Writing style has changed over time. It continues to evolve alongside the technology of mass communication. In Elizabethan times, writing averaged 40 to 60 words per sentence. By 1900 the average sentence in English had shrunk to 21 words. By the 1970s it was 17words and today writing averages 12 to 17 words per sentence.

Not all writing fits this description. But anything written for large audiences does. That includes fiction and non-fiction books, popular magazines, newspapers and business writing for public audiences.

Sentence length is just one of the changes in writing style. As literacy has grown, so has the public’s demand for clarity. And as technology increases communication, clarity commands the widest audiences. Top journalism schools have courses on the evolution of mass communication and teach clear writing for effective communication.

The University of Missouri uses a two-page handout on clear writing. It includes Ten Principles of Clear Statement, adapted from The Technique of Clear Writing by Robert Gunning. Principle No. 10 is, "Write to express not impress."

The paper says, "A trap awaits the inexperienced writer. In the unaccustomed medium of the written word, we often try to impress rather than express. We try to be someone else. No writing is easy. But we make it more difficult by seeking out long, unfamiliar words, and in writing long, meandering sentences."

It continues, "The chance of striking awe by means of big words is about run out. Readers have almost rid themselves of the yoke of past years. Few are fooled by fanciness in language. It’s been a long time since any of us have heard anyone say, ‘I can’t understand what he is saying; he must be highly intelligent.’"

We may laugh at the last statement today. But it reflects 19th century American culture and popular thinking that lasted well into the 20^th century. Just look at any old newspaper from the early decades. Flamboyant speech by politicians had died down by the early century, but formal foggy prose continued in print for many more years.

The need for plain speech and clear writing got a big boost in the 1940s. A Columbia University professor, Rudolf Flesch, wrote books that started a trend for clear, understandable speaking and writing. The Art of Readable Writing first appeared in 1949. Many good writing guides have appeared since then, but none is more lasting or better than Flesch’s book. It was last reprinted in 1994 and it’s still a main reader in the best journalism schools today.

The advice and guidance provided by Gunning, Flesch and other prophets for clear prose are as relevant today as they were decades ago. In the modern computer age, we crank out more words, more data and more information than people can possibly use or begin to digest. Readers demand clarity and conciseness, or they won’t buy it. People today don’t clamor to crowd into conference halls to listen to long-winded speakers who ramble on. And readers outside of the classroom today pass over a wordy tome on any topic if they have to study or labor to decipher it.

One might think that clear writing would come naturally by now. But it doesn’t, as the handout above explained. We need to work on the techniques of clear writing just as writers did in the past. That is, if we want to be able to communicate effectively with our readers. "Effective" means getting people to read our material in the first place; and in the second place, it means that they get the message we want them to get.

Government, institutions and some professional fields have been the slowest to change. They have persisted in foggy phrases, incongruous descriptions and incomprehensible language in their writing. Thus we have terms to describe their writing as "bureaucratese" and "legalese."

Today, many agencies and professions say they are turning over a new leaf. They want to operate more like a good business. That means they want to provide better service for their customers. It should be no surprise that better service includes clear communication. Indeed, good service begins with clear communication.

So public groups that want to improve their service and run more like a business need to copy the practices of good businesses. That includes changing their writing habits. Good businesses don’t stand for gibberish and gobbledygook. They can’t afford to. Confusion costs them money. It turns customers away, confounds employees and hurts output and sales. Many books on clear communication today appeal to the success and profit motives of businesses. Clear writing that works for business will also work for government and other public groups.

Besides giving us lasting prose, great writers through the ages have advised us how to write – and how not to write. Here are some snippets of wisdom from some.

"A man who uses a great many words to express his meaning is like a bad marksman who instead of aiming a single stone at an object takes up a handful and throws at it in hopes he may hit." – Samuel Johnson.

"Words, like glasses, obscure everything they do not make clear." – Joseph Joubert.

"The finest words in the world are only vain sounds if you can’t understand them." – Anatole France.

"Words are the clothes that thoughts wear …" – Samuel Butler.

