^^ Oh, no, it's nothing to do with 'Chinese' English (or Turkish English) as such, but everything to do with the type of English used in academic circles worldwide by people who do not speak and use the language quite as a native does. There are certain conventions that exist now (which are wrong, perhaps). They arise mainly from the fact that many languages prefer more formal phrasing for academia. It's more a culture thing, since this is what they have in their own languages. They prefer their words shrouded in mystique and totally different from everyday English, and they are not the least bit interested in having the writing/what they say intelligible to a layman in their subject area! P.S. And so, 'being concise' is not considered a good thing at all in many other cultures, and this passes over when they use English, even when they are practically native speaker standard.
If what you said in your last post is true, then I don't think this is the right forum to answer the question. The OP needs an expert in writing specifically for English-as-a-second-language, which apparently is a different beast than regular writing in English. Throw away the Elements of Style, then. Everything we know about English as a language is officially wrong. Charlie PS. I'm not sure what "words shrouded in mystique" has to do with anything, but it sounds like something found in religious and philosophical writing, which I'm actually a big fan of, but which also generally follows other rules of regular English. PPS. Okay. I'll buy what you're saying. But for the actual, real English language, what I've said, I think, is pretty valuable information. I actually think the author of the OP should consider reconsidering "It is said" construction and consider an alternative construction, if only because his students may one day want to learn how to actually write English in an English speaking world, and if they do, they'll have to unlearn a lot of bad habits they learned when learning how to write English as a second language. I doubt that an English as a second language person will have a problem understanding the sentences as I've proposed writing them. If they read: Hemingway is an expert.. Or: Hemingway was said to be an expert... I doubt they'd say, "No, no, it needs 'It was said' or it's not correct." Charlie
No, but it looks as if your understanding of style guides is wrong. Academic style is not the same as journalistic style is not the same as fiction styles are not the same as correspondence styles are not the same as internet forum style and so on. I don't write in the same style when writing a technical document, when writing training material and when writing poetry. Elements of Style gives you elements of style, not rules that apply across all styles. If you want to write good English then you need to be aware of how to vary your style for different contexts. You need to be aware of when Elements of Style applies and when it doesn't. The passive exists in the language for a reason, and when that reason applies then the passive is the most appropriate form. The "It is said" form applies in the language for a reason, and when that reason applies then it is the most appropriate form. If a guide says "don't use passive forms" then it's not being at all helpful. If I guide points out that the passive form distances the reader from the subject of the action and foregrounds the action itself, which is usually undesirable then it is being helpful. It is giving you the information you need to make an informed choice about your writing rather than hectoring you into a bland, identikit style. When you look at Elements of Style, or any other style guide, always ask yourself "What contexts is this style designed for? In what other contexts would it work? In what cases would this be an inappropriate style?"
sorry, but that doesn't make sense, because people still say hemingway was a master... what i've proposed and what madhoca has said above are valid, correct, and sense-making alternatives...
But what I'm reading here is that there's a special style when English is being taught as a second language. That it matters that it's Chinese speaking English. If that's the case, then no English speaking person in an English country could possibly have any input on the special rules for that special case that has nothing to do with the English spoken by English speaking people, unless that person has some expertise in that area. The source I quoted was specific for Academic writing, and my understanding is that we're talking about Academic writing, and the source agreed. I also think that the alternatives I proposed seem better, taking the journalistic style into consideration. The fact that different styles exist is not evidence that a particular style (academic journalism, say) has a particular rule. I searched and could find no evidence that "It is said" is a preferred construction for academic writing, that vague references are preferred in academic writing. I did not search for guidelines on writing for English as a second language, however. You may want to take what you're saying a step further, and demonstrate (since we've established that different writing such as journalism, academic writing, etc. has different styles) that, in this particular style of writing, it is a preferred practice to include vague references such as "It is said." I would be very interested to read a writing manual for academic writing (or writing English as a second language) that said something like, "Never construct a sentence by saying, 'Hemingway was a master." Instead, insert a vague reference such as 'It is said' because in academic writing