#there are way too many adverbs in here

[mortalityplays]

This is a dangerous sentiment for me to express, as an editor who spends most of my working life telling writers to knock it off with the 45-word sentences and the adverbs and tortured metaphors, but I do think we're living through a period of weird pragmatic puritanism in mainstream literary taste.

e.g. I keep seeing people talk about 'purple prose' when they actually mean 'the writer uses vivid and/or metaphorical descriptive language'. I've seen people who present themselves as educators offer some of the best genre writing in western canon as examples of 'purple prose' because it engages strategically in prose-poetry to evoke mood and I guess that's sheer decadence when you could instead say "it was dark and scary outside". But that's not what purple prose means. Purple means the construction of the prose itself gets in the way of conveying meaning. mid-00s horse RPers know what I'm talking about. Cerulean orbs flash'd fire as they turn'd 'pon rollforth land, yonder horizonways. <= if I had to read this when I was 12, you don't get to call Ray Bradbury's prose 'purple'.

I griped on here recently about the prepossession with fictional characters in fictional narratives behaving 'rationally' and 'realistically' as if the sole purpose of a made-up story is to convince you it could have happened. No wonder the epistolary form is having a tumblr renaissance. One million billion arguments and thought experiments about The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas that almost all evade the point of the story: that you can't wriggle out of it. The narrator is telling you how it was, is and will be, and you must confront the dissonances it evokes and digest your discomfort. 'Realistic' begins on the author's terms, that's what gives them the power to reach into your brain and fiddle about until sparks happen. You kind of have to trust the process a little bit.

This ultra-orthodox attitude to writing shares a lot of common ground with the tight, tight commodification of art in online spaces. And I mean commodification in the truest sense - the reconstruction of the thing to maximise its capacity to interface with markets. Form and function are overwhelmingly privileged over cloudy ideas like meaning, intent and possibility, because you can apply a sliding value scale to the material aspects of a work. But you can't charge extra for 'more challenging conceptual response to the milieu' in a commission drive. So that shit becomes vestigial. It isn't valued, it isn't taught, so eventually it isn't sought out. At best it's mystified as part of a given writer/artist's 'talent', but either way it grows incumbent on the individual to care enough about that kind of skill to cultivate it.

And it's risky, because unmeasurables come with the possibility of rejection or failure. Drop in too many allegorical descriptions of the rose garden and someone will decide your prose is 'purple' and unserious. A lot of online audiences seem to be terrified of being considered pretentious in their tastes. That creates a real unwillingness to step out into discursive spaces where you 🫵 are expected to develop and explore a personal relationship with each element of a work. No guard rails, no right answers. Word of god is shit to us out here. But fear of getting that kind of analysis wrong makes people hove to work that slavishly explains itself on every page. And I'm left wondering, what's the point of art that leads every single participant to the same conclusion? See Spot run. Run, Spot, run. Down the rollforth land, yonder horizonways. I just want to read more weird stuff.

[literaryvein-reblogs]

"troublesome" words

Lie, Lying, Lay, Lain vs. Lie, Lying, Lied, Lied

"Lie" is an intransitive verb meaning "to rest" or "to be at rest." Its forms are: lie, lying, lay, lain. Examples: Lie down. 2) Lying in the sun dries our skin. 3) The parcels lay on the table. 4) We have lain in the sun for thirty minutes.

"Lie" can also mean make an untrue statement. It is an intransitive verb whose forms are: 'lie' and lying (present), 'lied' (both past and participle.) Examples: 1) Please don't lie to me. 2) He was punished for lying. 3) They lied to their parents. 4) They have lied before.

Unlike "lie," "lay" is a transitive verb, so it always takes an object. Remember that "lie" never takes an object because it is intransitive. The forms of "lay" are lay, laying, laid, laid. Examples: 1) Lay the bricks here. 2) He was laying the bricks in rows. 3) Yesterday he laid the bricks ten high. 4) He has laid all the bricks in the wall.

Note that the present tense of "lay" is the same as the past tense of "lie."

Its vs. It's, 'Tis

"Its" is the possessive of the pronoun "it." Note that there is no apostrophe. Example: Its appearance was misleading.

"It's" is a contraction meaning "it is." Example: It's a long way to Tipperary. "It's" can also be a contraction meaning "it has." Example: It's been a long day.

"'Tis" is also a contraction meaning "it is." Example: 'Tis seldom used in modern English.

Set vs. Sit

"Set" is, in most ordinary uses, a transitive verb needing an object. It means to put or place something in a certain position, or to arrange. Its principal parts are: set, setting, set, set. Examples: 1) She set the table. 2) He set the watch.

"Sit" is, in ordinary usage, an intransitive verb. It means to rest somewhere (like a chair) in an upright position. Its principal parts are: sit, sitting, sat, sat. Examples: He sits down.

"Sit" can also be used to talk about where an object is located. Example: The clock sits on the shelf. In a few instances "sit" is used as a transitive verb, such as in: He sat himself down.

Your vs. You're

You have probably encountered confusion between your and you're in many Internet posts.

Sometimes people write comments like "your so pretty in this picture" when they really mean "you're so pretty in this picture."

So what's the difference? Just remember—you're (with the apostrophe) is a contraction meaning you are, but your (no apostrophe) indicates possession or ownership. 

Their, There, and They're

"Their" is the possessive form for the plural pronoun "they." Example: They used their money on video games.

The word "there" has several meanings. As an adverb it means in, at, or about that place. Example: Place the book there.

When used as a noun, "there" means that place. Example: Are you from there, too?

When used as an interjection, "there" expresses an exclamation of triumph or relief. Example: There! It is finished.

"They're" is a contraction meaning "they are." Example: They're going to the show.

To, Too, and Two

"To" is used as a preposition or part of an infinitive phrase. Examples: 1) We are going to the store. 2) Are you going to sing a song?

"Too" is an adverb meaning also or to an excessive degree. Examples: 1) I am going too. 2) You are just too much.

"Two" is the number 2. Example: I have two dollars.

You and I vs. You and Me

"You and I" are pronouns used as either the subject or the predicate in a sentence. Examples: 1) You and I are going. 2) The winners are you and I.

"You and Me" are pronouns used as direct objects, indirect objects, or objects of prepositions. Examples: 1) They have chosen you and me. 2) The reward is for you and me.

Who vs. Whom

Some people think the main difference between who and whom is the way they sound, with whom being the more formal way to say who. In reality, the distinction between them is grammatical.

Even though who and whom are both pronouns, they do completely different jobs in a sentence—who acts as the subject while whom acts as the object.

Just remember to use who to refer to the person who is propelling the action in a sentence; use whom when the person is having the action done to them.

You also use whom, never who, as the object of a preposition.

Who: Subject pronoun; never use as the object of a preposition Whom: Direct or indirect object pronoun; Must use with prepositions

Some examples:

Students who study hard usually earn excellent grades. The pronoun, who, is referring back to the subject, students. (Who earns excellent grades? The students do.) Because the pronoun is referring to a subject, it would be incorrect to use the object pronoun whom.

Earning excellent grades also depends on whom you study with. This sentence has two clauses, but for the purposes of this lesson we'll focus only on the second one, whom you study with. In this clause, whom is the object of the preposition with, so it would be incorrect to use the subject pronoun who.

Hint: You can replace who with other subject pronouns (he, she, I, we, they, etc.) and whom with other object pronouns (him, her, me, us, them, etc.).

The comedian who is on TV right now is the funniest guy I've ever seen. ⇒ He is on TV. Who is the subject of the verb is, so you can replace who with he.

My cousins are the family members whom I see most often. ⇒ I see them. Whom is the direct object of the verb see, so you can replace whom with them. You'll notice that the placement of whom is different from that of other object pronouns—whom generally comes before the subject and verb while other object pronouns like them come after the subject and verb. For that reason, it might not be obvious at first glance that you can replace whom with another object pronoun (you would never say them I see).

A Couple of Sticky Situations: Who vs. Whom

There are certain sentence types that make it difficult to decide whether to use who or whom.

Object of One Clause, Subject of Another This situation involves two verbs with a pronoun between them:It was pitch dark, and I couldn't see who was coming down the hall.Notice how who seems to "stick" to both verbs—it looks like the object of the first verb and the subject of the second. So which pronoun do you choose, who or whom? There's a simple answer—subjects speak louder than objects because they propel the action in a sentence, so always "stick" with the subject pronoun who.

Preposition Separated from its Object Take a look at this example of traditional formal English: For whom are those flowers? Chances are you've never heard anyone ask a question that way. When we talk, the preposition "unsticks" from the pronoun and moves all the way down to the end of the sentence: Whom are those flowers for? Still sound strange? That's because most people would say Who are those flowers for?  but it's really better to use whom because it's the object of the preposition for. It's easy to tell when you're dealing with an object-preposition separation because you can replace whom with him, her, me, us, them, etc. Question: Whom are those flowers for? Whom is the object of the preposition for. Answer: The flowers are for her. Now, in the answer, her has become the object of the preposition for.

Note: Traditionally, it is incorrect to end a sentence with a preposition, but when we talk it happens naturally. Many teachers still prefer their students not to end sentences with prepositions, but this rule has become more relaxed in recent years.

All Ready vs. Already

"All ready" refers to a state of readiness. Example: They were all ready to go. In the case of a singular person, the "all" in "all ready" can be dropped to just say, "Are you ready?"

"Already" means prior to some specified time. Example: They were already packed and ready to go when he arrived.

All Together vs. Altogether

"All Together" means in concert or in unison. Example: They sang all together.

"Altogether" means wholly, completely, or absolutely. Example: This is altogether strange.

All Ways vs. Always

"All ways" or "all the ways" means every manner possible. Example: She was in all ways very humble.

"Always" means at all times. Example: She was always humble.

Everyone vs. Every One

The terms everyone and every one may look the same, but they are used in different contexts. 

Everyone, as one word, is a singular pronoun that refers to a group of people. It's synonymous with its sister pronoun, everybody.

Remember, even though a group is made up of several members, everyone is always singular because you refer to those members as a single group. 

Everyone is used only for people, never animals or objects.

Everyone I know is coming to the pool party on Saturday. Multiple people are coming to the party, but they are being treated as a single group.

These cookies are for everyone. The cookies are for a group.

Every one, as two words, is a phrase that refers to the individuals that make up a group, not to the group as a whole. It is synonymous with the phrases every single one and each one.

You can also use it for emphasis to give your sentence a little more "oomph." Just like everyone, every one is always singular.

However, unlike everyone, every one can refer to anything, including people, animals, and objects.

I think every one of these cakes is delicious. This sentence emphasizes that each individual cake in the group is delicious. You could simply say "These cakes are delicious," but it wouldn't have the same effect.

Every one of them is coming to the party. This sentence also uses every one for emphasis. It's not just everyone who's coming to the party—it's every single person in the group.

Hint: Here's a little trick to help you remember the difference between everyone and every one:

When every and one join together (everyone), you are focusing on the group as a whole—the two words work together as a single unit.

Everyone laughed. (The group laughed.)

When every and one stand alone (every one), you are emphasizing individuals—the two words work separately.

Every one of them laughed. (Each person laughed.)

Award vs. Reward

"Award" means to bestow an honor or object by a considered decision. Example: The principal gave academic awards to the top students.

