Using too many big words. Too many big words 2022-10-21
Using too many big words Rating:
5,7/10
550
reviews
Using too many big words, or using unnecessarily complex language, can be a problem in writing and communication. While it may seem impressive to use a wide range of vocabulary, using overly complicated language can actually hinder the clarity and effectiveness of the message being conveyed.
First and foremost, using too many big words can make the writing or speech difficult to understand. This can be frustrating for the reader or listener, as they may need to constantly refer to a dictionary or ask for clarification. This can disrupt the flow of the piece and distract from the main points being made. In addition, using too many big words can make the writing or speech seem pompous or pretentious, as if the writer or speaker is trying to impress with their vocabulary rather than clearly convey their ideas.
Furthermore, using too many big words can also exclude certain audiences. If a writer or speaker uses language that is too complex, they may exclude those who are not familiar with the specific terms or concepts being used. This can lead to a lack of inclusivity and accessibility, as some people may feel excluded or unable to fully comprehend the message being conveyed.
Overall, it is important to find a balance in language use. While it is good to have a wide vocabulary and to use specific terms when necessary, it is also important to consider the audience and the purpose of the writing or speech. Using simple and clear language can often be more effective in conveying a message and ensuring that it is understood by all.
Too many big words
Since all these things are being experienced by Linda, you might ask yourself, "What words would SHE use to describe her impressions. But just because someone is reading a paper or anything really that is difficult for them to understand does not mean that the author is a poor communicator. Let's look at your first example Mary Sue eased out Eased is much stronger than 'got out'. Writing like this, done properly, can be fun and actually set a sensual tone but it must be used in the right circumstances. This is why IIRC some Alaskan tribe has 11 different words for snow. Though I appreciate the way you made your point using them, as this made things a lot clearer. Granted, some academic articles seem deliberately and ostentatiously verbose, and it's a real and documented problem.
There's definitely an upper limit on the number of words you can use before a person starts to lose track of the conversation, and part of this problem is solved by using a single word that conveys that idea completely. Now you know the jargon so you can communicate efficiently with people in your field about common but complex ideas relevant to that field, stringing together esoteric words to get a huge point across quickly. In short I'd say your rewrite was a partial success and a partial failure, since you removed some of the original meat of the passage when you trimmed off the fat. Abstentious Self-restraining; also the longest word in the English language to use all five vowels in order once 2. For example, recently with Trump's travel ban there was an oral argument before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals where a lawyer for Washington State and a lawyer for the Department of Justice were each trying to convince a panel of 3 judges to side with them. I'm trying to express how I feel about my life and I say "Y'know, I don't really like where I am, but the delta is positive". Predilection — preference 56.
Its origin is Latin: circum-, meaning "around," and locutio, meaning "speech. This leaves me in limbo, somewhere between example A and example B. I remember when I would write a complex sentence that described a huge idea in only 10 words, and I would get an ego boost. What I hoped to gauge from people's responses was the way in which improper or excessive writing could damage the flow of a story, and that's exactly what I got from the examples I provided. How does the small function work in Excel? Also, if the fog dissipates, it could hardly have been infinite as you imply by comparing it to the darkness , since it wouldn't have any place to dissipate to already being everywhere. Also, cutting people out of the conversation is sometimes intentional. And for those who have focused too much on the examples, they were merely that.
What is it called when you use big words to confuse people?
Based on your comment history, you seem like a smart person. Saxicolous — something that lives on rocks 63. Anything beyond that is simply a lack of awareness on the part of the user, and thus cannot be directly related to the size of their vocabulary. Obviously, this isn't always the case, and some of the academic language does seem to be a kind of slang, a way to separate those inside the group from people outside the group. Soon the fog dissipated, transposed by an equally infinite darkness. When both sides have access to a big arsenal of words, it can allow more subtle points to be made, and improve the overall quality of discourse and communication.
I remember hearing the word evince for the first time as a grade 12 student. I would argue that you can always use a word's definition in place of using the word itself. I assume you mean simple synonym rather than definition. To make the assumption that all people who use big vocabularies are also poor communicators is a bad one, because you are making that assumption based primarily on literature, which is didactic and lacks interaction. If you're found to be in violation of this rule it is a permaban regardless of intention.
“too many words” doesn’t disprove anything : TheRightCantMeme
Smart-mouth "one given to making remarks that aim for cleverness and wit but that strike others as cocky or annoying" followed about a decade later. . Circumlocution is firmly in the second camp. I would argue that in that context they were still communicating effectively because their goal was not to communicate with the viewers of cable news, but to communicate with and convince the three judges. It creates a clearer image, so this one gets a tick of the shower, careful not to lose her footing on the lubricated Does lubricated evoke anything more vivid than wet? The humanities on the other hand, have very little if any need for such language. This, I think, is precisely the reason that Brian stresses submission to a professional editor.
CMV: People who use big vocabularies are extremely ineffective communicators : changemyview
I am not a big fan of Sci Fi so I am unsure whether or not this is a genre feature. There are people who are capable of speaking to multiple audiences with appropriate vocabulary restraint. You have to start somewhere, and the point of academia is to improve. This is something I like to refer to as the essay syndrome Does anyone have this problem? This is a tricky question, and I'd say that aesthetic considerations are just as important. So it's not always the case that fancy words means bad communication.
Having a large vocabulary does not mean that you have to use it. If you're using them as part of rhythm, alliteration, internal rhyme or some other special effect, I wouldn't mind, but as it stands, the word ubiquitous just seems like a bit too much here. All I meant in defending the examples is that it was in no way my standard method of writing, nor should any impression of how I write be formed from them. However, such persons could hardly be judged to be worse for their use of complex terms. As I see it, OP wanted to set up a discussion about how people end up excluding other interested but new people from discussions in exchange for what he sees as an ego boost for the author and possibly linguistic efficiency. When you're delving deep into a topic, you end up needing to parse between small semantic differences, and academic fields end up creating their own shared language to make it easier for members of that group to accurately and effectively differentiate between those small but important differences in meaning when communicating with one another. You should report, not retaliate.
One of my all time favourite anecdotes is about the great physicist Richard Feynman. They both can however, talk about how much they love cake. But it's not using a big vocabulary that makes them poor communicators, it's that they don't have a grasp on who to use what sort of vocabulary with. But frankly, they are unacceptable because they are wrong. For example, the Similarly, I have friends on Facebook who are better read in feminist or queer political theory than I am. On the other side of the coin, you have writers who needlessly scatter their language with erudite terms. It may take 2 extra pages to explain what they could have done in 2 pages, but at the end of the day, the reader will save time and not be so mentally taxed.