English as a second language, vague references are preferred to direct statements." (And, once again, I repeatedly said that the biggest issue is the vague reference, not the use of passive. You have circled back to the use of passive. I even provided an example of an alternative that uses passive, but avoids the vague reference being used as the subject.) Hemingway is said to be an expert... (alt: Hemingway is said to have been an expert... Hemingway was said to be an expert... Hemingway was said to have been an expert...) Passive voice, as you seem to prefer for some reason. No unnecessary vague "it" pronoun. On the subject of passive voice, the articles I found on academic writing did not say that passive voice "is preferred," but that passive voice may be preferred if there is a specific reason, such as focusing attention on the object. "It is said" does nothing to focus attention on the object. It fails all the reasons for using passive voice. For example, it's perfectly fine to say the passive "Glass is classified as a solid," instead of "Scientists classify glass as a solid," because the focus is on "Glass" and its classification, not who is doing the classifying. But in this case, the focus isn't on "It." The focus is on Hemingway. So what is the purpose for the "It" in "It is said"? It would not be correct to say that all sentences in academic writing should use passive voice. There are reasons for using passive voice in academic writing. I don't see the reasons here, and the only reasons I've been given are "this is academic writing" (irrelevant, many sentences in academic writing are written in active voice and are perfectly fine) and "this is English as a second language for Chinese" which I cannot respond to because I know nothing about English as a second language for Chinese. Charlie
Well, I think there is more than one type of acceptable English, Charlie. For example, unlike you, I speak and write (usually) Southern British Standard. And if I'm submitting to ESL Journal my English is different from when I undertake creative writing. Btw, the English written by non-natives is likely to contain less errors than English written by a bestselling author, if you only examine the grammar. No, ESL teachers don't deliberately set out to teach students an exclusive style of English--although unfortunately, many of the native speaker teachers I've known, all over the world, are pretty incoherent when it comes to giving guidence to their students. Too often, their lessons become simply 'It's like this just because it is, folks. Why do you boring, unimaginative lot always want reasons for everything? Try to go with the flow, sit back and absorb my wonderful native speaker English...' Not much help for any learner, either foreigner or native speaker.
I agree completely. I thought I made that clear. But if all sentences were created equal, there would be no point to "Writing Forums," would there? I agree that there are more than one type of acceptable English. Where I don't agree is that a vague reference like "It was said that..." is preferable to a direct sentence like "Hemingway was a master" in academic writing. I even tried to find evidence to support your case by searching out information specific to academic writing, and could find none. What I found supported my case. Your repetition of this point--that different types of writing use different styles--is really a side issue. It's true, and it's irrelevant to the question of whether this particular sentence would actually be better for this particular type of writing. Suppose I wrote, "A master, said it is, Hemingway." Now, that sentence doesn't make sense at all. I've jumbled up the words. If you pointed out that it doesn't make sense, I could defend the sentence by saying, "Yes, but there are many types of writing, and this is academic writing. You must understand that the Elements of Style does not apply to everything..." Everything I would be saying would be true, but it would be irrelevant to the particular case, being, that the words are all jumbled up. In this particular case, the case of "It is said that," there are better ways to construct the sentence, taking the type of writing and all other factors under consideration. I was trying to point to better constructions. I'm not sure why some here are so adamant against reconstructing the sentence to avoid the ambiguous "it." I've actually provided many different alternatives in several posts, and you almost seem to be implying that I'm suggesting a narrower rather than a broader look at the alternative ways to write the sentence. Yes, there are more than one types of acceptable English. Some are better than others. "It is said that Hemingway was a master" can be improved upon. There are more than one acceptable ways to write that sentence for academic writing. Am I unjustified for exploring alternatives and providing the reasons they may be preferred? Charlie
Which is why I agreed with it. I only have a slight preference for "was", on the grounds that in this case it isn't really relevant what people are saying now.
If so, then wrongly, because alas! he is no more. Fine, if it's what's said now that is of interest. Something uncomfortable somewhere in the tense and aspect of that one, although nothing so strong as to call non-standard. Fine, if it's what was said then that is of interest. All of those foreground Hemmingway. "It is said that..." and "It was said that..." foreground the act of saying, which is a stylistic choice. All of them are passive, as you rightly note, and all of them are equally vague about who is (or was) doing the saying, but you seem to think they're not.