"Reward" is something given in return for something done, either good or evil. Example: He was rewarded with cookies.

Anger, Angry vs. Mad

"Anger" (Angry) means a strong displeasure and antagonism directed toward the cause of a possible wrong or injustice; wrath; ire. Example: I am angry.

Madness (Mad) means a suffering from or manifesting severe mental disorder; insane; lunatic; psychotic; crazy. Example: Madness is a severe mental disorder.

Note: It is common in informal everyday expressions for the word "mad" to be used for "angry." This covers the explicit and formal meaning of the words.

Can vs. May

In formal speech writing, "can" implies the ability to do something. Example: I can throw a ball.

"May" implies a need for permission. Example: May I throw a ball?

In informal speech and writing, "can" is now acceptable in the sense of "may." Example: Can I leave now?

At the formal level the distinction between "can" and "may" is still observed.

Fewer vs. Less

If you've been to the grocery store lately, you've probably noticed a sign at checkout that says "15 items or less." You'll learn in this lesson that the sign should say "15 items or fewer."

The reason is straightforward—when talking about a quantity you can count with numbers, use fewer, but for an amount you can't count, use less. Below are some examples:

There are fewer students here today than there were yesterday. Use fewer because you can count the number of students. Maybe there were 30 students in class yesterday and only 25 today.

The teacher assigned less homework today than he did yesterday. Use less because the word homework is not countable. It's not possible to make homework plural—homeworks is not a word. You wouldn't say I have three homeworks tonight ... and that actually leads us into this lesson's hint:

Hint: Usually, if you can add s to the end of the noun to make it plural, use fewer, not less.

Just be mindful of exactly what you're trying to communicate; sometimes you can use either less or fewer, but the word you choose will change the meaning of the sentence:

You gave him less pie than you gave me. Yes, it's true that you can add s to the word pie to make it plural. However, this sentence is talking about the amount of pie, not how many pies, so use less.

Last year's pie-eating contest champion ate fewer pies this year than last. This sentence tells us that there is more than one pie. Maybe last year he ate 10 pies, but this year he could only choke down 8. Because you can count the number of pies, use fewer.

Be careful when discussing time, measurements, or money. These often seem countable, but in reality they refer to an amount, so use less, not fewer.

Our business pulled in less than $100,000 last year. You'll be able to finish the race in less than 10 minutes.

Lose vs. Loose

The word lose, with one o, is a verb that means you have lost something that belongs to you. It can also mean to reduce or lessen.

My little sister always loses her toys. Vitamins lose their potency when they are left out on the table.

Spelling Hint 1: When you say the word lose aloud, you pronounce the s like a z.

Spelling Hint 2: Think about the words lose and lost. Both words have the same meaning (when you lose something, it's lost), and both are spelled with only one o.

The word loose, with two o's, means that something is not tight, or that it's coming apart.

He loosened the reins on his horse. My shoelaces always come loose during gym class.

Spelling Hint 1: Unlike lose, the word loose is pronounced the way it looks, with the s making a regular s sound.

Spelling Hint 2: Remember the phrase loose as a goose. Both loose and goose are spelled with two o's.

More Helpful Hints: Lose vs. Loose

Note that these two words can fulfill different grammatical roles.

The verb lose can be turned into a noun by adding a different ending.

The word loose can be used as a verb, an adjective, or even an adverb, depending on the ending you choose.

The words lose and loose are used in many idiomatic expressions (that's a fancy term for slang). This basically means that their conventional definitions can be stretched a bit.

Accept vs. Except

"Accept" means to receive. Example: I accept your invitation.

"Except" means to omit or to exempt. Example: Everyone except Bill will attend.

Affect vs. Effect

"Affect" may be a verb or a noun, but for the purposes of this lesson, treat each instance of "affect" as a verb meaning "to influence or to change." Examples: 1) Illness affects his patience. 2) She attempted to affect a caring attitude.

"Effect" may be a verb or a noun. As a verb it means to bring about. Example: We will effect the changes we want.

As a noun it means result of a cause. Example: What effect will this bring?

Advice vs. Advise

"Advice" is a noun meaning a suggestion or recommendation. Example: What is your advice?

"Advise" is a verb meaning to recommend. Example: I have been advised to attend.

Between vs. Among, Amongst

"Between" shows connection with two persons or things and may refer to space or time. Example: There was an alley between the buildings.

"Among" and "amongst" show connection with more than two persons or things. Sometimes people use "between" when they want to show a connection with more than two things, but this is not correct. Example: They stood among the trees.

Bad vs. Badly

"Bad" is an adjective meaning sick, in pain, unpleasant, or immoral. It is always used with nouns and linking verbs, and it can never be used with action verbs. Example: I feel bad.

"Badly" is an adverb that is used with all other verbs. You use it when you want to say that someone is not good at something or that someone did a bad job. It should not be used as an adjective and is never used with linking verbs. Example: He drives badly.

Breath vs. Breathe

"Breath" is the noun pronounced to rhyme with death. Example: I lost my breath.

"Breathe" is the verb pronounced as to rhyme with sheathe. Example: Breathe deeply.

Bring, Take, Fetch, and Carry

"Bring" implies moving or conveying something from a distant place or person to a nearer place or person. Example: Bring me a drink.

"Take" implies motion away from speaker to a person or place. Example: Please take me to your leader.

Some easy ways to remember the differences between "bring" and "take" are: You bring something here, and you take something there. You bring something toward a person, and you take something away from a person.

"Carry" implies the conveying of something from one place to another. Example: Please carry this to the car.

"Fetch" implies a two-way trip that is to go for something and bring it back. Example: Rover, fetch the ball.

Capital vs. Capitol

"Capital" as a noun can mean either the seat of government or wealth and resources.

As an adjective it means first or excellent.

Sometimes it is used to mean punishable by death (a capital offense). Example: Cheyenne is the capital of Wyoming.

"Capitol" is a noun meaning the building in which a state legislature convenes; a statehouse. Example: The Wyoming capitol building is in Cheyenne. Also is referring to the official building of the U.S. Congress in Washington D.C., the word is capitalized as part of the proper noun: Capitol Building.

Complement vs. Compliment

"Complement" means that which completes. It can also be a complete number or set of people or things. Example: Those shoes complement that outfit.

"Compliment" means an expression of admiration or approval given freely as a courtesy. Example: Her compliment on the outfit was appreciated.

Sometimes the adjective "complimentary" also means free. Example: The hotel provided a complimentary breakfast.

Emigrate vs. Immigrate

To "emigrate" is to leave one's country for residence in another. Example: I emigrated from my home country.

To "immigrate" is to come into a country of which one is not a native. Example: The person arrived in the new country as an immigrant.

Farther vs. Further

"Farther" usually implies the idea of physical distance. Example: San Francisco is farther away than San Diego.

"Further" usually implies the idea of greater abstract degrees. In other words, it is used to talk about concepts such as time and progress, among others. Example: His dreams were further in the future.

Council vs. Counsel

A "Council" is an assembly or group that meets for deliberation. It can only be used as a noun. Example: A council of teachers considered his case.

"Counsel" is a noun that means advice or deliberating together. Example: He accepted the counsel of his mother. Note that "counsel" can also be used as a verb, as in "I am counseling my friend," while "council" can only be used as a noun.

Principal vs. Principle

"Principal" as an adjective means main, chief, leading. As a noun, "principal" means a leader, a head, or a sum placed at interest. Examples: 1) The bus was his principal means of transportation. 2) The principal of the school was new.

"Principle" means a rule of action, a moral standard, or a fundamental truth. Example: The principle of the statement was understood by all.

Whether vs. Weather

"Whether" is a conjunction meaning in either case. Example: Tell me whether you are considering our plan.

"Weather" is a noun meaning a prevailing condition or atmosphere: mental or moral climate. Example: Stormy weather is coming.

Allay vs. Alley vs. Ally

"Allay" is a verb meaning to reduce the intensity, lay to rest, or pacify and calm. Example: His mother attempted to allay his fears.

"Alley" is a noun meaning a narrow passageway. Example: There is an alley behind the buildings.

"Ally" is a verb or noun meaning to connect by some relationship usually showing helpfulness or kinship. Example: The United States is a close ally of England.

Allude vs. Elude

"Allude" is a verb meaning to make an indirect or passing reference. Example: The speaker alluded to his fame.

"Elude" is a verb meaning to evade or escape from something. Example: The soldier attempted to elude the enemy.

Allusion vs. Illusion

"Allusion" is the noun derived from the verb "allude," which is to make an indirect or passing reference to something. Example: She made allusions about her wealth.

"Illusion" is the action of deceiving the eye or mind by what is unreal or false. Example: The magician created the illusion of flowing water.

All-round vs. All Around

"All-round" is an adjective meaning versatile or general. Example: He is an all-round mechanic.

"All around" has the meaning of being all over a given area. Example: Fir trees were all around the cabin.

Alternate vs. Alternative

"Alternate" (as a verb) means to follow one another by turns. Example: Please alternate the colored pages.

"Alternate" (as a noun) means a substitute or second for another person. Example: I am the alternate committee member.

"Alternative" means a choice between two things. Example: We have only two alternatives.

Apprehend vs. Comprehend

"Apprehend" means to take into custody or grasp mentally. While "apprehend" sometimes means "understand," it is best to use "comprehend" because it's easier for most people to understand. For the purposes of this exercise, always use "comprehend" for "understand." The noun form, "apprehension," means a foreboding or dread of something. Example: Please apprehend the criminal.

"Comprehend" means to grasp mentally or understand fully. Example: Do you comprehend this material? The adjective "comprehensive" means all-inclusive or having a wide range. Example: Final exams are usually comprehensive because they include questions on all the material covered in a semester.

Born vs. Borne

"Born" is an adjective that means brought forth as by birth. It can also describe someone who has a natural talent for something. Example: She is a born musician. Common patterns use "born" as a past participle verb form, as in: She was born on the Fourth of July.

"Borne" is the past participle of the verb "bear" (bear, bore, borne) meaning to support, to carry, to hold in mind, to suffer. Example: The fluffy seeds were borne by the wind.

Censor vs. Censure

"Censor" as a noun means any official examiner of books, plays, etc., empowered to suppress them if they are found to be politically or morally objectionable. Example: Is there a censor for our library?

"Censor" can also be used as a verb meaning examine or suppress. Example: Many movies have to be censored before they are put on TV.

"Censure" means the expression of disapproval or blame, strong criticism, reprimand. Example: Will we be censured for our article?

Notable vs. Notorious, Notoriety

"Notable" and "noted" are used chiefly of persons or things that are remarkable or distinguished for favorable reasons. Examples: 1) The notable remark will be remembered for a long time. 2) The noted author spoke at a local club.

"Notorious" is now almost always used to mean of ill repute. In other words, if someone is known for doing something bad, he or she is "notorious." Example: The notorious outlaw was hunted by the law.

"Notoriety," likewise, means unfavorable publicity or distinction. Example: She did not want any more notoriety.

Persecute vs. Prosecute

"Persecute" means to subject a person or group to persistent ill treatment. Example: People tend to persecute teenagers for their different styles.

"Prosecute" means to pursue, carry out, or bring a lawsuit against a person or group. Example: The court will prosecute anyone who breaks the law.

Continual, Continuous, and Consecutive

"Continual" means happening again and again at short intervals as "continual reminders." Example: The loud trucks were a continual problem.

