People tend to equate intelligence with simpler language

I'm inclined to think that the length of the words a person uses signifies precious little. How words are used is far more telling than how long the words are.

"If I had more time, I could have written it simpler". Its an effect that recognizes that the standard for "fine"writing, isTHE FEDERAL GOVT . Govt memo writing is usually fuzzy and full of unneeded obscure words in place of creative phrases more simply written.
I do tech editing for 2 science pubs and I often leave my role as a tech editor and comment on style. Im especially po'd at the extent of "scientific neology" wherein words are chosen, not only for their "reader impression index" but , many times these words are just MADE UP. An example of this is the now familiar term "Discretization" , The writers could have originally said "step by Step function" or "stepwise function" (Not even sure whether that exists) . DIscretization has been stuffed into the scientific dictionary and nobody has complained . There are many examples of made-up words in science writing and many of these are just embarrasing
To me--The humorists of the day reflect what is accessible to the masses. So, if one uses humorists as a gage, the writings of Mark Twain are often purposely "fine' because they become funny by the very language of his own
"educated incredulity and understatement" . Twain often used words for their weight , which, made his phrases even more hilarious.
On a2k one person does this better than any one else (usually because sometimes he can be just a pain in the ass) its BLATHAM. His dipping into a TWain style makes his posts , often some of the funniest just by that sense of the incredulous.
Sine its my nickle, Id like to call our attention to the writing style of Larry Mcmurtry in "Lonesome DOve" He took a writers refuge in an almost Victorian style that gave the book an important style which made these rough saddle bums attain a sense of nobility by virtue of their previous lives and yet, gave others a further sense of geographic isolation because they always screwed up the literary refernces by being way out there working in HAT CREEK.
Ive got lots of favorites in style , and confess that Im always impressed with a simpler phrase because , many times , poor scholarship and writing takes refuge in "fine" writing,and simpler language gives me a sense that the writer understands the topic so well that they can explain their thesis in simple words.
If you read books by Jay Gould youd think this guy was so impressed with himself. His writing is terribly complicated. Yet, when he speaks, his style was just the opposite. I have no reason for that and I blame his editors for l allowing some of his incoherently complex phrases to even be printed. His last work, THE STRUCTURE OF EVOLUTIONARY THEORY, was written when he clearly knew he was dying and it appears rushed and written almost like a JAck Kerouac novel. Its pretty much a stream of consciousness without much careful editing. Its still one of his greatest works but its a devil to try to wade in and understand without many cups of coffee.
Piffka, these results are not new and I dont think it has anything to do with the "dumbing down" phenomenon, although such an effect is visibly out there. The original published work on this stuff was gleaned from a 1980s Wharton study that focused on Business writing. Letters where Serving up services and productsby the application of loads of polysyllable words and obscure phrases (even though correct)was reportedly perceived as a sign of a mind that was "Out of touch" and inflexible and therefore less intelligent and less desirable to Have on a business team.
Somehow this got translated into follow-on work that attemnpted to breakdown how we detect the presence of intelligence from someones written communication. Many more studies were done and the whole concept of "simpler is better and smarter" got a cult status.
In summary , I tend to agree that simpler language
, with greater attention paid to creative phrases, is a mark of a more creative mind. For example on a2k, I like Joe NAtions phrases and creative use of language as an example of where words,carefully chosen , and built into phrases that are unique, makes for most interesting reading.
If a writer can hold my attention, that writer has my vote as smart, and witty.

Well stated farmerdude!

"Dear Sir or Madam:

"You may or may not be right."

-- H L Mencken

And I believe Winnies quote was "Up is with which, that shall not be put"

set---Mencken was good at sizing up and using the colloquial of the time. As was Robt Benchley. They both could turn a phrase so well.

cav. Thats gotta be a Bullwar Litton prizewinner . I hadda stop and take a breath at times , I have a sneaking feeling that I write like that, it is so awful that I can see you laughing your butt off, whew. Does that guy sell a lot? or is he, like Peter Dzosky, a national treasure? (Although I actually like Peters writing, its like a less pretentious Garrison Keilor)

That brings up a point re: writing v speaking. Garrison Keilor is a good story teller, So was Gene Shephard. However , both of these guys produce rather pretentious written works.

It's John Lanchester, who has an obvious fascination with the humour that accompanies obscure and obtuse verbiage. I did indeed laugh my ass off reading the book.

http://www.contemporarywriters.com/authors/?p=auth59

There is a big difference in chosing a specific "big word" when an precise meaning is necessary and using all the time isn't there?

That seems (to me anyway) to be the point the survey drives home.

Having a large vocabulary is good. Knowing when to use it is even better.

FM makes a good point about styles of speech. Public speaking was indeed the popular entertainment of pre-radio America. The term "stumping" comes from political candidates who would arrive at a recently cleared patch in a forest where a new town had been erected, where he would mount a stump, and begin holding forth. David Crockett was a first-class "stump speechifier," and it twice got him elected to the United States House, despite being a complete failure as an effective politician. The novel True Grit makes the point that in the 19th century, one demonstrated one's intellect and erudition by the choice of vocabulary. At the dedication of the national cemetary at Gettysburg in November, 1863, Edward Everett, the most popular public speaker of that time, held forth for more than two hours. Lincoln spoke for a few minutes. Everett immediately congratulated Lincoln on having said so much in so little time, disparaging his own poor efforts. The press did not necessarily agree, and gave Lincoln poor marks, probably in the belief that the public would not be impressed with such plain speaking. As a result, it is uncertain exactly what Lincoln said--there are more than one manuscript versions of his "address," and none of the short-hand recorders present (a crucial journalistic profession in those days) bothered to record what Lincoln said.

