I recently – and rather coincidentally – reunited with my chemistry teacher from high school. Having dinner with him reminded me of something that he told me after class once afternoon.
I was having trouble answering a question in a practice exam paper that involved defining some sort of industrial chemical process (I forgot which one exactly.) I asked him whether the answer I came up with would get all 3 points (or however many it was) that the question was worth.
After he read what I showed him, he told me that it was a good and adequate answer – but that there is actually an “easier” way to approach the task of “defining” something in a sentence.
What he said next was a very good piece of practical writing advice – one that I have remembered all these years and continues to serve me well now that I have a constant need to “define” things – like grammatical or Linguistics concepts – for students. 😅
The advice is this:
Instead of mentally cornering yourself by starting off a “definition” by saying “XXX is __________,” which often forces you to use a lot of modifiers to modify a noun phrase, not to mention to think hard to avoid repetitions, you can just go directly into what the “XXX” “does” or “functions as” as the core content of the sentence.
It sounds abstract and complicated like this, so let’s look at a simple example (with our grammatical framework as a basis).
Let’s say we have to define a “sewing machine.”
The instinctive way we would start this definition is like this:
A sewing machine is…
However, once you start, you would quickly find out that it is hard to continue after “is.” A “sewing machine” is “what”? Clearly, it’s a type of “machine,” so we would probably say:
A sewing machine is a machine…
But here, we already encounter the problem of repeating the noun “machine” twice in such a short space, which you probably wouldn’t need me to tell you is stylistically not the best. So, to “solve” this problem, you might try to think of (or find) a synonym for “machine” to avoid this repetition, something like:
A sewing machine is a device…
The word “machine” happens to have a synonym – “device” – that works fine here because it is also a common word that means pretty much the same thing, but there is not always an easy alternative with other nouns.
Anyway, even after you find the workable alternative of “device,” you then need to use a relative clause to modify what the device does – because, obviously, we need to incorporate a full embedded clause’s content to explain its function. So then we write something like:
[ A sewing machine is a device [ that sews fabric together. ] ]
縫紉機是一種把布料縫合在一起的裝置
The relative clause [ that sews fabric together ] modifies the noun phrase “a device.” (I am using [ ] to show clause boundaries like in my course framework.)
This is of course fine, but, even here, we have to repeat the word “sew” – which already appears in the participle form “sewing” within the noun phrase we are trying to define in the first place. If we were to avoid this repetition, we would have to think hard again to come up with an alternative – perhaps something like:
[ A sewing machine is a device [ that joins pieces of fabric together with thread. ] ]
縫紉機是一種用線把一塊塊布料連接起來的裝置
In going about this definition in this instinctive way, you have “cornered” yourself into coming up with a viable synonym for the “type of thing” that a “sewing machine” is, and then into modifying this synonym with a relative clause.
By far an “easier” way of approaching this definition would just be to plunge right into what the “sewing machine does.” For example:
[ A sewing machine joins pieces of fabric together with thread. ]
縫紉機會用線把一塊塊布料連接起來
Here, the sentence is just one clause. The subject is “a sewing machine,” and the finite verb is “joins” – as in, the core action/content of this clause is exactly “what the sewing machine does.”
This way, the definition is just a straightforward and direct one-clause sentence that serves the purpose equally well (with the added bonus of clarity.)
Of course, the previous version of the definition is completely fine too, because “sewing machine” happens to not be extremely hard to define in words either way, but I have found that this simple advice works very well especially with more abstract definitions.
Anyway, see if you can apply this to your own “definition writing” in the future! Haha.
Incidentally, I am currently working on a short, webinar-style course called “10 Practical Writing Tips from Ms. Charlotte” – in which I will share 10 practical ideas you can keep in mind to add more substance, variation, and style to your everyday English writing.
But, of course, the basis of all good writing is sentences that express their intended meanings in a grammatically accurate way. As I have said in another email after a non-student asked me about the “style guide” in the DSE Writing exam, “style” is completely beside the point if you can’t yet produce sentences to express your meanings both structurally accurately and with appropriate vocabulary.
Once you can form structurally correct sentences to express your intended meanings accurately (or know how to use reliable tools to help yourself do so), you can go on to advanced topics like how to enrich your writing in different ways. Only then would you have the proper structural scaffolding in place to understand how to improve your writing at that higher level systematically.
As such, the upcoming course on practical writing tips will be primarily for students who have finished or are enrolled in our foundational course on English structure, Core Concepts of English – because a lot of the content will draw directly on an existing overall grammatical understanding of how English sentences work.