"Continuous" means uninterrupted, whether of time or space, as in "continuous misery," "continuous rain," or "continuous range of mountains." Example: The stormy weather was continuous.

"Consecutive" means occurring one after the other, as in "consecutive days of the week." Example: Are we to attend on consecutive days?

Sight vs. Site, Cite

"Sight" used as noun means vision or the act of seeing. Example: Sight is one of our senses.

"Sight" used as a verb means to take aim or to spot something that is difficult or unusual to see, or make an observation. Example: Sight along the barrel of the gun.

"Cite" is a verb meaning to quote as authority, to mention in a report, or to summon to appear in court. Example: Please cite the applicable law.

"Site" is a noun meaning a place where an event has occurred, or a place where something is located, a place set apart for some specific use. Example: It was a large school site.

Stationary vs. Stationery

"Stationary" means fixed in one place. Example: The cabinet in the kitchen was stationary.

"Stationery" means writing supplies. Example: The stationery had a flower motif.

[toxicpineapple]

writing tips masterpost

hello to my loyal tumblr followers... i am often asked to give writing advice but usually when people ask me this i'm nooooot completely sure what to say despite having a ton of advice to give. it's such a broad question when there are so many different things i can advise on, right? so i thought i'd make a sort of writing advice masterpost where i can compile the tips that i think people specifically in fandoms could benefit the most from hearing, OR that i wish someone had told me when i was still finding my footing as a writer.

hopefully this will be helpful to you. i am putting all of the advice under a read more since this is going to be a long one. let's roll!

✬ paragraph breaks are your friend

the fastest way to get me to stop reading a fic is if i click in and see that there are NO paragraphs made and the entire piece is in a huge block of text. no matter how good your work is, i just can't read it at that point. the giant paragraph makes me get lost, i can't focus on anything... it's a huge no.

the trick is you want your paragraphs to sort of act as a guide for your reader, taking them through the story, keeping them engaged. do not be afraid to do short paragraphs! i can understand wanting to shy away from one or two sentence paragraphs for fear of not having "enough substance" in your work, but the truth is, a thousand short paragraphs is ten times easier to read than a huge block of text.

realistically, you want to have a good amount of variety in your paragraph length. variety is key. readers will notice when your work gets formulaic, and some people will like that, but for others that can turn people away from your work. but don't force it! a paragraph should end at the end of a statement, or if the paragraph is getting too long then cut off the thought and continue in the next paragraph with a transitional phrase.

as a general rule of thumb, you want lines of dialogue by different speakers to be put in separate paragraphs. you also want to avoid doing huge chunks of narration or exposition in the same paragraph as you introduce a new speaker. just make a new paragraph! no big deal. i guarantee you your reader will be way more engaged and nobody is going to come at you for doing more rather than less.

✬ make sure the reader knows who is speaking and when

you don't have to end off every line of dialogue with "she said" and in fact i would really recommend you don't. but you ALWAYS need to have some kind of indication in the text as to who is speaking, otherwise the reader can get lost.

this doesn't necessarily mean that you always have to explicitly say who is saying what, though. if it is obvious in a scene who is saying something -- so for example, a scene where there are only two characters talking OR the dialogue has some kind of phrase, statement, etc that makes it obvious who the speaker is -- then in that case you can just let the dialogue speak for itself. sometimes in writing less can be more. you disrupt the flow of a scene if you start to exposit unnecessarily when the reader could reasonably work something out for themself.

✬ "said" is your friend too

related to the last piece of advice, here's another note: don't shy away from using the word "said".

don't overuse it, either. obviously, you don't want every single line to be "he says" "she says" back and forth, especially when they might be asking questions or shouting, in which case the word "said" probably isn't all that applicable at all. but it's a nice default. if you catch yourself busting out the thesaurus, my recommendation? quit it. just use said. it's not going to hurt you and the reader isn't going to mind.

but yeah, in the event that a character is raising their voice, whispering, inquiring -- there are tons of other words you can use in lieu of said and then an adverb. it's just context-dependent, and also, you don't really want to lean too far one way or another. like i said, variety is key. too much of the same breaks immersion.

✬ if you wouldn't say it yourself, probably don't use it in writing

another related tip. look, i get it. you want to spruce up your writing with synonyms. but the fact of the matter is that a lot of these words that "mean the same thing" on paper actually have wildly differing connotations and if you don't understand what those are you're going to look kind of silly whipping out a word you just found off the internet. we can usually tell, too.

your vocabulary will naturally grow and expand as you continue to read and learn. you don't have to try and force it to seem smarter in your writing. people who can write compelling prose and dialogue without throwing in fancy words they barely understand look a lot more intelligent than people who have a thesaurus at the ready 24/7.

✬ if there's a simpler way to say it, take it

this one can be sort of style-dependent, so if it's not your cup of tea then feel free to take or leave this tip, but in my opinion, taking a whole seven-line paragraph to describe a simple action wastes both your and the readers' time.

how many times have you read a fic where the main characters are having a conversation with these long rambling paragraphs between lines of dialogue? sometimes this makes sense! if you were writing a death note fic it would absolutely make sense for light or L to be pausing every few seconds to carefully analyse their opponent's move... but that's not always the case. sometimes characters are just making small talk.

i'm not saying you can't show off. you should show off where applicable. but there's a time and place. sometimes a scene benefits more from you taking the easy way to describe something and moving on. flowery language is great, but if you're meandering too much the reader will lose interest and attention.

✬ a metaphor is useless if nobody knows what it means

writing is subjective and highly personal. write for yourself first and foremost, and use the metaphors that feel right to you -- but the best metaphorical pieces, to me, are the ones that people can understand and identify with.

you've read a story like that, haven't you? with a reoccurring theme or motif that comes back into play at the end in a way that makes you feel so satisfied and complete? THAT'S what you aim for with literary devices like that. if you write a story that nobody can understand, with metaphors that just don't make any sense -- then you haven't really successfully told a good story, have you?

i understand wanting to have a magnum opus. i think it's easy to fall into the "misunderstood writer" mindset where you want your pieces to be so magnificent that only the likeminded will get it -- but writing is a form of communication. metaphor is just another means with which we can illustrate how we feel. you WANT your readers to understand what you're doing with the metaphors, you WANT the people who step away from your story to know what you were trying to say. you don't have to be obvious, just make it good. make it something that can be reasonably drawn from the text.

at the end of the day flowery language is just flowery language. that doesn't actually make your story good.

✬ grammar intermission

(.) period/full stop: used at the end of sentences. oftentimes not used at the end of sentences in dialogue, because lines of dialogue are considered a fragment of a larger sentence. use a period/full stop at the end of a line of dialogue if the dialogue is followed up by another complete sentence. example:

"i just went to the store," he said, scratching his head.

"i just went to the store." he scratched his head.

(,) comma: used in the middle or to separate different clauses (parts/sections) of sentences. used for incomplete clauses, AKA sections of the sentence that could not function as individual sentences. also used to indicate a slight pause. example:

she reached for the ripest banana, plucking it from the bunch.

a comma can also be replaced by a conjunction like "and" or "but". example:

she reached for the ripest banana and plucked it from the bunch.

(;) semi colon: used to separate different complete clauses in sentences, AKA sections of the sentence that are related but COULD function individually as their own sentences. example:

he sighed as he looked out the window; it had been so long since he stepped outside.

not to be confused with

(:) colon: used at the end of a line that leads into or introduces another line. example:

his fingers drummed restlessly against the window sill. it was finally happening: he was finally leaving this place.

(-) hyphen: used to connect compound words like three-years-old or hyphenated surnames like jones-smith.

(–) en dash: used to indicate ranges of time or distance, like 3–4 hours.

(—) em dash: a girl's best friend. slash j. but an em dash is used to indicate a few different things: an abrupt end to a thought or sentence, a "cut-in" where you interject something tangentially or unrelated before returning to the original thought, or a diversion in the sentence/thought. examples:

"no, listen, you don't understand—"

he scowled—an ugly look on his usually handsome features—and told her to be quiet.

it's not like she had wanted it to go that way—but when had it ever mattered what she wanted?

(()) parentheses: used to add additional context, information, or a semi-unrelated thought that would break the flow of an ongoing sentence without completely taking the reader out. example:

"no, i'm sorry. i just forgot to call you this morning," he said, looking away. (in truth, he'd sat by the phone for fifteen minutes trying to psyche himself into it, but hadn't been able to muster the courage.)

✬ show don't tell, and tell don't show

show don't tell is one of the classic pieces of writing advice that i do, often, think is correct -- but it's a little more nuanced than just never telling your readers what a character is thinking. you want the work to speak for itself without you implanting messages or themes into the reader's brain. at the same time though you don't want them to be doing too much work because it breaks immersion.

this ties into what i was saying above about simpler being better sometimes. you want to be concise especially in scenes that might call for it. a fight scene should be quick and snappy. no need to dig into the physical sensation of being enraged -- just say the character is pissed! but if a character is having a meltdown or panicking, you can get SO much more out of describing how that feels than just outright saying it.

✬ remember your perspective

another huge thing with show don't tell is that you don't want your character to be able to objectively say what everyone else is thinking and feeling -- unless that makes sense for them within the context of the story. really dig into it. DOES the character have a reason to know what their opponents, friends, etc are thinking? how well do they know the other characters? how attentive are they to the emotions of those around them?

it's better to focus on descriptions than labels in that case. say what face a character is making, describe their body language or tone. your character can have impressions, just make it clear that those ARE their impressions. and let your character be wrong! they do not have to be a completely objective source of information.

✬ when it comes to representation, if you aren't confident you can do it well, don't do it at all

i'm one of those people who's kind of of the opinion that white or cishet or otherwise systemically advantaged people have no place being the loudest voices in conversations about representation, least of all AS the representatives. if you are someone with systemic privilege and you choose to portray someone who is oppressed -- that's not necessarily a bad thing. but you need to be willing to do your research and have a sensitivity reader, and you have to be ready for people to say you did it wrong.

not much else to be said about that. your voice on the matter isn't actually all that important. there are people from the demographics involved who DO have stories to tell about themselves that will be MUCH more valuable than your perception of them, so it's honestly better to just let them tell it. that's how i feel.

✬ don't break the rules unless you know how to follow them. in other words, your rebellion should be obvious

a lot of times i see people breaking grammar or other rules and citing "stylistic" choices as their reasons why. which is all good and well, to an extent -- but you want it to be very clear that you ARE breaking the rules on purpose in a way that adds to the artistic merit of your piece.

if you don't know the rules, then it really just comes across like messy work. you both have to know how to apply the rules, and also how to break them in a stylistically significant way. if it doesn't make sense for the rules to be broken, if it says nothing... it's honestly better to just follow them. that's my take.

✬ don't be scared of names and pronouns

i said before that you want variety in your work, and that is very very true -- but it's also true that certain words like names, pronouns, etc will sort of blend into the background in writing. people don't notice them. that means if you're using a name or pronoun a lot in a scene to make it clear who exactly is being referred to...

hey. look into my eyes. breathe. it's okay. you do not have to resort to highlighting arbitrary characteristics of the characters. i know. just breathe. it's okay. use their names. they have them for a reason. it's all good.

this isn't to say that you SHOULDN'T do that, just do it when it makes sense to. if height is something the characters are noticing then use "the shorter boy". if age is relevant, eye colour, hair colour, whatever -- go ahead and use them. but don't be excessive with it. i should not be having to read the bluenette more than i'm reading shuichi's actual goddamn name.