By the end of the 19th century, "hard-nose pragmatism" was making itself felt. Plain speaking was more valued; although public speaking continued to be popular entertainment, the spread of symphonies and theaters was replacing the practice in popularity. As it was considered "un-presidential" for an incumbent to actually go out to campaign, administration supporters would send out a host of surrogates, and it is not unlikely that the arts of the political harangue deteriorated at at time when more of it was being seen. The Speaker of the House, Republican Thomas B. Reed of Maine, from 1889-91 clamped a heavy hand of procedure, it symbolicly sounded the death knell of long-winded political speaking (pace, Hubert Humphrey). A member from Indiana was recognized, and, standing, began in a theatric manner:

Ind.: "I was thinking, Mr. Speaker, I was thinking . . ."

Reed: "A commendable innovation on the part of the gentleman from Indiana, the chair recognizes the gentleman from South Carolina."

Styles have changed and tastes have changed. There are places for the terse, and the verbose, in our enjoyment of our babbling.

Setanta --

Your mention of the Ghettysburg address, and of Lincoln not receiving the highest praise of all the speakers, reminded me of a book in the middle of my to-read pile which makes the same point, according to Amazon's preview. I ordered the book after reading a favorable review of it in The Economist, and because the book couldn't possibly be bad, given its title: "Doing Our Own Thing: The Degradation of Language and Music and Why We Should, Like, Care By John McWhorter". The review starts with a contrast between the political rhetoric of today and that of 100 years ago; I find it most instructive.


I tend to prefer concise writing myself, but I regret that it has become a necessity rather than an option. Credible high-tone rhetoric died when Martin Luther King was shot in 1968. His genius as a speaker may not be the most important part of his personality that is sorely missing in the modern world, but it is certainly one of the more important ones.

never realized that there is no actual text of a Gettysburg address. You mean this was all cobbled togetherf from recollection ? This would be a neat forensic examination using questioned documents techniques to verify which of the versions of the manuscripts were derivative of the others.

Plain English Campaign

Here in Britain, awards are given to certain documents which are written in very clear style...there's no point in confusing people deliberately.

Cav - I loved "Debt to Pleasure" as well...very amusing.

Here's an old song:

Show me the way to go home
I'm tired and I want to go to bed
I had a little drink about an hour ago
And it's gone right to my head

Wherever I may roam
On land or sea or foam
You will always hear me singing this song:
Show me the way to go home

Here's the "Cambridge" version :

Indicate the way to my abode
I'm fatigued and I wish to retire
I quaffed a beverage sixty minutes ago
And it's gone right to my cranium

Wherever I may perambulate
On terra firma, aqua or aerated water
You will always hear me singing this song:
Indicate the way to my abode.

KP

Oh hell, gimme the first version any day, KP.

Actually it was originally a PowerPoint presentation. (Link here.) For some obscure reason, only the speaker's notes survived in the public's collective memory.

I hope that helps clarifying the forensics.

FM, there is more than one manuscript copy, in Lincoln's hand, but it is not certain which one he actually used. Additionally, his secretaries disputed which text was used, and other contemporaries claim what he actually said differed from what was written (although only slightly). There is a page at the Library of Congress on the controversy, which i can go find later, when i have more time.

hee hee. Set, youve gotta see Dr Krugmans POWER POINT presentation of the Gettysburg address. Thats another trhing POWERPOINT has defeated our ability to acquire knowledge via presentations. This thing of the devil must be stopped or we are all gonna be talking in bullits.

Hemingway's short stories vs. Dickens' A Tale of Two Cities. Quite a contrast there.

Dickens got paid by the word though.

FM & Thomas, the Library of Congress is in possession of two of the five known drafts written in Lincoln's hand. It appears that he made copies after the fact, and that he had delivered his speech from notes he made on the train journey to the event. Here is the Library of Congress Exhibition[/b] . . .

As for technology and it's "benefits" to modern society, FM, i'll just quote Old Abe again, "What god hath wrought."

Part of the vocabulary issue could be the ingrained American Anti-Intellectualism rearing its ugly head. "You just think you're smart because you know all them big words. Well, I got news for you...."

Part could be long-standing resentment of the way that English Competition is taught in high school with extra credit for polysyllabic adjectives and adverbs whether or not these frills contribute to meaning.

There is a nasty radio commercial pitching vocabulary lessons which begins with a smarmy voice intoning, "People will judge you by the words you use...." Well, The People also judge people by the words they use.

My prose style uses more words of Anglo-Saxon derivation than Latin. I'm not a natural-born speller and adore the theory of Spell Check. Still, I'm constantly being queried about properly spelled words that are not in Spell Check's vocabulary: medical terms, dialect words and other perfectly normal nouns and verbs.

As an aside - I laugh my butt off every time I hear that commercial. He jumps in with "People will judge you by the words you use. A bad vocabulary can sink you as quickly as bad breath."

Maybe he should note that a bad lisp will sink you just as quickly as either and his is HORRIBLE! (A tip for anyone is business: Never ever ever make your own commercials. Hire someone - it's well worth the $$ spent.)