Good Nouns Go a Long Way

Adjectives may be strong, but nouns are powerful. With a good noun, you can go an entire story with an adjective.

Adjectives are strong, but sometimes they can be weak. Take the phrases below for example:

“a funny guy”

“a guy who is funny

Both examples are helpful describg the noun (“guy”) but they are also flawed. In the first phrase, if the page cut off after the adjective “funny,” readers would be confused. A funny what? T-shirt? Song?

The second example shares this flaw. It uses an relative clause (“who is _”) which functions as an adjective, since it describes the noun. It’s a handy technique, but if the page cut off anywhere after “guy” and before “funny,” readers would be lost. Imagine if after the “is” was information that never again gets revealed in a story. The sentence could read: “A guy who is a fan of sentimental operas, though he tends not share this with others.” But readers would only see “a guy who is” and never be fufilled. Ah, the unaddressed suspense…!

Don’t get me wrong, adjectives are great. They can be excellent descriptors, with phrases like “a witty guy” or “a guy who has a wry sense of humor.” But they hold nouns back.

With a good noun in a phrase, you don’t need an adjective:

“A prankster

“A comedian

“An impressionist

In one word, a reader has learned information that previously required two words.

Whenever you’re revising your work, it’s always a good idea to look at the adjectives you’ve used and decide if they work good or if they could swapped out for a better noun. Happy writing, and seeya next time!

So… Where Do Sentences Come From?

I’ve noticed something. When I’m writing, there are days when I feel invigorated—“Yes! Did you read that sentence?! I’ve got the magic touch!”—and there are days when I feel muddled—“Bah! I’m slogging through quicksand. The words just don’t sound right…”—but in either case, when I become self-aware of what I’m typing, or of the words I’m scribbling in my notebook, I ask myself: “How literally did I come up with that sentence? Like, literally, literally. (Not hyperbole literally.)”

How is my brain deciding which word to place next to the next word? There are a ton of synonyms for things. Why did my brain decide to write “It’s burning up in here” instead of “I’m burning up in here” or even “It’s too hot in here”? You might read those examples and think, “well, ‘it’s’ implies everyone’s hot while ‘I’m’ implies only the speaker is hot.” But on a conscious level, I’m not thinking of the differences at all. I have an idea that my character is sweating, and so my brain thinks of a sentence that I type onto the page. But what causes me to create one sentence and not another?

If you’re anything like me, I know what you’re gonna say, so let me stop you right there: no, the blanket statement “the subconscious mind” is not enough :P. I want to know the exact pathways of the subconscious, how the brain runs through its word binder and decides the best possible words for a situation. Or the worst words. Because the brain doesn’t give us the best sentences each go around. If it did, we wouldn’t need editors.

Unfortunately, dear readers, I am not a linguist. But as a writer and an avid grammar fan, I can recount the wonders of noticing how sentences are made, and I can speculate what it would be like if we had the power to always choose the right words.

The Art of Choosing Sentences

Here’s a helpful perspective: perhaps sentences being spoken or written unconsciously is a gift, in the same way breathing is done unconsciously. With both writing and breathing, some unknown part of us does the heavy lifting. I know I’m writing this sentence just as I know I’m breathing, but I’m not consciously doing focusing on each step. I’m not searching my brain for each individual letter, each logical part of speech, each word. All I have to do is stay on topic and the rest is guaranteed.

But in the same way manual mode with breathing allows us to meditate for calm or hyperventilate to psych ourselves up, taking conscious control over sentences allows us more flexibility, more power, and more possibilities in our prose. Take this sentence for instance: “The hat that you’re wearing looks nice.” This sentence is pretty straightforward. You might type it as a line of dialogue for a character and move forward, not giving it a second thought.

But when you do give things a second thought, you might find it outdoes the first. In the middle of typing a line of dialogue, you might pause and allow more noun and verb ideas to enter your head, or different pacings of the sentence, or unique tones of voice. You type a new sentence: “Nice hat you’ve got there,” but you want to know what else you’ve got. You toy around with it some more: “Wearing a nice hat there,” “Where can I get a hat like that?” You even go back to the original sentence but omit the “that”: “The hat that you’re wearing looks nice.”

Things get even more interesting when you factor in the different sentence types. The content of these two sentences is the same, but the order of the words changes your focus, and the use (or not) of a comma affects the cadence:

“Once I got home, I took out the trash” vs. “I took out the trash once I got home.”