✬ read

this is the huge one. reading other works informs your writing. it teaches you skills and tricks you can use. it helps expand your dialogue and your world view. it might even highlight to you things you do too much of in your own writing. read, all the time, whenever you can. it doesn't have to be books. it can be fanfic, articles, whatever -- just keep reading, because you will be passively absorbing knowledge during that time and it'll help you grow as a writer.

✬ practice

BOOOOOO TOMATO TOMATO TOMATO! SHE SAID THE THING SHE SAID IT!

but listen, it's literally just true. i write almost every day for at least a couple of hours and i have been on a trend of consistent growth for the past five years. go read my fics from 2019 if you don't believe me. i've grown fast and i've grown constantly. you just DO grow through constant practice, even if it doesn't always seem that way.

not only that, but you start to build confidence too. writing a lot helps develop those muscles to a point where you start to realise that you ARE that good and you DO have that dawg in you. or whatever. you just have to keep at it. you're not going to magically improve thinking for six months about how you want to be a better writer without practicing anything about it.

✬ yeah, betas are good

you want to have a good editor. i know that that can feel like having someone ELSE be the reason your piece is good, but that's genuinely not it. a beta reader is a second pair of eyes on your work, someone who can tell you about the issues and mistakes you're missing. they'll tell you when something doesn't make sense. they'll point out your punctuation errors. you don't NEED to have a good editor for every crummy little oneshot... but it's good to have one.

✬ numbers are fine and all but don't compare yourself to other people

i think almost everyone in some kind of creative pursuit wants to get some kind of acknowledgement for it. we want to be the best we can be, and it can be discouraging to receive utterly no validation along the way! i get it!!

just don't get caught up in crunching the numbers. you are not as good as your fanbase is. you alone know your skillset and you absolutely should not say "well this other writer got THIS much attention" because that'll just wear you down. it really will. external validation will only keep you going for so long, and you'll always end up needing more. you HAVE to build your own personal confidence first or you'll crash and burn.

✬ read your writing out loud

there is no quicker way to see if something is wonky in your prose than reading it out loud and seeing if it makes sense verbally. i highly recommend this to anybody who struggles with sentence flow. it's a good one.

✬ yippee hooray!

🥰 and that's what i've got for now. thank you if you made it this far, please take all these tips as you will, it is all subjective of course, these are just the tips that help Me the most when i sit down to write something.

please feel free to ask me for additional advice (on specific topics if you could!) at any time, i love encouraging new writers and i am passionate about writing so i will gladly offer support in any way i can, including beta reading works for anybody who might need that.

take care now 💖

[capnportofficial]

man i love fakeposting what if smurfs had tumblr

0 notes

👓 spectacledsavant Follow

Thank you for being my 31st follower, @hotsexylove72848!

#my brilliant words

2 notes

🌾 farmersmurf Follow

54 notes

🌹 rose-garden Follow

i am simply. pining. yearning. smurfing. when will i have a husband who loves me and who i can love back in equal measure...

#smurf.txt #im too young to marry and boys always seem to love so much more intensely than i do #but i just really wish i could find somesmurf who i can love as much as they love me

1,100 notes

😠 i-hate-usernames Follow

I hate Tumblr.

#I hate tagging.

1,688 notes

💤 slepytime Follow

Life fucking sucks sowmtimes like hwow am i supposed to explain to papa smurf that i want to do work but im too damn tired

#please im so sleepy #im trying so hard

4 notes

🐝 beefanatic33 Follow

Sorry for being inactive these past few days, a family member passed away and I've been grieving.

🔁 prettyasapixie Follow

My condolences, darling! I know how difficult it can be to lose someone close to you. Y'all Smurfs are especially close with each other, too... I hope you're doing okay.

🔁 beefanatic33 Follow

Yeah, I'm smurfing as well as I can. Mary-Anne was a very special bee, and I don't know what I'm going to do without her.

#honey speaks

218 notes

👓 spectacledsavant Follow

I've seen several people on this website confused about the way I smurf, so I thought I'd give a lesson in Smurfic grammar.

Smurf is a language characterized by the usage of the word "smurf." For me, and other Smurfs, it's a psychosmurfical compulsion we can't control- only Papa Smurf has been able to smurf himself to speak in a way understandable to non-Smurfs, and hems had many centuries to learn.

When you speak Smurf, you smurf every so often- within certain grammar rules. Any past participle smurfed with "to smurf" takes an "ed" in the past tense. Smurf can also be used to resmurf a noun, but only one noun in a compound word, and you must keep the prefix and suffix.

For instance, bottle-opener could be smurfed into "smurf-opener" or "bottle-smurfer"- I, personally, prefer bottle-smurfer- but never "bottle-smurf."

Positive adjectives are "smurfy," negative ones are "unsmurfy," but "smurfy" and "unsmurfy" are also words on their own. If you smurf an adverb, that’s "smurfily" or "unsmurfily." If something is better than something else, it would be smurfed "smurfier," and not "smurfer."

These rules are invariable, except in cases of euphony.

More below the cut.

Keep reading

🔁 quartzyy Follow

hey brainy wanna hang out tomorrow. we can go on a picnic

3 notes

🌸 thefairestintheland Follow

looking amazing yet again today, so here's a selfie.

#my face

3,278 notes

[3hks]

Quick and Simple Tips to Elevate Your ACADEMIC Writing!

Essay writing is a different task for everyone. For some, it's pretty easy and straightforward, but for others, it's a serious battle and ungraspable concept! We're all at different levels when it comes to academic writing, and I'm 110% sure that I'm NOT the best writer out here, but if you're looking for some straight-to-the-point advice on improving your academic writing, I might just have what you need!

1. AVOID ABSOLUTES

An absolute is just as it sounds--it's a word that broadly guarantees something. For example, the words never, always, best, worst everyone, no one, are all absolutes!

When we use these in an essay, we're saying that there are zero exceptions to our topic, which is more often than not wrong (not always ;)).

If we say, "everyone likes ice cream", that's not necessarily true; not everyone likes ice cream. And while it seems harmless to use an absolute in this particular case, it's still technically misinformation, and in the formal, academic world, that's something we should avoid.

2. TRANSITION WORDS

In general, transition words are a super easy way to establish the order of our paragraphs and help connect our thoughts from one area to another! It requires minimal effort but they're so useful!

3. LITERARY PRESENT TENSE

When writing about the details that take place in literature, it's conventional to stay in the present tense. This is because in the story, the events are happening as you read. Of course, there are some circumstances when this doesn't happen, but when explaining an event that takes place right then in the story, present tense is the expectation.

4. NO FIRST/SECOND PERSON

Most of us should be aware of this; never use first or second person in academic writing. When you include second person and bring the reader into your essay, well, you're putting them in the spotlight, which is often considered informal. And for first person, in the grand scheme of things, no one really cares about your opinion. (Just kidding! But when readers see words like "I think...", "my opinion...", etc., it reveals bias, which can compromise your essay.)

5. ADJECTIVES, ADVERBS, ADJECTIVES

Use as MANY adjectives (and adverbs) as you can! Yes, I'm well aware that excessively wordy sentences are something to avoid, but that's a problem usually revolving around redundancy and incorporating too much excess information, not because of a few descriptors.

When you use a LOT of adjectives and adverbs, it strengthens your writing with more details and specifically describes your subjects!

6. MEMORIZATION

For the most part, a thesaurus really comes in handy when it comes to essay writing. Finding strong substitutions and varying word choice is a key aspect in writing. However, it's also a good idea to have a simple list of certain, commonly used synonyms memorized in case you don't ever have access to a thesaurus! For the most part, I suggest memorizing some synonyms to any verbs you frequently use. (Ex: shows, explains, depicts, etc.)

But if you've been writing for a while, there's a good chance you'll subconsciously have a mental list anyway!

7. NO BE VERBS

The seven "be verbs":

Is

Are

Was

Were

Am

Be

Being

Been

If you seriously want to really elevate your sentences and make them sound good, avoid these weak verbs. You can do this by substituting be verbs for stronger verbs, which creates a stronger sentence overall! Or you might need to reorder the structure of the sentence, which could alter the meaning slightly, but it won't change the initial idea!

Ex: She is happy today. -> She feels happy today.

Ex: Although the weather was unpredictable, the event was considered a great success for those who attended. -> Despite the unpredictable weather, many considered the event a great success.

So, if you still use "be verbs" in your essays, I challenge you to begin refraining yourself from using them to the best of your ability! While it may seem difficult, I promise you that this will take you academic writing to the next level! Keep in mind that verbs are critical to your essay!

Happy writing~

3hks :D

[ihavedonenothingright]

Captive Prince: Historical References and Naming Conventions

Hi all! I've had this idea in my head for a while now, and I finally had some time (and an Ancient Greek dictionary), so I figured I'd give it a shot. I've always been fascinated by Pacat's worldbuilding, particularly the naming conventions, and as a classicist myself, I wanted to dissect them. So that's what this is. My focus is mainly going to be on Akielos since I don't have as in-depth a knowledge of French, but I'll go through some Veretian names too (je n'ai pas étudié le français depuis deux années, mais Arles… je voudrais parler d'Arles…)

I'm not approaching this with any kind of formal, academic structure, so if something wonky gets through, please let me know! And lastly, I have no idea how many of these are intentional on Pacat's part. This analysis is less about authorial intent and more about how the associations inherent in these names can lend to our interpretation of the work. I'll also be doing this analysis over a few different posts since there is a lot I want to cover. For post #1:

Country Names

This post will solely feature Vere and Akielos since that's already a lot, but I will tackle Patras et. al. later on. There's some very interesting stuff there that I would be remiss not to look at. Of our subjects for today, Vere is the simpler, and the one I am absolutely certain Pacat intended, so I'll start with it.

Vere

Disclaimer: I am in love with this choice. The word itself is actually a Classical Latin adverb derived from the adjective "vērus," meaning "true," and in Latin it's spelled "vērē" (though you will not see those macrons in extant texts, those are a modern pronunciation and differentiation aid). Vērē can be translated a handful of ways; often it's used for emphasis, and in that case it's usually translated as "indeed," but "truly," "rightly," "exactly," and "truthfully" all work in different contexts. Extrapolate vērus and its derivatives for around a thousand years and you get the Old French word "verai" (ouah c'est vrai !) which means, well, "true."

It's also close in spelling and pronunciation to the modern French "verre," which means "glass," which isn't entirely relevant, but is cool. It makes me think of shiny, fragile displays of opulence like the Galerie des Glaces in Versailles. 

The first reason I really like this name is that it calls back to Artes, the Roman-inspired kingdom that we're told once encompassed all of Vere and Akielos, while still fitting current Veretian (aka half-old-half-modern French) grammar and pronunciation. The second is, naturally, that it fits so well into the series' themes of truth, deception, and verisimilitude. The second we're introduced to Vere, and by extension Laurent, there's a subtle hint there that both he and his country are, at their core, more real, genuine, and truthful than Damen and Akielos. We're already building towards Damen's Kings Rising line, "I have never known a truer man." Even if you don't recognize the Latin, your brain will make the connection between Vere and verisimilitude later. It's perfect, 10/10 Pacat, could not have done it better.