If you are interested in getting an early-bird discount for the course later, sign up here: https://www.mscharlotteacademy.com/10-practical-writing-tips-course-earlybird-interest
We will send you more information when it is available. ✍🏻
我最近——亦算是相當巧合地——和我高中時的化學老師重聚了。和他一起吃晚飯，令我想起某一天下午下課後，他曾經跟我說過的一件事。
當時我正在做一份模擬試卷，有一條題目要我為某種工業化學程序下定義（我已經忘了具體是哪一種）。我問他，我想出來的答案，能不能拿到那條題目值的全部 3 分。
他看完我給他看的答案後，跟我說，那是一個不錯而且足夠詳盡的答案——但其實有一個更「容易」的方法，去寫出內容是「定義」的句子。
他接下來給了我一個非常好的實用寫作貼士——這些年來我一直記得，而且直到現在仍然很有用，因為我現在經常都需要為學生「定義」各種東西——例如文法概念或者語言學概念。😅
那個寫作貼士是這樣的：
與其一開始就說「XXX is __________」，在腦中把自己逼進死角——因為這樣往往會迫使你用很多修飾語去修飾一個名詞組，更不用說你還要很努力去避免重複字——你其實可以直接說「XXX」本身是「『做』甚麼」的，去作整個「定義」句子的核心內容。
這樣說起來聽上去有點抽象又有點複雜，所以我們來看一個簡單例子（當然也是以我們的文法框架為基礎）：
假設我們要為「sewing machine （縫紉機）」下定義。
我們直覺上或習慣上會這樣開始這個定義：
A sewing machine is…
可是，你一開始之後，很快就會發現，「is」後面其實很難接下去。A sewing machine 是「甚麼」？很明顯，它是一種 machine，所以我們大概會說：
A sewing machine is a machine…
但到這裏，我們已經遇到一個問題：在這麼短的距離內，把名詞 「machine」 重複了兩次。這種寫法在風格上不算最好，這一點我應該不用特地告訴你。所以，為了「解決」這個問題，你可能就會嘗試去想（或者去找）一個 「machine」 的同義名詞，好避開這個重複，例如：
A sewing machine is a device…
「Machine」 這個字剛好有一個同義詞——「device」——在這裏沒有問題，因為它也是一個常見名詞，而且意思差不多；但其他名詞未必每次都有這樣容易找到的替代字。
無論如何，就算你找到了這個可行的替代字 「device」，你接下來仍然需要用一個關係子句去修飾這個裝置所做的事——因為很明顯，我們需要把一個完整嵌入子句的內容放進去，才能解釋它的功能。所以，接下來我們就會寫出類似這樣的句子：
[ A sewing machine is a device [ that sews fabric together. ] ]
縫紉機是一種把布料縫合在一起的裝置
關係子句 [ that sews fabric together ] 是修飾名詞組 「a device」的形容詞子句。 （我這裏用 [ ] 來顯示子句分界，就像我在課程框架裏所用的方式一樣。）
這當然是完全可以的，但即使在這裏，我們也要重複用到 「sew」 這個字——而它其實已經以分詞字形「sewing」 出現在我們本來要定義的那個名詞組裏。如果我們想避開這個重複，就又要再努力想一個替代寫法——可能會像這樣：
[A sewing machine is a device [ that joins pieces of fabric together with thread. ]]
縫紉機是一種用線把一塊塊布料連接起來的裝置
當你用這種直覺式的方法去處理這個定義時，你其實就是把自己「逼進死角」：先要想出一個可行的同義名詞，來替代 「sewing machine」 所屬的那種「東西類型」，然後再要用一個關係子句去修飾這個同義名詞。
相比之下，一個容易得多的方法，就是直接跳進 「sewing machine 是做出甚麼功能」 這內容本身。例如：
[ A sewing machine joins pieces of fabric together with thread. ]
縫紉機會用線把一塊塊布料連接起來
這裏，整句只是單一子句。主語是 「a sewing machine」，限定動詞是 「joins」——也就是說，這個子句的核心動作／內容，正正就是 「sewing machine 會做甚麼功能」。
這樣一來，這個定義就變成一句直接、簡單、只有一個子句的句子，同樣能夠達到目的（而且還多了一個清晰度上的額外好處）。
當然，前面那個版本的定義也是完全沒有問題的，因為 「sewing machine」 這個名詞組本身無論用哪一種方式，都不算特別難用文字去定義。不過，我發現這個簡單貼士，特別是在面對一些更抽象的定義時，真的非常有用。
看看你將來能不能把這個方法應用到你自己的「定義寫作」裏吧！Haha.
順帶一提，我最近正在做一個短小、webinar 形式的課程，叫做 「10 Practical Writing Tips from Ms. Charlotte」——在這個課程裏，我會分享 10 個實用概念，讓你在日常英文寫作時，可以記住它們，從而令自己的寫作增加更多內容、變化和風格。
不過，當然，所有寫作的基礎，都是句子本身能夠以文法正確的方式，表達出要表達的意思。正如我之前在另一封 email 裏，回覆一位並不是學生的訂閱者問我 DSE Writing 考試裏的 「style guide」 時所說的那樣：如果你還未能組成在結構上準確地表達你想表達的意思的句子，那麼所謂 「style」 根本完全不是重點。
當你能夠組成在結構上正確的句子，準確表達你想表達的意思（或者你知道怎樣利用可靠工具幫自己做到這一點）之後，你才可以進一步處理一些更高階的課題，例如怎樣從不同角度去豐富自己的寫作。只有到了那個時候，你才算真正有了適當的結構框架，可以在更高層次上，有系統地理解應該怎樣改善自己的寫作。
因此，這個即將推出的 practical writing tips 課程，主要會是為那些已經完成，或者正在修讀我們英文結構基礎課程 Core Concepts of English 的學生而設——因為課程裏很多內容，都會直接建基於你對英文句子如何運作這個整體文法理解上。
如果你有興趣之後以早鳥優惠報讀這個課程，可以在這裏登記：
https://www.mscharlotteacademy.com/10-practical-writing-tips-course-earlybird-interest
有更多資料時，我們會再發送給你。✍🏻