Adverb: Difference between revisions

442 bytes added ,  11 September 2023
no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{a|plainenglish|}}{{d|Adverb|/ˈædvɜːb/|n|}}{{quote|“Using adverbs is a mortal sin.”  
{{a|plainenglish|{{image|LA confidential|jpg|James Ellroy. No truck with adverbs.}} }}{{d|Adverb|/ˈædvɜːb/|n|}}{{quote|“Using adverbs is a mortal sin.”  
:— Elmore Leonard}}
:— Elmore Leonard}}
A word you use when you can’t think of a better [[verb]]. A good writer’s ''capitulation''.  
A word you use when you can’t think of a better [[verb]]. A good writer’s ''capitulation''.  
Line 5: Line 5:
An {{tag|adverb}} ''modifies'' a {{tag|verb}}. It makes it stronger, weaker, more or less specific. Most end in ~ly, but not all do: “now”, “later”, “still” “again” “moreover”, “further”, “also”, “besides”, “too” can all function as adverbs, but note how ''redundant'' they tend to be:
An {{tag|adverb}} ''modifies'' a {{tag|verb}}. It makes it stronger, weaker, more or less specific. Most end in ~ly, but not all do: “now”, “later”, “still” “again” “moreover”, “further”, “also”, “besides”, “too” can all function as adverbs, but note how ''redundant'' they tend to be:


“I will see you ''later''”; “I am ''now'' reading”; “I have some ''further'' thoughts” — they render idiomatic without adding any content.
“I will see you ''later''”; “I am ''now'' reading”; “I have some ''further'' thoughts” — they render phrases idiomatic, but add no semantic content.  
You can, of course create [[adverbial phrases]] like “on top of”, “over and above”, “into the bargain”, “by the same token” and so ''tiresomely'' (<-- also an adverb) on.


Adverbs are unwelcome in legal writing — in any literature that aspires to elegance. Before reaching for one, look for a better {{tag|verb}}.
You can make [[adverbial phrases]], ''too'', like “on top of”, “over and above”, “into the bargain”, “by the same token” and so ''tiresomely'' (<-- also an adverb) on.
 
===Writing hack===
Therefore, a writing hack: if you are labouring with any prose passage, try removing all adverbs, and strengthening the verbs.  


“Jane '''struck the ball firmly''' through the covers and '''proceeded quickly''' to the non-striker’s end.”
“Jane '''struck the ball firmly''' through the covers and '''proceeded quickly''' to the non-striker’s end.”
Line 14: Line 16:
“Jane '''spanked''' the ball through the covers and '''galloped''' to the non-striker’s end.”
“Jane '''spanked''' the ball through the covers and '''galloped''' to the non-striker’s end.”


Few sentences cannot be improved by removing [[adverb]]s.
We call this the “James Ellroy oblique strategy”: the crime writer
stumbled upon it when his editor told him to cut 100 pages from his  ''L.A. Confidential'' manuscript. Adamant that removing any characters or plot-lines would kill the story, Ellroy combed the draft nixing every adverb, most adjectives and many verbs, in the process creating a distinctive style he’s stuck with ever since.
 
{{Sa}}
*[[Adjective]]