And just for fun: a Latin example!

Commentarii de Bello Civili, 2:27. Latin and English available here. 

Hi, sive vere quam habuerant opinionem ad eum perferunt, sive etiam auribus Vari serviunt…

Loeb Translation: "Whether they convey to him the opinion that they really held, or whether they only flatter his ears…" (165)

Slightly more literal translation (by me): "Whether these ones truly convey to him the opinion as they held it, or rather are subservient to Varius' ears…"

Akielos

The name "Akielos" is a lot more… nebulous. I don't know if there is a Greek print of Captive Prince, but my guess is it would be spelled Άκιελος (modern Greek speakers please weigh in, I'm only a year or so into Ancient Greek so I haven't really touched accent marks). That doesn't map neatly to any modern or ancient greek word—at least that I know of. What is does remind me of is Ἀχιλῆος (Achileos) from Ἀχιλλεύς (Achilleus), aka, Achilles. They're so close that I actually realized lately I had unconsciously been pronouncing Akielos as "Akileos" for a while; and in fact, this makes the Veretian spelling "Achelos" make a bit more sense. English and French both use a hard "ch" to represent χ in Greek words; so I imagine, in universe, that the word might actually be spelled Άχιελος. It wouldn't even surprise me if this was the way Pacat originally wanted to spell it, but had to change it for ease of comprehension.

I did have some other interpretations of the name, but I think this is the strongest. Because in addition to the obvious association, the name Ἀχιλλεύς is thought to be derived from the words ἄχος, "distress/grief" and λαός, "people," making it either "the grief" or "grief of/to the people" depending on who you ask (you rely on cases for that sort of distinction in Greek and they're not exactly present here. iykyk).

I really like the idea of Akielos being associated with grief; we're first introduced to it as a country in mourning, and then later on, as the cause of grief in Delfeur. And then you have the association with Achilles, himself a prolific brother killer, who Pacat references later in 'The Fall of Inachtos,' our in-universe Iliad. Insane levels of grief on grief on grief. Plus, because it looks closer to the genitive form, I automatically associate it with the opening line of the Iliad:

μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος

menin aeide thea Peleiadeo Achileos

Sing, goddess, the anger of Achilles, Peleus' son

So we can throw a little rage into the equation. As a treat. 

Also important to note that the -os there is a masculine ending. It doesn't have the most bearing, but it does mean that if we want to be strictly accurate to Ancient (and modern!) Greek grammar, I have to throw a quick article in front of it, making our final "how do the Akielons spell Akielos?" answer: ὁ Άχιελος ("ho Achielos"). The ὁ here is equivalent to le in French, with the major distinction being that in French, you don't typically need an article in front of a proper noun, whereas you do in Greek.

That's it for today's analysis! See you guys next time around for Patras, Artes, and (maybe) Arles, Ios, and Delfeur/Delpha.

Part 2 >>

[tinytalkingtina]

WIP Word Game

Rules: You will be given a word. Share one sentence/excerpt from your wip(s) that start with each letter of that word.

Thank you @little-annie, @vthx, @hbyrde36 and @adverbally for tagging me. Really got me to start working on my Star Trek AU again! Vulcan Steve lives to see another day

L "Look, do you want to do this or not?” Sharon asked. Shit, she sounded fed up. Eddie shook his head violently. “No no no, I do, you’re really hot. It’s just—the clasp,” he managed to mumble into the semi darkness of the bedroom. (Running with the Devil role reversal fic #2) I "I would prefer if you refrained from doing that,” S’tevan said quietly into the room, not quite meeting Eddie’s eyes. (Logical Imperfection) C Carol rolled her eyes as she popped her gum. “What is it with you two today? It’s like someone shoved a stick up both your asses!” (Running with the Devil role reversal fic #2) K "Keep that attitude of yours in check next time, or else I might take my services somewhere else.” (Running with the Devil role reversal fic #1)

S Stupid trailer in this stupid town. Why’d they have to move here in the first place? He liked Kentucky, never felt so dumb and wrong in Kentucky. Dad hadn’t turned mean ’til they moved, and now he was—. (Running with the Devil role reversal fic #2) I If only that had been the last time he dreamed of Steve Harrington.(Running with the Devil role reversal fic #1) D "Don’t move around so much.” Eddie grabbed Steve’s chin to steady him. Steve mercifully fell still. “That’s it, thank you. Doing so good for me there, Big Boy.” (Running with the Devil role reversal fic #2) E "Edward,” Mrs. Click interrupted, fond exasperation on her face. “I’m glad you’re so invested in keeping up school spirit, but for now let’s focus on the Revolutionary War.” Eddie laid the bashfulness on thick as he apologized. (Running with the Devil role reversal fic #2)

F For whatever reason, S’tevan’s ears were tinged the slightest bit greener than normal. Eddie was completely lost. “You, you brought me a mug?” S’tevan nodded his head. “Yes. I received this as a trinket from my time aboard the Klingon vessel exploring the Inverted Place, however, I do not drink raktijino. You have shown an affinity for displaying them in your quarters, therefore it is logical that you may have greater use for it than I.” (Logical Imperfection) I "I once again question why we are putting our lives in the hands of a hatchling.” Birdie was grumpy, had been since she transformed back.(Soaring Symphony) R Really he should have seen this coming sooner, but then again, he had been mated for only one day. It would be really lovely if the powers-that-be could cut him some slack. (Soaring Symphony) E Eddie hugged his knees closer to his chest. Maybe if he squeezed hard enough, he would be able to feel his Mama’s arms wrapped around him. (Running with the Devil role reversal fic #2)

F Flying was, well, exhilarating. Through their bond, Big Boy’s absolute joy thrummed high and sweet, the note echoing in the back of his mind. (Soaring Symphony) R "Reasoning did not factor into my decisions. It was a serious imperfection in my logic.” (Logical Imperfection) U Underneath the mask, he could be anyone. The feeling was both freeing and a little terrifying. (Running with the Devil role reversal fic #2) I It’s not like Eddie hadn’t spent time with enthusiastic partners. But he had never seen such naked adoration in anyone’s eyes before. (Logical Imperfection) T Tommy’s not wrong, it fits him perfectly. Hides the way his t-shirt’s a little too worn. Fills out his shoulders too. Thank goodness, because no matter how many pushups he does before school, they remain stubbornly bony. (Running with the Devil role reversal fic #2)

Should you accept this mission to play too, your word is PINE. Go and share those WIPS :D No pressure tagging @augustjustice @hairstevington @griefabyss69

@pearynice @penny00dreadful @ataliagold (If anyone sees this and wishes they were tagged too just PM me and I'll tag you!)

[cursed-40k-thoughts]

MTG or YGO?

Long post? Long post!

Are you asking what I prefer? YGO. Are you asking what I think is better? That is wholly dependent on what a person wants out of a card game.

YGO's biggest barrier to entry is the fact that the cards are written in their own form of legalese. I mean this very literally, too. They use "Problem-solving card text" where it makes use of deliberately placed adverbs in effect descriptions to dictate moment to moment interactions. It is almost like learning a new language, and has been compared to learning how to read through legal documents. It becomes comprehensive once you wrap your head around it, and is the reason you can do some properly crazy/funny shit in the game, but wrapping your head around it and understanding what new cards do is a whole thing. Having someone who's played YGO before teach you how to play the game is basically the most reliable way to learn it. It's genuinely a problem.

MTG is, comparatively, much easier to learn. Very low floor of entry, and sequenced in such a way that you can understand basically how the entire game works in a few hours. MTG's complexity 100% exceeds YGO's at the uppermost levels, but the way game comprehension builds on itself is much cleaner, so it feels less obtuse overall.

MTG is mechanically more casual friendly. The current MTG darling format, Commander, is basically a 2ish hour social game where four people engage in a free for all that hinges partially on social politicking. It's typically chill. You also have a lot of assorted 1v1 formats and such. There is likely a "way to play" that will resonate with you, and the games tend to be slowish.

YGO doesn't really have multiple formats in a meaningful way. You can absolutely do group stuff and set informal rules, but the game ultimately hinges on 1v1s. With the frontal complexity of card text, these can and will feel very lopsided and frustrating until you understand what's going on. Once you do know, it's super cool, but getting to that point can feel like a chore. The games are also typically quite fast (maybe 3-6 long turns) and very dense with card interactions and timings. I enjoy it for the way it makes me strategise (or not), but it's definitely a preference thing.

Cost is something where YGO absolutely curb stomps. I can get a whole deck of picked out cards, plus a suite of "staple" (eternally meta relevant) cards, with lots of cool foiled versions and stuff, for like 50-70 bucks USD. You are NOT doing that with MTG. MTG is a stupidly fucking expensive game, where reprints of important cards are rare to encourage market speculation (I am not kidding) and finance bros have an ACTUAL PLACE in the community. There is a reason that casual MTG encourages proxy use. It's fucked. Also, as an aside, MTG's shiny/foil cards are dogshit. Same-y and super prone to curling. YGO foils are extremely good and pretty.

Cost feeds into another issue; set rotation. You can argue merit in both directions with this one, but for the average person with average money to spend, MTG takes another L here. MTG has set rotation. Basically, in the standard 1v1 format, cards that have been out more than 3 years will no longer be playable in that format, and you have to get the new cards. A lot of the alternate 1v1 formats in MTG actually just boil down to "1v1s but you can use cards as far back as X" because... people want to use their cards they bought. YGO doesn't have this. It instead has a banlist, updated every couple of months, that aims to curb problematic card interactions. Ultimately, though, if you buy a thing and like the thing, you can basically always use the thing. (MTG, as an aside, also has banlists for its formats, but it's in addition to the rotation stuff. The fact so many formats are there to ignore X years of rotations is also kinda telling, imo.)

Art direction and flavour are a personal thing. I like both, though I think that YGO's reputation for archetypal/thematic variation and card art quality are well-earned. That'd be wholly up to your preferences.

So yeah, I have a fondness for both games, but I ultimately prefer YGO because I like doing unhinged bullshit in it, I like the art a whole lot, and I like that all my cards are affordable and retain usability in a typical play environment.

[pygmi-cygni]

hey! hope your having a good day/night. i was just wondering how to make the sentences blend together better? and also any tips on like how to go into more detail? sorry if that sounds stupid lol. sorry if you already wrote about this!

I did touch on this on my writing blog @pygmi-says-hi (which has all of my writing advice/writing tips, go check it out!) on this post but I can also write about it here!

As far as details go - here are some do's and don'ts :)

don't: be too flowery.

too many adjectives or adverbs gums up the sentences and makes it hard to read. If you are trying to convey something's appearance while also describing important plot details, it's important to keep it streamlined and informative. The thesaurus is gonna be your best friend.