In the former sentence, the crux of your attention is on the endpoint, taking out the trash, with the arrival home a backdrop to that action. The latter sentence’s focus is the reverse: we’re supposed to care about the arrival home, and the trash was just a sidenote of what happened there. Meanwhile, while writing about one of those two examples, we might consider the pacing of the sentences around it. If there are a lot of commas in a paragraph, we might choose the second variation since it lacks a comma—it would read faster, thus breaking up the pace. Likewise, in a paragraph of short, rapid-fire sentences, you’re better off with the comma version, which would give readers a chance to slow down.

These variations are by no means the end. We haven’t even factored in accents or slang! Just know, when you stop to reinvent a sentence—instead of using one as a mere tool—you can create something you’re truly proud of.

What If We Always Had the Right Words?

We all have ideas, but to articulate them? It’s tough. But imagine. Imagine writing a letter to your first crush that made them blush. Imagine writing a college essay with power words that hit like bricks and netted you a scholarship. Imagine writing a poem with the perfect rhymes, the imagery, and could convey your ideas seamlessly to listeners.

Here’s a fact about language speakers: we all more or less know our entire language. You have the same words as the president and a pop star. But the unique way each of us puts them together is what makes us, us. It’s why Chat-GTP can just mimic any person’s personality: it has access to all the words and all our unique patterns of speech, so mimicry is as easy as asking it to do so.

If we always had the right words? Well, I don’t think it would be so bad, actually. Actually, despite bringing up Chat-GTP, and I know for my fellow writers a fear may be aroused, of its neigh-inevitable snatching of our careers etc., I don’t think writing would become boring like AI prompts have become for me. (I mean, seriously, so what if it can write a description? Even if I got writer’s block and my own sentence came out sucky, at least I’d get a sense of accomplishment.)

If we always had the right words, it would be like becoming Usain Bolt. Do you think he got bored of running after he became the fastest man alive? Did he dive into a bowl of Cheetos and say “aight, I’m done now.” No! In fact, the fact that he’s excellent gives him more to work with. He can enjoy the moment of his sport and find new ways to perform—new challenges to do or places to sprint.

If we always had the right words, we would write beauty, frustration, curiosity. We would write about things we want to know and we would write about what we knew but had forgotten. We would write and feel accomplishment with each sentence, with each word. But allow me to backtrack. Because there are no right words.

Ever write a cover letter for a job? I know, I hate them too. When I write a cover letter, I often think about my word choice. It’s not enough for me to summarize where I’ve worked and why I want a new opportunity. To stand out from other job candidates, I have to write something compelling. I need a sentence that hooks the reader in immediately, and then I need sentences that can carry the momentum. A comma splice would break the magic.

And in my annoyance devising the perfect cover letter, I often think, “in all the parallel universes that may exist, some version of me has written the exact right words that the person reading this will want to hear, and that version of me is guaranteed the job.” But would it be the perfect cover letter? …No. Because someone else reading that same “perfect” cover letter may not like the writing style. Maybe the sentences are too short. And maybe a third person is okay with the sentences but may want more metaphors.

Sentence variation and metaphors are objective qualities. There’s no good or bad with them, only preferences— something that humans have. Plus, what one reader likes one day may be completely different another day, simply because of their mood.

The right words are the words that are right for you. And even that changes over time.

What are your thoughts on word choice in prose? Do you have an idea of how sentences are made? And what would you create if you could write “perfect” sentences? Tell me down below, and seeya next time 🙂

The Perfect Gift

“Dude: me and Karey, rappeling down a cliff, blasting Earth Wind & Fire out these speakers.”

“… and that’s your idea of a relaxing Valentine’s day?”

It was Shawn I was talking to, so I couldn’t be miffed at the reaction. A windy spring day, leaves loosed from trees brushed across his cheek or afro; his mouth remained agape. I rose from my reclined posture, patting my hands on my knees. He won’t win this lecture.

“We’ve been hiking like a bajillion times by now. She’s been saying it’s too easy, and she wants to ramp it up.”

“Really?” Shawn said. “She’s been with you hiking that much?”

“Yeah, we—”

“OK. Let’s say she has, pal of mine. She’s still. Scared. Of. Heights.” He made chopping scissor fingers and lowered his hand to the ground. “That’s you by the way. She’d push you off before going down herself.”

“She would not. She loves me.”

“And for what reason, I do not know.”

“Because I saved her life, I’m great at directions, I cook mean meatloaf.”

“Oh alright. You are a good cook at least. My wife’s been begging me to become your student. She still can’t get over those steaks…”

“Whoa-ho-ho! Has my guy finally left the souless salad side of vegetarianism?”