"I never write metropolis … because I can get the same price for city. I never write policeman, because I can get the same money for cop." – Mark Twain.

"The adjective is the enemy of the noun." – Voltaire.

"Short words are best and the old words when short are best of all." – Winston Churchill.

This guideline for clear writing includes some formulas, ways to check your writing, samples of fuzzy words and phrases to avoid, and other helpful hints.

The University of Missouri prints a two-page guide on clear writing. It includes Ten Principles of Clear Statement by Gunning-Mueller Clear Writing Institute Inc. The principles are:

1. Keep sentences short.
2. Prefer the simple to the complex.
3. Prefer the familiar word.
4. Avoid unnecessary words.
5. Put action in your verbs.
6. Write like you talk.
7. Use terms your reader can picture.
8. Tie in with your reader’s experience.
9. Make full use of variety.
10. Write to express not impress.

Besides these basic principles for clear writing, you can use other techniques to improve the quality of your writing. The following fit with the principles above:

1. Prefer a short word to a long one.
2. Prefer the plain word to the fancy.
3. Prefer nouns and verbs to adjectives and adverbs.
4. Replace verbs of being – is, are, been, were – with active verbs.
5. Use periods.
6. Prefer the simple sentence to the complicated.
7. Master the simple declarative sentence.
8. Vary sentence length.
9. Use short paragraphs.
10. Cut needless words, sentences and paragraphs.
11. Avoid imitation.
12. Minimize jargon and acronyms.

A writer can’t be credible if the reader doesn’t understand her. A speaker can’t be credible if the audience doesn’t know what he said. If people don’t understand what you say, they won’t be able to trust what you say. Then you actually lose credibility with the audience. So clarity is the first rule of credibility. But more things also affect your credibility.

For instance, if you hand out a paper that has basic grammar or spelling errors, it will affect your credibility. The reader may consider you to be "sloppy," or "not very well-educated," or "uncaring or poorly organized." Another example is use of data with wrong numbers or that you manipulate. Be straightforward when you present facts. Check your figures and numbers. Then you can qualify the data in a straightforward way. The following points will help you be credible in your communication.

1. Write or speak clearly.
2. Be accurate.
3. Be specific.
4. Give substance – facts.
5. Give enough information to be understood.
6. Use a manageable amount of data.
7. Give sources of statements and opinion.
8. Use terms and figures that are consistent and that relate.
9. Use reference points.
10. State opinion as opinion, not as fact.
11. State any self-interest you have frankly.
12. Be faultless in your grammar and spelling.
13. Change abstract terms to specific ones.
14. Cut out jargon and unexplained acronyms.
15. Don’t assume what your readers know.
16. Don’t be afraid to say, "We don’t know."
17. Write for reading ease.

If you ask a friend what he had for breakfast, he might answer, "Ham and eggs." He wouldn’t answer, "The upper part of a hog’s hind leg with two oval entities encased in a shell laid by a female fowl." Unless he was trying to be funny, of course.

If you ask another friend about a person she has been dating for several months, she might tell you that she’s "falling in love." You would have a good idea what she meant. But if she said that she’s "entering into a meaningful romantic involvement," would you know what she meant?

These examples of conversation show how people talk in plain, understandable language. And how confusing, evasive or pompous something sounds if it isn’t clear. People are more natural in everyday speaking. If they’re not, their speech glares of putting on airs.

The rules that guide clear speaking also apply to writing. Rule No. 2 of the Ten Principles of Clear Statement says, "Prefer the simple to the complex." Rule No. 6 says, "Write like you talk." Some grammarians argue that it should be, "write as you talk," but that violates the rule.

The first of the Ten Principles, "Keep sentences short," is number one for a reason. The handout on clear writing says, "Of the 10 principles, complexity is the one most violated. Nearly anyone facing a sheet of blank paper begins to put on airs. We use three words where one would do. We can’t resist the gingerbread of four-syllable words. We write "utilization" when we could just as well write "use," or "modification" when the short word "change" would do. The clear writing guide says, "Unconscious use of complexity is hard to overcome. Roots of the fault are sunk deep in habit. Writing shorter sentences usually means you use shorter words."