Keep the descriptions concise and separate from the plot sentences. My rule of thumb (not the law, do what you want, this is my process) is to keep action descriptions (fight scenes or movement montages) short and sweet, and spend more time on the exposition paragraphs. That way, the readers know what the setting looks like beforehand so that the action can still be fast-paced and easy to follow.

don't: worry about the little things

naturally, humans fill in the blanks with their imagination. You don't have to go into every nook and cranny to provide a well-rounded setting. Atmospheric writing is a way to convey the accurate mood/vibe of a setting that avoids 'white room syndrome' (aka not having any description and feeling lost without a location). Get the basics outlined and move on.

do: keep it consistent

overdescribing certain places/things and underdescribing others is not a good way to go. maybe your story works best with minimal setting and heavy emotions. or it has a sumptuous environment with richly detailed clothing and merchandise, but the plot is slowly meandering. as long as it conveys your story well, that's all that matters.

that being said - keep the style consistent. the audience will get confused if you hyperfixate on something and then ignore other things of potentially more importance.

do: prioritize

what really needs describing? what could do without the adjectives? outlining this reduces the 'heavy' feeling of paragraphs bogged down with setting descriptions.

do: maintain the vibe

group the descriptions and details together. find synonyms with a similar feel to them. example:

slimy, viscous, gelatinous, gluey, oily all kind of have the same vibe, but slippery, slick, gluey, sticky have a different vibe. the first set of words feel gross and alien. the second (to me) feel like an earthier description.

they might mean the same thing, but the sound and feel of the word has a different tone. play around and see what works!

xox hope this helps!

[horizon-verizon]

Same anon who asked about George talking about Daenerys here. Was referring to how there was originally supposed to be a five-year jump, and before that time was supposed to move faster over each book. George is pretty open about how that part of the story keeps getting away from him. He's also very open about which character he'd most like to spend time with and why, whenever anything close to the question comes up. Even if the question doesn't focus on "romance," he likes to find ways to bring it up. And look I try not to judge too much, but it does add some weirdness to how he likes to write older men falling over themselves for Daenerys and how he writes about the appearance of a (at least on paper) teenage girl.

Anon refers to this post. And I saw a tweet finally as to what i think you were talking abt.

This is extremely fair (what a weird adverb to use for this adjective).

Because the difference b/t how many over 20s males w/under-18s girls George thinks are appropriate versus what most people reading his books (excluding a lot of cis-hetero men, let's bfr) is a pretty large difference. Me, I've already argued for Rhaegar-Lyanna (no I don't consider Rhaegar the issue here), I disagree with the idea of Dany-Drogo being in any way "positive" or arguable for reasons other than the ages, and etc. But I understand your thoughts bc there are bonds that could have been comfortably cute if they hadn't been...suggestive, like Sansa and the Hound. It's a Watsonian/diegetic vs Doylist/exegetic thing for me that is not as static as you may think bc I still get weirded out for some interactions and wonder why exactly we needed say a 14 yr old to get groped by a grey-Frey troglodyte. There are other ways to convey Frey's grossness as well as the power such noble men are licensed in Westeros over younger girls and women.

I'll just say that maybe (and I think I'm being generous bc I remember a certain video whose link I do not have, sorry) that made me look askance at dear George abt Dany. Because even if you wanted her aged up in the beginning and later changed you mind, now that she is canonically nowhere near 18 (which would still be weird at your winter age) why are you now making comments about her attractiveness being a critical reason as to travel with her? Hmm...You really do fight for your life in this fandom.

[literaryvein-reblogs]

How to Improve your Writing

Rick Riordan's Writing Tips

Rick Riordan:

Taste is subjective, and opinions differ about what "good writing" looks like. Most of us have read a bestseller or two and wondered, "How did this thing get published?" Nevertheless, I would argue that most work does not get published unless it demonstrates a certain level of technical competence. The grammar is correct. The prose is readable. I would further argue that most manuscripts are rejected because the writing is not technically competent. The manuscript never stands a chance because the writer simply doesn't know the craft of writing well enough. If you write well, you have already set yourself apart from 99% of what agents and editors see every day. Below are some notes on what I call "sentence level competence" — the ability to craft prose at the most basic level. These tips reflect the most common problems I've observed in unpublished manuscripts.

Sentence-Level Competence

Sentence focus — the subjects of all clauses should be appropriate to the content of the sentence.

Favor the concrete over the abstract, the antecedent over the pronoun.

Example: It was a sunny day. (the subject "it" is boring and vague.)

Better: The sky was brilliant blue. (Here the subject is sky, which is what the sentence was supposed to be about.)

If you are writing a sentence about a guy named Fred, the subject in the sentence should be (surprise!) Fred.

Exercise

Go through a page of prose and underline your own subjects.

How many are abstract?

How many of your sentences are truly focused?

Modifiers

Be sure the modifier refers to the right thing.

The modifier should refer to the closest noun.

Confusing modifiers will trip up the reader, consciously or subconsciously.

By the same token, pronouns should have clear antecedents.

Always place the modifier as close to the subject as possible.

Example: Can you help other writers who are writing books like me? (I got this question recently. I understand what the person is saying, but 'like me' follows the word 'books' so he is implying, without meaning to, that there are people producing books that look like him.)

Better: Can you help other writers like me who are writing books?

Exercise

Color-code a page of your manuscript, making each phrase and clause a different color.

Match up dependent clauses and phrases with their modifiers.

Avoid getting your modifier too far away from the thing being modified.

Deft Description

Choose your details carefully.

A description should be vivid, but surgically precise.

The detail must be given for a reason, and have a logical connection to the plot or advancement of character.

Avoid long "grocery lists" of details.

For a paragraph-length description, offer a uniting theme — an extended metaphor — to give the details cohesion.

Example: He was six feet tall, three hundred pounds, with brown hair, small brown eyes, a big nose and big fists. He wore jeans and a muscle shirt. He looked angry. (this is way too much description for the reader to keep track of, and it is offered as a random list)

Better: He looked like a rhino, ready to charge. (then you can pick a few details that reinforce the image of a rhino)

Exercise

Go through a chapter and delete all adjectives and adverbs.

Read through, then add some back in sparingly.

You may find you can do with less than before.

Parallelism

Clauses or phrases that are part of a list should be similar in structure.

Unparallel constructions are awkward and difficult to read, even if the reader can't put her finger on the exact problem.

Example: He likes dogs, hiking in the woods and reads books a lot. (Dogs is a single noun, hiking in the woods is a participial phrase, reads books a lot is a simple predicate. These are all totally different things. Make them the same, and the sentence will flow much better.)

Better: He likes walking his dog, hiking in the woods, and reading lots of books.

Exercise

Try constructing your descriptions in parallel units — absolutes, infinitives, adjectives.

Source ⚜ Writing Notes & References

[i-translated]

I want to talk about syllable count in English vs Russian, and I'm going to use "Surface Pressure" as an example because of how fucking horrendous the official Russian translation is, let's go.

So English is a relatively simple language, and a lot of its simplicity is owed to how little various grammarical structures affect the modifications of words.

English nouns aren't gendered and only ever go through a transformation when you add a plural. Car - cars, city - cities, etc. Note that an -s at the end is itself a consonant, and in most cases does not influence the syllable count of the word.

English adjectives don't even have plurals. A fast car - two fast cars. The only modifications occur in comparatives (a fast car - a faster car -the fastest car) or in derrived adverbs (a quick move - to move quickly). All of these add only one syllable most of the time.

Verbs go through the most transformations. I move - I moved - I'm moving, etc. You can pair then with auxilary verbs (I have moved), though again in many cases it doesn't influence the syllable count (I move - 2 syllables, I've moved - still 2 syllables, only a bit more of a mouthful).

Now, there are obviously more complex structures out there, this is just a short sample for comparison. Now let's look at what's going on in Russian.

Nouns in plural typically gain at least one additional syllable. Conpare: cat - cats vs кот - коты. An ы is a vowel. A bitch to rhyme, too.

Nouns have cases. For instance: (this is a) house - дом, 1 syllable; (in the) house - (в) доме, 2 syllables.

Adjectives also have cases, and they match the nouns that they are describing. See: (this is a) big house - большой дом, 3 syllables; (no) big house - (нет) большого дома, 5 syllables.

If you have more than one adjective in a row, all of them have to natch the case of the noun they're describing. See: big pretty house - большой красивый дом, 6 syllables; (no) big pretty house - (нет) большого красивого дома, 9 syllables.

Verbs are even worse. There's no gerund, so every instance of it in English is a separate sentence. For instance: I saw him running - Я видел, как он бежал (lit. I saw how he ran). It's almost always at least two additional syllables, if not more.

Present participles get even longer. I need a separate bullet list just to demonstrate. Compare:

I run (2 syllables) - я бегу (3)

Running (2) - бегущий (3)

Running by (3) - пробегающий (5)

(A girl) running by (3) - пробегающая (6)

(To the boy) running by (3) - пробегающему (6)

And these are just the simplest examples. There are English infinitives that turn into whole Russian clauses (I want you to go - я хочу, чтобы ты ушёл). There are simple, everyday use words that are just longer on average, like:

If (1) - если (2)

When (1) - когда (2)

Which (1) - который (3)

This (1) - это (2)

Why (1) - почему (3)

Because (2) or 'cause (1) - потому что (4)

I could go on. Then there's also the fact that Russian is very phonetically consistent, meaning there's little to no phonetic reduction. You can't y'all'd've your way our of a long ass sentence. You have to work with it.

So here's what you end up with.

On one hand there are Russian-to-English translations that are short on syllables and you have to pull them out if your ass to fill up those bars. Not saying there isn't an occasional tight squeeze - Russian too can be concise and punchy in a non-verbose way - but to me the space within the lines seldom feels too cramped. You may phrase something in an unnecessarily complicated way or add a word that wasn't in the original, but as long as you stay humble and remember your role as a translator, you can do the original justice with minimal errors.

On the other hand you have English-to-Russian translations that always - and I do mean always - have too many fucking syllables. This is arguably much worse. One's ass may very well be a bottomless pit to pull words from, but you can't stuff them back in. Those syllables aren't going anywhere. You have a sentence on your hand and you can't cut any of that sentence without losing a part of its meaning.

If you've been following the logic so far, you're probably asking yourself: so what the fuck am I supposed to do with all those leftover syllables? That's a very good question! I ask it every day. It's agony.

Here are a few methods I've learned to utilize.

Sentence-slicing. Sometimes you can't match the lines exactly, so you step on the next oine until you get obe with some breathing room and "catch up". You can't do this too often or for too many lines in a row because the translation starts to "fall behind", but there are times when you can get away with it.

Wordplay! It's pretty hard to pull off in Russian but you totally can, and it feels amazing when you pull it off. Why use two words when you can use one with a double-meaning?

Use thesaurus. And if that don't work? Use more thesaurus.

Sometimes things will get cut. You must accept it. Not every metaphor can be translated. Not every rhyme can be preserved. Some words will have to be changed. This is very important to understand. A good translator must take responsibility for every meaning they twist. They must analyze the material on more levels than just literal and linguistic in order to accurately transfer it into another language with minimal, acceptable losses. I cannot stress enough how hard and how important this is.

Now, let's talk about "Surface Pressure".

The original lyrics were written by Lin-Manuel Miranda, and I don't fucking care what anyone says, this man got bars. It's kind of a trend to poke fun at Hamilton, but In the Heights won a ton of awards, and nobody fucking says the songs in Moana were bad, do they? Point is, I like his lyrics. They're extremely good. Great job, Mr. Miranda.

The Russian translation I'm going to be tearing to shreds today was, from what I could find with tough fucking luck, made by Disney Character Voices International, Inc.. This is only to say a studio approved it. I'm not harping on, like, one little guy. There were corporate decisions made there.

