite the sentence with an active verb, dropping the "ing" form:

"The Department of Administrative Services will issue rules on February 1."

The new sentence saves words and doesn't dilute the verb issue with a form of the verb to be. Sweet.

Studies have shown that passive writing tires the reader and dulls the meaning of the work. Most readers simply won't finish a lengthy piece laden with the passive voice. And because editors know the passive voice adds words to a sentence and obscures the meaning, they often reject otherwise good work, since column inches are valuable.

​​Want to become a better writer?  

​​​​You may think this sounds silly, and it may be. But many writers misuse nouns by converting them to adjectives, which -- in addition to being silly -- detracts from otherwise good work.

Check out the following example:

"The lecturer will examine the newly published Department of Labor veterans, minorities and disabled regulations."

This writer has twisted nouns into adjectives, injecting ambiguity into a simple, straightforward thought. "Department of Labor" (a proper noun), "veterans" (a noun), "minorities" (a noun) and "disabled" (a noun that means "disabled people") have all become adjectives that describe "regulations."

When you read this sentence, you consciously or unconsciously wonder whether someone has published "veterans," or whether someone has published "minorities," or whether someone has published "disabled."  Only after a mental double-take does the reader understand the Department of Labor has recently published regulations that concern veterans, minorities and people with disabilities.

In the process of figuring this out, the reader may actually mull the possibility that the regulations themselves might be "disabled," thanks to the order of the words.

To make the sentence comply with our simple rule, we should rewrite it this way:

"The lecturer will examine the Department of Labor's newly published regulations on veterans, minorities and people with disabilities."

No ambiguity here. The reader gets the message with no need for double-takes.

Train yourself to follow this rule by putting the object of the verb ("regulations," in this case) as close as possible to the verb itself ("examine"). The lecturer will examine the regulations, right?

Inserting "the Department of Labor's newly published" between the verb and the object does not obscure the meaning. Why? Because none of the inserted words is a noun. We've turned "Department of Labor" into a possessive by adding an apostrophe s, making it a legitimate adjective; and "newly published" is a word combination used as an adjective to describe "regulations."

In short, we've used no nouns as adjectives. We've completed the sentence with "on veterans, minorities and people with disabilities," which follows the object and plays the role of a descriptive prepositional phrase.

Let's look at one more example: "The plan contained detailed productivity, safety, Equal Employment Opportunity and Affirmative Action strategies."

Once again, the writer messes with the reader's mind by using nouns as adjectives. To fix this sentence, rewrite it and put the object of the verb ("strategies") as close as possible to the verb itself ("contained"). Then add words that describe the strategies, putting them in a simple prepositional phrase.

"The plan contained detailed strategies on productivity, safety, Equal Employment Opportunity and Affirmative Action."

The important thing to remember is this: Make your meaning clear. Don't load your sentences with nouns that describe other nouns. Use nouns as nouns, and adjectives as adjectives.​