David Belasco, the great American theatrical producer once said, "If you can’t write your idea on the back of my calling card, you don’t have a clear idea." Another quote, attributed to Albert Einstein is, "If you can’t explain something simply, you don’t understand it well." If those men understood that fogginess may hide ineptitude, wouldn’t many other people in an audience think the same thing?

George Orwell said that the attraction to bad writing is that it is easy. "It is easier … to say ‘In my opinion it is not an unjustifiable assumption that’ than to say ‘I think.’" But will a reader know that’s what you think, if you don’t say so? And how many readers will think that "not an unjustifiable assumption that" smacks of arrogance by the speaker or snobbery by the writer?

"Proper words in proper places make the true definition of style," wrote Jonathan Swift. "Prefer the familiar word," says the Ten Principles of Clear Statement. "Big men use little words; little men use big words." William Shakespeare wrote it another way: "Men of few words are the best men."

And William Hazlitt said, "The more a man writes, the more he can write." So practice may not make perfect, but it sure will make writing better. The best way for anyone who writes to practice, is by editing and rewriting his or her own work. A good way to remind yourself of this is to think of everything you write as simply a draft. If you’re serious about improving your writing, you may find yourself doing three or four rewrites. In time you will develop good habits of critical thought about your writing. Then you’ll be able to finish good clear manuscripts in a single review with some polishing.

Robert Gunning developed a way to measure how hard something is to read. His Fog Index in The Technique of Clear Writing (McGraw-Hill) is considered the most reliable formula for testing your writing. It is not an index of how good your writing is but of how easy it is to understand. Good writing is another subject. But all writing must be clear before it can be good. Here is the Fog Index formula:

1. Take a sample of your writing. Count the words in several complete sentences until you have about 100 words. Divide the number of words by the number of sentences to get the average sentence length.

2. Count the words with three or more syllables. Don’t count those that are capitalized or combinations of short, easy words (like bookkeeper or garbageman) or that are made three syllables by adding –ed or –es (like expanded or confesses). This gives you the percentage of "hard" words if your sample is about 100 words.

3. Add the average sentence length and the percentage of hard words (like 15.25 percent, not .1525). Multiply by .4.

Example: Apply the Fog Index to the three numbered paragraphs above, without the samples in parentheses. Figures like 100 count as we read them – one hundred (two words). Likewise, we read ".4" as point four or four tenths (two words either way). The three paragraphs above have 98 words and eight sentences – an average of 12.25 words per sentence. The "hard" words total 10 – slightly more than 10 percent. Adding average sentence length (12.25) and percentage of hard words (10.20) gives you 22.45. Multiply that by .4 and you have 8.98. See what this means below.

If you have a Fog Index of more than 12, you run a serious risk of not being understood – or even read. This chart is not a measure of intelligence level, or of subject matter level, but only of reading level. The introduction mentioned Rudolf Flesch who wrote The Art of Readable Writing. Flesch gave a formula to measure reading ease. He based it on scientific studies by Columbia University Teachers College. The Flesch method measures the ease of reading for elementary through college grades. The Gunning Fog Index measures the grade level for clear understanding of writing. We all learn to read more difficult words before we understand them. Thus the Fog Index level is usually two grades or higher than the reading ease grade level. The Flesch formula has remained valid through later Columbia studies. So we have two measures for writing. One for a reading ease grade level (Flesch) and the other for a clear understanding grade level (Fog Index). Note: Most newspapers write at the 8^th to 10^th grade understanding level (fifth to eighth grade reading ease). Why? Most people won’t read the news and features if they have to labor over articles as if doing school research.

The following list shows frequently used complex words that make writing foggy, and words that make writing seem phony or insincere. Beside them you’ll see shorter words that are better choices. They make the meaning clearer and more sincere to the reader. They don’t seem phony, so the reader trusts the writer.

