This one’s about sentences.
I just finished copyediting a long nonfiction book on a tight schedule. The author has many years of high-pressure writing experience, but this is his first book. The manuscript felt like it was a couple of drafts short of final — not uncommon when a rush to deadline is involved. A glaring symptom of this was sloppy sentences. If sentences come out sloppy in early drafts, it’s no big deal. You’ll clean them up when you start revising — right? right??
In this particular manuscript, the author probably didn’t have the time to make them clearer or more effective. So yours truly the copyeditor did it, pruning some elements, rearranging others, and querying whatever I couldn’t figure out either from context or from a quick Google search.
There are plenty of books out there on how to construct a sentence. You know the basics: subjects, verbs, and objects, phrases and clauses. The tricky thing is that sentences can be grammatically impeccable and at the same time unclear, ambiguous, or downright misleading.
Here are some hints on how to make sentences more effective, whether you’re writing, revising your own work, or editing someone else’s.

Clotheslines tend to droop in the middle. So do long sentences.
Sentences are like clotheslines: they tend to droop in the middle. In the middle of a long sentence, the reader’s attention starts to wander. So if you’re trying to get across an important point or detail, don’t bury it in the middle. Placed at the beginning and the end, it’s more likely to catch the reader’s attention, and to connect with the sentences before and after.
This is also true of paragraphs, by the way. Paragraphs that take up a whole page of text are daunting. KEEP OUT! they say. Or maybe WELCOME TO THE LABYRINTH.
What poets do with line and stanza breaks, prose writers can do with sentences and paragraphs.
I love long loopy sentences, but when one long loopy sentence follows another and another and another, nothing stands out. It’s also easier for subjects and verbs, or nouns and pronouns, to come adrift from each other. Confusion often results.
The closer together words are in a sentence, the stronger — and clearer — the relationship between them. The opposite is also true: the further apart they are, the more tenuous the connection. Here’s an example adapted from the book I just edited:
Smith requested and received permission to publish the translation from Jones in 2005. . . . Smith, in an interview, described the text as boring.
I skidded to a halt at the end of the first sentence: who? what? when?
It took me a few moments to sort it out: It wasn’t the translation that came from Jones but the permission, and what happened in 2005 wasn’t the publishing but the requesting and receiving of permission. (It was made clear elsewhere that the work was published in 2008.) In the second sentence, the parenthetical “in an interview” unnecessarily separates subject from verb.
Here is my edit:
In 2005, Smith requested and received permission from Jones to publish the translation. . . . In an interview, Smith described the text as boring.
Be especially careful with pronouns. “Antecedent unclear” and “unclear referent” are among the most common editorial queries, in both fiction and nonfiction. They mean we can’t figure out for sure whom a he, she, it, or they is referring to. In the job I just finished, the vast majority of the players were men — as is often the case in books about politics and international affairs, which this one was. Often a he, his, or him could have referred to either of the two fellows mentioned in the preceding clause or sentence.
Authors often miss these unclear antecedents because the antecedents aren’t unclear to them. They know exactly who’s being referred to. Readers, however, aren’t in the same loop. We need a little help. Better to repeat a name than leave it ambiguous. This is one reason second readers can be so important: they come to the manuscript without knowing what you mean. They just read what’s there.
Have you got an unruly sentence that could use some untangling, or one that you’ve successfully untangled yourself? Send it along! The best way to develop an eye for what works and what doesn’t is to pay close attention to how sentences work. We can do this in our reading, in our writing, and in our revising.
Love your teaching posts! Could you just edit all my writing, please? 🙂
LikeLike
Send in your snarly sentences, longing to be clear! 😉 Or if there’s a particular issue you’d like me to write about, please ask. I’ve got so much stuff packed in my head that I often can’t figure out which thread to pull on first.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Love the clothesline metaphor — may I borrow it?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sure! I wish I had a clothesline photo with a more pronounced sag. (Just typed “saggier” and decided it looked too weird.)
LikeLike
I have just been hanging laundry. Noticing how I “naturally” put the light stuff (like longjohns) in the middle and the heavy stuff (like jeans) at either end. The image works! Follow my example and your sentences won’t sag so much in the middle. You can write longer sentences! 🙂
LikeLike