Saturday, November 21, 2009

Revising for Style

After reading the last chapter of Booth, Revising for Style, post here as a reply two of your sentences from your essay. Next, revise these two sentences based on your reading of this Booth chapter. Explain why you made the changes you did in relation to Booth's Revising for Style.


  1. Before:
    "My apathy was a result of the perceived marginalization of my own views."

    "I believe the exclusive use of these few established and popular methods of modeling political ideology on a spectrum (e.g., left- vs. right-wing, authoritarian vs. libertarian), and also, by extension, the limiting of choice with regard to political affiliation to a two-party system, in the case of the United States, has the potential to allow for the formation of false notions and misconceptions about political ideologies amongst the voting populace."

    "I perceived my own views to be marginalized, which resulted in my apathy."

    "I believe exclusively using these few established and popular methods of modeling political ideology on a spectrum (e.g., left- vs. right-wing, authoritarian vs. libertarian) and also, by extension, limiting the choice of political affiliation to the United States' two-party system potentially allows for the voting populace to form false notions and misconceptions about political ideology."

    I made these changes in particular because I used a lot of nominalization where it was not the best option, and passive voice when it was not well-suited. Doing so appears to have eliminated a lot of unnecessary words and made my sentences flow more smoothly.

  2. Before:
    "Born into unfortunate situations, there is nothing these children alone can do to change the condition they are in."

    "Children being born into hopeless situations cannot change their condition without help.

    Here, I changed the character of my sentence from the situation to the children. I also felt that saying "alone" was too abstract to get the point across that they need someone to help them. I feel like these changes make my sentence more active, like booth explains, which, to me, creates more of an actual sense of action.

    "Not only does the adoptive family have something to offer to the adopted child, but the child will also have much to offer the family."

    "The adoptive family and the child enter into this new relationship together, both offering much to each other."

    I changed this sentence a lot, because I wasn't happy with how it was before. I felt like it had 2 characters, making the sentence confusing. So I combined the characters, and nominalized "offer." I think these changes got rid of unnecessary repetition within my sentence.

  3. Before: "Because it is now possible for indecent material to be posted on the Internet, with little regulation of the material, people can easily access it whenever they want."

    After: "People can easily access indecent material posted on the Internet whenever they want because it is so difficult to regulate material posted on the Internet."

    I made this change because I did not think the passive voice was the correct format for the sentence. This way,I think the flow is better and less confusing. Also, I think the information is better understood in this format.

    Before: "One commercial for the drug Zoloft asks you to consult your doctor if you experience any form of the vague term “depression,” because Zoloft fixes a “chemical imbalance” in your brain that may only be a possible solution to the “unknown” causes of depression."

    After: "Depression is an extremely vague term that has an unknown cause; however, the drug company Zoloft suggests consulting your doctor if you experienced depressing because their product can possibly help by fixing a chemical imbalance in the brain.

    I changed this sentence because I liked depression to be the character of the sentence instead of the commercial, and this order better presents the point that I am trying to get across. Also, I think the sentence is more appropriate in the active voice.

  4. Before:
    It would be unfair for the government to take control of the food industry and regulate what we want to put in our bodies.
    The government unfairly taking control of the food industry results in unjustifiable regulation of what food we choose to put in our bodies.
    I made this change because the government regulating the food industry results in a regulation of our diets so I wanted to show that the government more in action of taking control rather than just saying if it were to happen.
    Even though this says food companies are trying to save their good names, the affect is a healthier food for all of the consumers.
    Food companies started producing healthier food to save their want to protect their superior names.
    I switched this sentence around the make the healthier food more of the character of the sentence since it’s more important than the companies saving their names.

    Erin King

  5. Before:
    There are many different ways this can be accomplished, each with its own positives and negatives.
    There have been many major solutions proposed to help hunting, but the most effective one would be to have several smaller solutions combined.

    I switched the sentence around to say that one major solution will not be able to solve anything, to show that a group of smaller solutions will be best for hunters and people observing hunting

    In doing this, the goal is to sway the majority of non-hunters towards the side of hunting proposing that the ethics will make hunting become even safer and humane for the animals.

    In forming a code of ethics, it will portray to non-hunters that hunters as a whole are making hunting as safe and humane as possible.

    The character of this needed to be the code of ethics actually being made instead of the character being the goal of making it, to show that something is actually being done and not just being talked about

    Erik Ross

  6. Before: Knowing how something is funded is one of the key first steps in running a plan efficiently.

    After: One of the key first steps in running a plan efficiently is knowing how it will be funded. -- The subject in the first sentence is a verb turned into a noun, so I changed it back into a verb. I believe it makes the sentence more clear.

    Before: It offeres coverage to Americans and permanent residents aged sixty-five and over as long as they or their spouse "... has worked for at least ten years in Medicare-covered employment."

    After: This government-run system offers coverage to Americans and permanent residents...
    -- I think that changing the subject ties this sentence to the sentence before. It also makes the sentence more clear.

    Katie Clark

  7. Before: This is displayed by the activities humans participate in, movies and shows that are made, and articles that are written.
    After: The activities humans participate in, movies and shows that are made, and articles that are written are three ways in which this is displayed.

    I basically just flipped the sentence around to make it more clear that I'm talking about the human activities.

    Before: The cost of this expansion is sometimes the loss of land in which many anumals call home, including bears.
    After: Sometimes, the loss of land in which many animals call home is the cost of human expansion.

    I changed this sentence around to focus more on what I'm talking about....the cost of human expansion.

    A.J. Hubert