No, that's not what I think. They're certainly vague regarding who said that Hemingway is an expert. They omit the vague pronoun "it" however. The context I was talking there was on the discussion of passive voice. When you use passive voice, you use it for a reason. In these sentence examples, they bring the subject of interest (Hemingway) up front. They bring your attention to the object of the action, instead of bringing your attention to "It," the vague reference. Bringing your subject of interest up front is one of the primary reasons for using passive voice. (Example: One might say, "Glass is classified as a solid." to draw attention to the object of the action "glass." Active voice, "Scientists classify glass as a solid," draws attention to who is doing the classification. Here is passive voice used for the valid reason of drawing your attention to the object of the action.) In our case, the object of the action is Hemingway. Therefore, to use passive voice for the purpose of drawing attention to the object of the action, select one of the choices I provided. The different tenses I provided illustrate possible options for when it was said and when Hemingway was an expert. I actually provided various tenses to show all the grammatical possibilities, focusing on the sentence structure. One might avoid one tense because, as you say, "alas, Hemingway is no more." But what if we were talking about someone who is still with us, or what if the sentence was written during Hemingway's life? (It's even hypothetically possible we're not talking about Ernest Hemingway, who is not with us, but Bob Hemingway, who is very much with us and the subject of our article.) Showing all the tense possibilities was merely to show every way that type of sentence may be constructed in passive voice, bringing the object up front. Whether or not Hemingway is still with us is only relevant to what you're trying to say in the sentence. It's not relevant to the question of how many grammatically possible ways there are to structure the sentence. Which verb tense you choose will be determined by preference, context and intended meaning, whether the action (said) occurred in the past or present, and whether the object action (person being an expert) occurred in the past or the present. It's untrue to say that passive voice is "preferred for academic writing." It would be equally untrue to say that it doesn't have a place in academic writing. There are reasons for using it. If one uses passive voice, it should be for a reason. This wording fulfills one of those main reasons: to bring the object of interest up front. It's true that it's still vague. To avoid vagueness, eliminate the passive voice, eliminate the "it is said" entirely and jump in with "Hemingway was an expert," or provide the specific reference, or even a moderately specific reference (Literary critics say Hemingway was an expert.) The examples I've given are better for different reasons. The reasons for one example being better don't necessarily apply to a different example. In those examples, I was providing passive voice, given one of the real reasons to use passive voice, specifically, to bring the subject up front. "It's academic writing" is not a real reason to use passive voice. What matters is what you're trying to accomplish with the sentence. These examples didn't solve the issue of vagueness, but, if the goal was to bring the subject up front through use of passive voice, it accomplishes that goal while the original sentence does not. Certainly, the subject of interest isn't the vague nonentity "It." Really, though, I was stretching a bit because of the suggestion that passive voice is, for some reason, preferred. I actually picked a reason why it might be preferred and ran with it. Bringing the object up front is one of the most common reasons for using passive voice, and one of the most likely reasons to use it in this case. Unless there's a real reason to use passive voice ("this is academic writing" isn't a real reason) I'd go with active voice. It's even possible, if you want to avoid the vagueness, and keep passive voice for the purpose of bringing the subject up front, to accomplish both. Those sentences are constructed as follows, providing all tenses, reasoning for that already explained. Hemingway was said by literary critics to be an expert... Hemingway is said by literary critics to be an expert... Hemingway was said by literary critics to have been an expert... Hemingway is said by literary critics to have been an expert... This required adding "by literary critics" as a subordinate prepositional phrase. There are many other ways to accomplish this with multiple sentences. (Hemingway is said to have been an expert at fast writing. The literary critics who made this statement noted that...) What construction you choose will depend ultimately on what information you want to convey and your purpose for choosing a particular construction. Your verb tense will depend on "when" each action took place. The construction and choice of passive or active voice will depend on your purposes, what information you intend to convey. Is your purpose to draw attention toward the object of the action, Hemingway? If so, use passive voice as I suggested. "Hemingway was/is said to be/have been an expert..." Is your purpose to draw attention to the action "said" in the context of who said it? If so, use active voice, but be specific. "Literary critics say/said that Hemingway was/is..." Is your purpose to draw attention to the fact that Hemingway was an expert? If so, omit the "said" part altogether. "Hemingway was/is an expert..." I can think of no overriding purpose for using "It is said" that would make it preferable to all three of the above possible constructions. "It is said" draws attention to "it," a vague reference, a pronoun that refers to nothing, a nonentity. Other, alternate constructions are certainly possible. I personally think the strongest choice is omitting the "said" part altogether and jumping in with "Hemingway was an expert," unless you want to make it very clear that someone other than the author is making the statement, say, if the author disagrees and doesn't think that Hemingway really was an expert. If the author thinks Hemingway wasn't an expert, he/she should identify the people he/she is disagreeing with. But again, it depends on the overall purpose of the statement in the larger context of the entire piece. Charlie