Some people, when they write, use strings of words that make what follows them vague or meaningless. These trite expressions fog up communication. Some examples follow, with a preferred simple word or two beside each or a note to delete the phrase.

More fuzzy phrases . . .

The following phrases waste words, dance around the subject or put on airs. All add fog to writing and make it more difficult to understand. The alternatives to each are short, to the point and cut through the fog.

Redundancies just say the same thing twice. Hence they clutter up communication. Here are some frequent abuses of clear expression.

Clichès can give spice to language when used carefully and sparingly. But many have been so overworked that they have lost their power to communicate. The following have become threadbare phrases, yet many people still write them today.

Institutions are adept (or inept) at incongruous writing. Government agencies, academic groups, research foundations and others violate the Ten Principles of Clear Statement most often. They try to sell themselves or their causes by impressing readers with big words and phrases. But do they communicate well when they use such language? Equally important is what they may communicate.

What does it mean when an agency says it’s "endeavoring to implement structural transformation?" Is it trying to change? If an institution is in a "transitional utilization paradigm," does that mean its functions are in flux? When a corporation announces its "organizational objectives," has it set business goals or targets?

What messages do the wordy, fuzzy phrases above send to people? One might be, "That agency doesn’t know what it’s doing." Another could be, "That institution is succumbing to its own weight." A third could be, "That business must not care if I know what it’s doing." Those messages aren’t likely what an agency or business intends. But when it fails to communicate clearly with the public, an organization has to live with such adverse results. To communicate clearly and effectively, we need to eliminate buzzwords of bureaucracy.

The companies and businesses that get ahead know they have to communicate clearly. That means they don’t waste words. They don’t waste the time of management and employees to try to make sense out of confusing phrases. And they don’t want to confuse customers. A poor company might have employees who are "merchandizing services specialists," but a good company will have "sales clerks." A poor business may have "retail transaction technicians," but a good business will have "cashiers."

After years of hacking through the etymological thickets of the U.S. Public Health Service, a 68-year-old official found an out. Philip Broughton hit upon a way to convert frustration into fun. He designed the Systematic Buzz Phrase Projector. His system uses 30 commonly used buzzwords.

The procedure is simple. Think of any three-digit number. Then select the corresponding buzzword for each digit in the corresponding column below. For example, number 257 produces "systematized logistical projection." Now there’s a phrase one could drop into virtually any grant application to give you that ring of authority. At least in the 1960s through the early 1990s.

The following examples show how some people and groups hurt their causes. They come from real sources in recent years. They obliterate the reader by obfuscation. What they really mean is anyone’s guess. An editor will not be able to rewrite such incongruous statements to be sure of their meaning without going to the source for clarification.

(a) "We must turn our attention to the logistics tail of spare-parts acquisition as we fine-tune our initiatives and push them down to the operating level." (Government official)

(b) "In the temporal health caretaking environment there presents an ethical-legal dilemma, in certain jurisdictions, that could adversely impact, fiscally and professionally, upon the health licensee. This dilem-ma comes to fruition whenever a health provider must choose between moral convictions and legal liabili-ties regarding to duty options when the health practitioner comes upon an accident scene and is burdened by the choice of intervening with ‘care’ or passing by and disregarding an injured person." (Legal newsletter)

(c) "We feel that our school offers an optimum synthesis of the traditional education in the fundamentals of learning and innovative education in creative involvement." (School promotion)

(d) "The Department of Synergy is entrusted to contribute to the welfare of the country by using its extraordinary scientific and technical talent to fuel a competitive economy, improve the environment through waste management and pollution prevention, and reduce the nuclear danger." (Government memo, agency name changed)

(e) "Other accomplishments include developing a comprehensive set of operating, restoration and emergency-preparedness plans to mitigate the eventuality of service interruptions. Achievement occurred when we reviewed and prioritized mission-critical suppliers, customers and vendors." (Government report)

(f) "We hope to foster interfamilial meaningful relationships with counselees recovering from cardio-vascular pulmonary malfunctions." (Hospital release)