I'm also gonna compare it to my own translation because I just think that it's better. It's not perfect by any means, but then the bar is already pretty damn low.

With all that out if the way, lets read some lines! Out of order because this is my post and I can do what I want. Exhibit A.

"It's pressure like a drip, drip, drip that'll never stop // Pressure that'll tip, tip, tip 'til you just go pop" is a line from the chorus that gets repeated a few times. I likeit because it's cute, evocative, and alliterative - it creates a particular "beat" sound by using frequent consonant repetitions "drip-drip-drip" and "tip-tip-tip".

The original translation gives us: "Давит тебя вниз-вниз-вниз и всё ближе дно, Давит тебя вниз-вниз-вниз, выплыть не дано" - lit. "Pushes you down-down-down and the bottom gets closer // Pushes you down-down-down, it's impossible to surface". It's not the worst offender but the alliteration is gone to fuck, now it's "down-down-down" in both lines and sounds pretty repetitive.

I did it like: "Давление по кап-кап-капле прижало грудь // Тянет тебя вниз, вниз, вниз, не даёт вздохнуть" - lit. "Pressure by drip-drip-drip(drops) pressed your chest // Drags you down-down-down, doesn't let you take a breath". The first line is actually a wordplay, "кап-кап-кап" (kap-kap-kap) is the sound water droplets make, and "давление по капле" or "pressure by drops" is a lowkey classic metaphor for continuous strain on one's nerves. The line also isn't tautologic because it uses two different words for pressure.

I wanted to keep more of the origial meaning but "pop" did not translate. Couldn't imagine what one would say instead. Хоба? That's so rustic.

If you're thinking "it's not too bad" then we'll get there when we get there. Exhibit B.

"Diamonds and platinum, I find 'em, I flatten 'em // I take what I'm handed, I break what's demanded, but-" is one of my favorite lines in the goddamn song. Notice how the first line has a quadruple rhyme? So fucking crisp and juicy. Fuck yeah!

The original translation gives us: "Тверже бриллианта, сильнее Атланта // Я всем помогаю, я строю-ломаю, но-" - lit. "Harder than diamond, stronger than an Atlas // I help everyone, I build and break, but-" and y'all this is so cringe. What's up with "I help everyone"? It's so childish, it doesn't fit the tone of the song at all. All the rhymes in the second line are verb rhymes which is the laziest, most childish, most unoriginal type of rhyme in the entire goddamn language. Seriously. Silver Age poets are turning in their coffins right now. Good fucking heavens "Строю-ломаю" what a Care Bears ass phrasing. Also, Atlas? Really? Go off ig but I think that's just cause they couldn't find another rhyme for diamond and didn't even try for platinum.

I did it like: "Бриллианты и платина - вызов под стать, а мне // Брать что дают и ломать что некстати, но-" - lit. "Diamonds and platinum are a challenge to match (me), I have to // Take what I'm given and break what's not right (what's amiss, what's unneeded, neither here nor there)". So the quadruple rhyme still couldn't be preserved (sorry Mr. Miranda) but I did manage to rhyme platinum, and I kept the "I take what I'm handed" line in a way, which I feel is very important? Like, in the context of the song? It refers to her literally carrying physical items as a part of her work and to her metaphotically "taking" shit from her family that was pressuring her, and it reads both ways in translation too, it's kind of like "be content with what you're given", it's very in-character, I feel like. I did lose rhymes though. Can't be helped, I suppose.

"It's still pretty okay-" EXHIBIT C:

"Pressure like a grip, grip, grip, and it won't let go // Pressure like a tick, tick, tick 'til it's ready to blow" - another line from the chorus, very good alliteration still, very steady rhythm, very evocative, I kiss this song on the mouth if you even care.

The original translation throws at our face: "Давит тебя вниз-вниз-вниз, это нелегко // Давит это, тик-тик-тик, взрыв уже недалеко" - lit. "Pushes you down-down-down, it's not easy // Pushes means tick-tick-tick, the explosion is already near". I fucking hate "it's not easy" for how stupidly blunt it is, I hate that "tick-tick-tick" no longer has as strong of a metaphorical connection, I hate that they repeat "down-down-down" for the third goddamn time, but y'know what? I could forgive all that if they haven't broken the rhythm. Allow me to illustrate.

Slashes are stressed, Us are unstressed, the dash is a skipped beat.

Do you see the extra syllable? Do you see it? I see it. I lose my sleep because of it. This isn't, like, a classic translation liberty. This is legit a mistake. They just said Fuck It, Who Give A Shit. Well, I does. I gives a shit

I did the line like: "Давление как взять-взять-взять и держать в тисках // Давит будто тик-тик-тикает и бабах!" - lit. "Pressure like to grab-grab-grab and hold you in a clamp (a vise? what's it called, the scary construction tool) // Pushes as if tick-tick-ticks and kaboom!" So... Ticking is a verb now! And a bit of a wordplay, too. My line is actually one unstressed syllable short but it doesn't break the rhythm because you can, y'know, stretch the previous syllable. Cause it's a song. And you do that in songs. Also the next beat is the one you skip anyway. God, I sound so arrogant but this is just so much better.

So I actually didn't check the official translation at all when I made mine, but there's a part we did very similarly but the official one is just... Clearly worse? Okay, hear me out. Exhibit D.

"Who am I if I can't carry it all? If I falter..."

The original translation presents: "Кто я, если всё не потяну? И вдруг дрогну..." - lit. "Who am I if I can't carry everything? And suddently falter..."

My version is: "Кто я, если всё не потяну? Если дрогну..." - lit. "Who am I if I can't carry everything? If (I) falter..."

Pretty straight-forward but I'll explain. My issue is with the "If I falter" part.

So. Mine is pretty word-for-word, the official one adds a "suddenly" in there. Why, I don't fucking know, but it's not thematically terrible abd doesn't step on the meaning of the line, so whatever. But.

But! I know y'all can't read cyrillics so let me translit that real quick.

First, my version: Если дрогну - Yésli drógnu

Now the other one: И вдруг дрогну - I vdrúg drógnu

This isn't, like, critical, but if you look at the consonants on the second one, it's just VDRGDRG

I mean, fucking hell, right? I'm a native speaker and it's hard for me to say out loud. Why did they feel like it needed to be there? Why did they not just translate literally this one time where a word-for-word translation would fit perfectly? Who thought this soft gentle fade-out part needed to sound like a steel bolt in a cheese grater? Top fifteen questions that keep me up at night.

We're getting to the really bad ones.

So, the verse repeats the phrase "under the surface" a few times and rhymes on it. Like, a lot. It's very impressive and I love it.

Me, I'm a madman who loves pain and suffering, so I translated it as "сказать открыто" lit. "to tell openly" and then stayed up all night rhyming on Ы.

The official translation, however, hates to use its brain, so it went with "на самом деле" lit. "actually" and then rhymed with fucking. Nouns in the same case. Like some type of kindergarten.

I'm gonna list a bunch of lines that use this bit so I wanted to get that out of the way. Now, exhibit E.

"Under the surface, was Hercules ever like 'Yo, I don't wanna fight Cerberus'?" is a line I like for it's rhyme and dislike for something else I'll tell you in a bit.

The official translation smacks me upside the head with: "На самом деле, а мог ли Геракл сказать: 'Подвиги мне надоели'?" - lit. "Actually, could Heracles say 'I'm tired of (heroic) feats'?" which breaks the rhythm again and follows neither the original nor the music, but is overall okay if you don't count how childish it all sounds.

I did it like: "Сказать открыто Геракл не смог бы, что, мол, этот подвиг претит ему." which is actually a wordplay, so a literal translation would do something like "To tell openly, Heracles couldn't (tell openly) that he's sick of this (heroic) feat".

Note how we call him Heracles, not Hercules. That's cause that's his fucking name in the myth.

He didn't fight Cerberus either, he tamed him.

Also my translation follows the beat of the song, at least. Fucking hell of a line.

Okay, ready for the worst goddamn line ever? Meet exhibit F.

"Under the surface, I'm pretty sure I'm worthless if I can't be of service" is a hella powerful line to me personally.

Let me show you my version first this time, it goes like: "Сказать открыто, невыносимо стыдно, что я непродуктивна" - lit. "To tell the truth, (I am) unbearably ashamed that I am unproductive". It's not the prettiest line but it's solid enough.

The official translation curses my fucking bloodline with: "На самом деле, я каждый день недели стараюсь быть при деле" - lit. "Actually, every day of the week I try to be at work". You don't need to speak Russian to notice that within the span of a line these people actually and with full seriousness rhymed "деле" and "деле".

"Well maybe it's just a different word" no it's not.

It's the same word.

They rhymed on the same word.

I actually wanted to add more but Tumblr glitched and posted instead of saving to drafts. I think it's good like that. We're done here.

[german-enthusiast]

a run-of-the-mill German 6-line-sentence

1: The quote

Due to my studying the second-language-acquisition of German in university, I tend to notice complex sentences (probably more than the average reader). In the book I'm currently reading ("Sprache ist, was du draus machst!" by Simon Meier-Vieracker) I stumbled upon this sentence:

Um zu verstehen, wie Fußball in unserer Gesellschaft zu dem werden konnte, was er ist, nämlich ein für viele Menschen Identitätsstiftender, einen riesigen Markt begründender und in andere Bereiche wie die Politik ausstahlender Teil der Alltagskultur, muss man auch die Sprache in den Blick nehmen, mit der über Fußball gesprochen und geschrieben wird.

(In the book this spans 6 lines)

2: Translation

For those who don't know German or are still learning it, here's help:

In the picture, I've gone for a phrase-by-phrase translation. A more elegant translation that still keeps it as one sentence might be:

In order to understand how soccer could -in our society- become what it is, which is a part of everyday culture that establishes a huge market and for many people even identity, and which also radiates into other areas like politics, one has to take into account the language which is used to speak and write about soccer.

(I realize that there's a comma too many after "the langauge" in the picture but I can't be bothered to go back and change that now)

3: Thought One

The thing (for me at least) is: This German sentence isn't even that crazy.

Yes, even German natives will probably notice that this is a long sentence and weak readers/native Germans struggling with academic language will possibly need multiple reads to comprehend it fully

but in the grand scheme of things, this is not the worst it can be! (See for example the famous author Thomas Mann and his sentences, which stereotypically and famously span one to one and a half pages).

For additional context, Simon Meier-Vieracker, the author of the book this quote is from, is a linguistics professor BUT the audience for this book is specifically non-linguists and the writing generally is academic-ish but intentionally bridging between everyday language and linguistic topics!

4: Thought Two // So what?!

You might wonder why I even find it noteworthy as a long German sentence because, as shown above, it can be translated into an equally long and complex English sentence.

What's different between the elegant English translation and the German original is that in the OG, the definition of "what it is" is made up of participles ("identitätsstiftend", "begründend", "ausstrahlend"). I've translated these as English participles in the screenshot but you might've noticed that it's rather weird and clunky!

In English, when creating long run-on sentences, people usually go for multiple dependent clauses.

We do this too, of course! The last part of the OG ("mit der über Fußball gesprochen und geschrieben wird") is one of those.

However, we often extend sentences by adding in grammatical modifiers (in German "Attributes", which IMO is a way more commonly word already than 'grammatical modifiers') that are not dependent clauses.