“Fat chance, moo murderer.”

“You’ll come around, someday,” I said. I turned to the corner and picked my new speakers off the bench. “Anyway, wise guy, what do you think I should do for Karey next week?”

“Anything that doesn’t involve those speakers. Unless you’re playing smooth jazz.”

“Yuck, that’s what she likes.” A woman walking by rolled her eyes as she passed me.

“Well if you’re tryna marry her someday you better get used to making sacrifices.”

“Yeah yeah.” I said and shrugged. But deep down I knew he was right. Karey and I started dating five years ago, and it took two years of friendly prodding for her to dip her toes into my lifestlye: I took her on her first hike. We’ve been on several since; she loves it. It would be rude of me to not give her world a try.

“Will that be the red or the white wine,” a waiter might ask us. I’d sweat profusely. What’s the difference? And you can’t say “I’ll take a beer” in the restaurants Karey likes.

“She’s been dealing with nasty costumers all week,” Shawn said. Her shoulders likely ache from hunching over at that receptionist desk all day. She needs… a massage. Or a sauna. Go with her, try both!”

“I dunno if I can sit still for so long while somebody’s touching me.”

“Make some jokes. She’ll be right next to you, you’ll forget about your surroundings.”

“What if I forget to hold in my farts?”

Shawn slapped both palms to his face. “Man, man, man… you’re hopeless.”

Quote Me On This

Can we learn anything by writing down quotes? I ask myself this sometimes, when I read a punchy phrase in a crime story, or one that tugs my heart’s strings, or one that’s constructed expertly, each word placed like a brick forming a smooth column. I analyze the quotes sometimes, pick them apart like a vulture and savor each segment, then step back again to marvel at the thing as a whole. But how does this help me grow as a writer? I haven’t found myself mimicking the quote. Nor do I want to. I want the pride of having created something myself.

Perhaps it’s got to be a conscious effort. Perhaps it comes down to rereading those quotes a couple times in a week, and deciding to use its technique, whatever it may be for that particular quote that makes it stand out. Perhaps it comes down to rewriting it a few times, and then doing something similar on my own, and then finally my brain will guide me to making my own powerful quote. And if that method doesn’t work, doesn’t lead to me creating my own power quote, at least I’d learn how to appreciate more the one I already loved.

Quotes are like beautiful paintings you hang up and can look at again and again and always draw inspiration from. Quote me on this 😉

The Nine Billion Names of God – Short Story Review

The Nine Billion Names of God is a short story that speculates God’s purpose for mankind and how technology intersects with spirituality. With a total of three scenes and no particular protagonist (rather, we hop from 3rd person limited over various scientists as they interact with Tibetan monks), the author Arthur C. Clarke makes it clear that rather than character growth, the story’s events are what readers should focus on.

Throughout the story you’ll gain a sense of wonder at the monks and their planning capabilities, culture, and history, even if they tend to be vague and cocky. For instance, they gladly explain their goal with the device known as the Mark V computer—to discover and transcribe all of God’s names—but offer no explanation as to how they can tell what a “real” name is compared to other names. As you learn about the Mark V’s progress, you’ll be introduced to a captivating twist, one that will make you question the cosmic-spiritual rules of our own reality.

While character development is nonexistent, character is very present, and I’m certainly grateful for it. The monks are like poker players holding secret knowledge, and the scientists act as clueless as we feel. One scientist, who doubles as a salesman, questions just how is it that the monks know how to handle technology like the Mark V.

Another scientist name George is bored working in the monk’s temple, is anxious to leave, but his commitment to his job shows us some humanity in contrast to the stoicism of the temple-goers. There’s even humor to be found in his critiques of the monks. And in the nick of time, the scientist named Chuck arrives in the story to provide a sense of adventure.

Prose-wise, this story is written in colloquial, easy-to-follow English with a healthy amount of dialogue and narration—it’s thin on description, but objects and setting details aren’t overly important in the narrative. The lore of the story unfolds at a quick pace, thanks to a time skip, and the rules of spirituality remain consistent and left open just enough for readers to fill in some blanks with their imagination. My one complaint is that it’s never stated why God has multiple names. What, does he have a lot of nicknames or something?

Overall I think this story does an excellent job getting readers thinking. What is our purpose in the universe? Is technology a part of it? Are we even supposed to reach our purpose? If questions like these interest you, or if you like science, philosophy, or religion in general, this is the story for you.