(g) "In terms of arting, when the reference condition is not fixed or even known conceptually, but rather something coming into being, what can we hope through our formative hermeneutic movement." (Art bulletin)

(h) "Creating an atmosphere that fully utilizes the talents and capabilities of a diverse work force is critical to the achievement of this mission." (Government memo)

(i) "I am concerned with the evolution of viable constructs by which complex problems at the medico-legal interface can be effectively resolved for social usefulness." (A doctor)

(j) "Our approach to business process reengineering will be different than that associated with the functional review, or with Total Quality Management. It will be a higher level perspective and more crosscutting. It will initially focus on the core processes regardless of where they reside in the organization and the functions and sequence of activities, policies and procedures, and supporting systems required to meet a marketplace need through a specific strategy." (Agency bulletin)

(k) "The criticism leveled against me is counterfactual." (Government official)

(l) "First of all, to become competitive means that we must accelerate our ability to dramatically and radically change the way we do business and/or the nature of our business." (Government newsletter)

Most Americans in school read Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg address. Speaking on Nov. 19, 1863, at the Civil War battle site, Lincoln gave a 271-word talk. It speaks tons about the moment, the event and the president himself.

"Fourscore and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.
"Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation or any nation so conceived and so dedicated can long endure. We are met on a great battle field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

"But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate – we can not consecrate – we can not hallow – this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember, what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced.

"It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us – that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion; that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain; that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom; and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth." – Abraham Lincoln, Gettysburg, Penn., Nov. 19, 1863

Lincoln was wrong about one thing. Millions of Americans and people around the world do remember his words – more than a century later. Because he didn’t waste words, but wrote and then spoke his brief talk from the heart, Lincoln stands as a model communicator. His remarks live on.

Besides those already mentioned, there are many other books on clear writing in print. Every person who writes should have and use a dictionary. And if you have a computer, you can use two handy tools to check your words and writing. The Merriam-Webster dictionary is on-line at: (http://www.m-w.com/). And MicroSoft’s Word software has a grammar check. It’s based on Rudolf Flesch’s clear writing formula and gives statistics on samples of your writing that you choose. The data includes average words per sentence, the percent of passive sentences, a reading ease score and the school grade reading level. The latter (Flesch-Kincaid) ends at the 12^th grade, and many samples of heavy writing would go well beyond that. But since all writing for clear communication should be below or no higher than grade 12, the grade guide on MSWord is okay to follow to rewrite and improve your writing clarity. (The more exact Flesch formula and grade levels appear in The Art of Readable Writing. The Flesch formula is also compatible with Gunning’s Fog Index, as explained at the end of Section 4.)

Finally, edit and rewrite your work. Computers make it easier than ever to rewrite today. You can edit any E-mail you plan to send to be sure that it’s clear and gets your point across. The same is true for letters, memos, reports and any documents you draft. This hasn’t changed since we first learned composition in school. Editing and rewriting are the stock and trade of good writers. Remember, to be good you first have to be clear.

In the heyday of The New Yorker Magazine, editor and writer James Thurber got a letter from a woman who said she admired the excellent writing of The New Yorker staff. She said the writers all seemed to have a natural talent for prose. Thurber wrote a thank-you in the next edition and then explained how the magazine’s writers work hard at their trade. He said he rewrote his articles at least six or seven times before the reader saw them in print.

So anyone who wants to improve her or his writing can take Thurber’s words to heart. Use the grammar check on MicroSoft’s word program. And for clear and easy to understand writing, aim for the following results.

(1) Average sentence length should be 13 to 17 words. Occasional longer sentences are okay, but an average length beyond 17 will weary the reader. It will be hard to read and understand.

(2) Your writing shouldn’t have more than 10 percent passive sentences – at the most. Five percent or less is best. Active verbs put action into words. The active voice gives meaning to the reader.

(3) Write for a reading ease score no lower than 50 (10^th grade reading level). But aim for a reading ease score of 60 or higher (8^th to 9^th grade level).