Short digression: What's a grammatical modifier? Wikipedia explains, it is "an optional element in phrase structure or clause structure which modifies the meaning of another element in the structure. For instance, the adjective "red" acts as a modifier in the noun phrase "red ball"" Typical grammatical modifiers are adjectives and adverbs (though they are not always used as modifiers!). Nouns can also be modifiers (consider: "land mines" or "mines in wartime"). Dependent clauses can also be modifiers. [end of digression]

Back to German: As stated, we like going for non-sentence modifiers (in addition to clauses as modifiers). The three participle-phrases in the German quote are great examples of this. They are not dependent clauses (since they do not have a finite verb), they're "merely" phrases - participle phrases. Again, English uses these a lot too but not as much to build huge sentences (which in general aren't as typical for English as they are for German).

5: Conclusion

Long German sentences can be a pain for both German learners and German natives, but I just love to analyze them and I think it's so fun to notice how long German sentences come about. That's it. I just thought this was neat.

TL;DR Long German sentences are often not only comprised of many (main and dependent) clauses. Instead of dependent clauses, you'll also often find pariciple phrases which largely fulfill the function of a dependent clause but are a little funkier. English doesn't do this as much. I think it's fun.

[slayingfiction]

Creating Your Fictional Language AKA Conlang

Hi Everyone!

As I am working currently on a conlang for my WIP, I thought I might post about the steps for anyone else thinking of going above and beyond in their world building to create an entirely new language.

First: if you don’t want to create your own language but need one for your WIP, there are many online generators that will do it for you. My favourite is vulgarlang.com and it comes with a free demo version.

Before we begin:

IPA: learn all about the International Phonetic Alphabet. This is when you will be deciding which sounds will be present in your language.

Study existing languages to get an idea of all the ways you can design your alphabet and language. This will give you an idea for grammar, punctuation, sentence structure etc.

Getting Started:

Name your language.

Make your alphabet. This can mean creating your own drawings for sound, or using an alphabet that already exists. You can make an alphabet, each symbol representing a particular sound (up to about 50 usually) , a syllabary which represents a syllable (up to about 100) or pictographs (hundreds needed).

Create words by putting your sounds together. Try combining words to make new but similar words. For example, any is an indeterminate word, and where is for a place, anywhere being a compound word being a place that does not have a pre-determined location.

Order your sentences. English has an order of subject-verb-object (the dog ran after the ball), while in Japanese they use subject-object-verb. Once you choose an order for where your words fit into your sentence, be sure to always follow the pattern as to not be confusing later on.

Make grammar rules. These are the rules that dictate your language, and if you are following the steps, you will have already started. Does your language have plurals? How many ways can your verbs be conjugated? Is your punctuation the same as in English?

Start creating your dictionary, and be sure to always write it down and keep notes, or you won’t remember.

Practice. Practice. Practice. Create new documents using your language, writing journals entries, translating books or try speaking it out loud. Get to know your language.

For languages similar to English, here are the word classes to help you start choosing which words you need translated: nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, prepositions, pronouns, determiners/articles, interjections and suffixes. Please note, not all languages have these classes, and your language may not require them either.

Things to remember:

Making a symbol equal to English letters and writing English words with your new alphabet is a cypher, not a new language.

The shape of your creature’s mouth will determine the sounds they can make. That being said, if you make a language too hard to pronounce or remember, no one will be able to learn it. You probably want your new language to be useable.

Homophones are words that sound or are written the same, but have different meanings. This happens all the time, just be careful when using similar words, people will confuse them often. This could mean your character learning the language can make people laugh with silly comical mistakes, or insult an entire race.

Your conlang will, and should, have words that don’t translate to English, and that’s ok. A fantasy world will likely have many different words that we are not accustomed to for things like weapons, or food or instruments we don’t have.

Implementing the language into your WIP is an art. You want the language to come naturally to native speakers, but using too many words too quickly will draw attention away from your words, and your reader will start to skip them. Try putting in a dictionary at the start of the book for reference, and slowly growing your readers knowledge without overwhelming them. No one wants to try to remember a new language while also getting to know your characters, environment and plot.

Keep in mind, all languages have slang and idioms. There may even be several dialects of the language, similar to English. Don’t forget, you also need a new name for their currency. These are all things you need to consider when creating your language.

You need about 800 to have conversational basics and over 8000 words to be a native speaker of a language. No matter where you end up, you need to start somewhere.

Hopefully this is helpful to someone! If something I wrote is wrong, please let me know so I can change it :) Any questions, comments or concerns, message me or leave them below!

Happy Writing

[greenhousethree]

Apologies for gushing but your last fic twenty-two was just so beautiful! I'm wondering how you come up with so many good details in all your fics? I'm working on getting better at imagery and would love hearing more about your process, you just have such way with descriptions!

first off, thank you so so much anon! this made my whole week!

but oof, this one is tough since i'm definitely not an authority on descriptive writing (or any sort of writing, really), and i'm not particularly introspective about the process. and twenty-two more or less fell out of my head in one piece, which doesn't happen very often for me, so i'm working a little backwards here.

so at the risk of sounding incredibly preachy, i've taken a stab at articulating how i tend to think when creating scenes. maybe some of this will be helpful?

for me as a reader, details that tend to stick out are both extremely specific and concise. the specific part comes a little easier for me when writing - picking out little actions and details from everyday life that i don't tend to read about very often - but the language precision takes more work. if a detail requires too many descriptors to convey the full picture, i'll usually revisit and search for more specific words or axe it completely.

i think it's really important to trust our abilities to describe things uniquely! which sometimes means swinging for the fences and missing entirely with an analogy that doesn't work, but i find that so much more interesting than relying on clichés.

i'll add to the choir of advocates for killing your darlings. deep down, you know if something doesn't fit. i keep a "dump now use later" doc as a personal pacifier, because it feels easier to delete an *incredibly clever* bit of wording if i think i can recycle it someday (spoiler: i won't).

i try not to think about this too hard, but syntax is a really helpful tool for flow and for characterizing a narrative voice (she says in full awareness that hermione's inner monologue in her fics sounds a lot like ginny's which sounds a lot like harry's... 😬).

i like to let descriptive verbs do the talking over adverbs an adjectives. again this is based on my preferences as a reader; i find actions to be much more immersive when they can stand alone without modifiers.

a wonderful beta changed my life by ruthlessly trimming the fat from one of my works. this is a little different than cutting out entire ideas that don't fit, more like removing filler from your sentences that dilute the point. i'm not necessarily advocating for a minimalist tone (lord knows we're far from that), but this kind of editing really helps the details pop.

a n y w a y , all of that feels very boiled down to a science, which might go against the point? i think it can be good to consider these things while editing, but i guess the biggest piece of 'advice' i would offer is to try and let your voice and your plot/ideas speak before any of the language mechanics. i usually feel most stuck when i'm too focused on phrasing something that doesn't serve the bigger picture, and zooming out to "what is this scene even doing here" often helps me realize that (ahoy, we've circled back to killing our darlings).

maybe some of that made sense, and if not i apologize, but thank you so much again anon for this humongous bit of flattery and for letting me ramble!

🌱

[earlgreytea68]

A few years ago, I found that I had to teach Hamlet to a class. I hadn't read Hamlet since senior year of high school, so I re-read it one summer so I would remember enough to be able to teach it.

And I'm sitting there reading this play and I'm like, "Oh, my God, this play is so good." I kept saying to my family, "I don't think you understand, this play is SO INCREDIBLY GOOD." And it seemed so ridiculous of me, like, most people would say that it's the best play ever written in the English language, hands down, without a doubt. But when I read it as a senior in high school, I just...didn't get it. Like, I don't remember being at all impressed with it. The teacher was like, "IT'S THE BEST PLAY EVER WRITTEN," and I was like, "...whatever." And then I read it as an adult and I was just like, NO, IT IS ASTONISHINGLY GOOD, I CAN'T GET OVER IT, and I suddenly understood why people say it's the best play ever written, like, it is REALLY GOOD.

Anyway, that experience stuck with me. It occurred to me that maybe many of the Great Literature we get assigned to read in high school and college we're just too young for. We're not ready yet to grasp how good it all really is.

So I was thinking that maybe I should reread some of the things I read in high school and college that I just didn't like, on the theory that maybe I was too young and didn't get it. And then I learned about this app called Serial that will send you an installment of a public domain book, no more than 20 minutes reading every day. It seemed like a good way to tackle a project like this, made it doable. Like, "Oh, I'm going to read War and Peace," but "I'm going to spend 20 minutes a day tackling War and Peace."

Actually, I didn't start with War and Peace. I did like some Russian literature in college, Chekhov remains one of my absolute favorites, but Idk, I wasn't inspired to do Russian literature. I decided instead to tackle Dickens.

Why? Because Dickens is one of my MOST-HATED WRITERS. I HATE DICKENS. I had to read so much Dickens in high school and I hated every single bit of it. Not true, I remember liking A Tale of Two Cities. But I hated Great Expectations and I hated Oliver Twist and I hated A Christmas Carol, which we read EVERY YEAR from fourth grade to eighth grade, like, ENOUGH WITH THE DOORNAILS VS. COFFIN-NAILS, CHARLES DICKENS, ENOUGH.

But everywhere you look, people are like, "Dickens: one of the best English writers ever," and I'm just like, What is the deal with everyone and Dickens! Maybe I just didn't get it, like with Hamlet.

People recommended Bleak House to me because it has to do with law but given the time of year I decided to start with A Christmas Carol. The first installment came and oh, look, there in the second paragraph is that stupid doornails vs. coffin-nails thing and I hate that whole aside so much and I was just like, WHY. WHY IS DICKENS LIKE THIS. HE IS SO ANNOYING.

Well. I am now three installments in and...this is a good book????? hahahahah I cannot believe it! But I am enjoying it! I am absolutely shocked! Were people right about Dickens, too????

Look, here's the thing: I think the man is bonkers. Like, his comparisons are absolutely off-the-wall. He's always off on some stupid aside nobody cares about. But whereas that annoyed me when I was younger and having to read the book to take a test on it later, now I'm just like, What is this man on about???? What is this man ON?????? Like, Dickens is so tongue-in-cheek, right??? And I missed that the whole time??? Maybe it's just A Christmas Carol, which makes sense, but I cannot believe how hilarious it is. Scrooge is actually funny! He says funny things! And Dickens keeps using droll little adverbs to describe what he's doing and it is cracking me up! But it also legit creepy! But also it is just WILD.

Like, look at that simile above. "Like a bad lobster in a dark cellar." What the hell does that even mean???? I DON'T EVEN WANT TO KNOW, because it is absolutely hilarious, I'm just like, "Go on, Chuck, it was like a bad lobster in a dark cellar, uh-huh, what's next?"

I think when I was younger I thought being told, "This guy is one of the best writers of all time," meant that he had to be SERIOUS. Like, my impression of literature is that it was SERIOUS. And that is something that really annoys me now, but as a young person, that's what I thought. And now I'm like, no, actually, you can be one of the best writers of all time specifically because you know how to use words in all sorts of ways, not just serious ones, and it feels like it took me a long time to realize it, but maybe I like Dickens? I'll see how the rest of the story goes.

I WILL NEVER LIKE EMERSON AND THOREAU, THOUGH, THEY REMAIN MY NEMESES.