Guides to clear writing stress brevity as part of clarity. Short words, shorter sentences and shorter paragraphs. Clarity has power to get the message across. But beyond the power of clarity itself, brevity also has another power. That is in what a statement doesn’t say. What it leaves unsaid. For instance, qualifying phrases are most often better left unsaid. (A general exception is in fiction writing.) Unless they are truly pertinent to a statement, most qualifiers aren’t necessary. They only detract from the statement and the power of the message.

In some cases, what is left unsaid has power by inference. By not saying more on a topic – in between, before or after a statement – a writer can invite readers to fill in or infer more meaning. When the inference is obvious or direct, it’s a good and powerful tool. But avoid cases that invite the possibility for many different inferences – unless your purpose is to confuse or divide.

Whether we write short sentences to be clear and direct, or to purposely leave some things unsaid and invite the reader to take part in the subject, brevity has power. Consider some examples we have in history. How many famous quotes do you remember? Do you remember them for the occasion, the event, the speaker? Perhaps you may recall some of those details. But the real reason you remember them is because they are brief and powerful statements. Even when you can’t remember who said one or more of the following examples, or when it was, where or why.

So look at these examples. Beside the actual quote and source, you’ll also see a rewritten version. It may give more details, qualifications, or explanation, and attempt to convey the same message, but in a more formal, stuffy and foggy manner. Read the quote and the "what if" version. Then consider – would you remember the "what if" version? The reason we wouldn’t is because each of these examples lacks clarity and brevity and instead puts out lots of irrelevant and meaningless fog.

"Plain language does not mean baby talk or dumbing down the language," says Joe Kimble. "It means clear and effective communication." Kimble took plain language critics head-on in an article in the Scribes Journal of Legal Writing in 1997. He’s among recent writers to appeal to professionals in all fields to use common sense and common language to communicate better with the public.

Will Rogers put it plainly when he said, "I love words but I don’t like strange ones. You don’t understand them and they don’t understand you. Old words is like old friends, you know ‘em the minute you see ‘em."

Mark Twain had sound advice about unnecessary words. "As to the adjective, when in doubt, strike it out." And Anatole France had the last words on writing length. "The best sentence? The shortest."

Use the grammar check for each of the sections of text above. Don’t include the tables of words and phrase samples. They aren’t sentences of text, and without punctuation the grammar check program won’t be able to read them properly. After you do the grammar check, apply the Fog Index to the same sections. See what you come up with. Note the good levels of reading ease. The reading grade level for all of the poor examples is much higher than the maximum grade 12 on the computer grammar check. (To get the precise levels of those, check Rudolf Flesch’s formula in The Art of Readable Writing. See Section 4 for the difference between the reading ease level and the Fog Index grade level for clear understanding.)

Here’s a summary of reading ease and understanding level by three groups of writing from this guideline. The body of the guideline text excludes the quotes used as samples (including Lincoln’s Gettysburg address) and the examples of poor (foggy) writing. The main text is 4,241 words. Average sentence length is 12.2 words. The text is 1% passive. Its reading ease score (Flesch) is 65.5 for a seventh grade reading level. Its Fog Index rating (Gunning) is 9.5 grade level for clear understanding. That’s the writing level used today by most newspapers and popular magazines.

The quotes in the introduction, Section 14 and Lincoln’s address in Section 12, have 461 words with 16.4 words per sentences. They have 5% passive sentences and a reading ease score of 80.0, for a sixth grade reading level. The Fog Index rating is 8.8 grade level for understanding.

The rating for the poor writing examples includes the horrid examples of Section 11 and the "What Ifs" examples of Section 14. They have 649 words and an average 29.5 words per sentence. Although they have only 2% passive sentences, the writing is so complex and foggy that it scores 23.9 on the Flesch reading ease check. That’s equivalent to a Ph.D. level for readability, which is harder to read than the Harvard Law Review. The Fog Index for clear understanding is much higher. It’s at a level of three Ph.D.s and the equivalent of the IRS Code prior to 1970.