WHAT WE MUST NOT DO
As to Words.
1. Never use a term which depends upon the point of view of the observer, such as right, left, in front of, behind, on this side, beyond, and the like. Any of these directions may be turned askew in nine cases out of ten for the hearer or reader. Use instead north, east, etc.—the points of the compass—designations which do not change. To give an exact position of a place, state the number of yards it lies south, west, etc., of a certain point on the map or of a well-known object called a reference point.
Exceptions.—Right and left may be used in regard to individuals, banks of a stream, and flanks of troops, because their rights and lefts do not change. The right of a man is the side on which his right arm is no matter which way he faces; the right bank of a stream is the right as the observer faces down stream; the right flank of a body of troops is the right as the troops face the enemy. (Troops in retreat are supposed to be facing the enemy. The rear guard in reality is doing so.)
2. Do not use qualifying words such as, sort of, kind of, very, almost, quite, exceedingly, tremendously, somewhat, rather, nearly, and the like;
For,
(a). They lessen force, because they render uncertain ideas which should be definite; and
(b). They mean different things to different people. Smith’s almost may achieve; Jones’ almost may scarcely start.
3. Do not use slang. There is usually a word which will express the meaning more truthfully. “Putting it over” may mean complete victory or a sniper’s accurate shot. The phrase is not truthful.
4. Use no abbreviations except A. M., and P. M., and those given in Appendix 9 of our Field Service Regulations.[1] Noon and midnight should be written out fully.
5. Never use he, it, this, him, her, their, them, that, those, which, whose, or the like, without looking at them from every angle to make sure that they refer to a single word. If they refer to a whole statement or to two or more possible words, they are used wrongly. The addition of a noun will usually fix the meaning. Suppose you were to receive a message with this sentence in it:
The platoon leader assigned to one squad the wrong objective, and it delayed the firing.
Grammatically, the objective delayed the firing. Logically, either the act of the platoon leader or the squad delayed the firing. You make out by re-reading the whole message that it must have been the mistake of the platoon leader which delayed the firing. But in the meantime you have lost three minutes, and the government has lost that much efficiency.
And this or which in place of “and it” in the message would have made the sense no clearer. But and this error, or which error, makes the meaning unmistakable.
6. Never use a participle without inspecting it to see that it does not dangle—that it refers to the subject of the sentence rightly. Example:
“Looking over the crater, the periscope of the enemy was seen to turn.”
What this sentence really says is that the periscope was looking over the crater—a very possible happening. But all circumstances connected with the idea, after a series of mental deductions on the part of the reader, reveal that the writer had been looking over the crater at the periscope. The commander who received this information might have been led to believe that the periscope was situated in the crater. At least he was delayed, if not misled.
7. Do not use and except where necessary. Usually, when we connect clauses with it, we do not mean and, but some more expressive word such as because, whereas, when, etc.
8. Do not use any word which might not mean the same thing to any probable recipients, or might not commonly be understood. For instance, to a southerner evening means something different from its significance to a northerner, and to an Englishman clever has not the American meaning. Watch the words which have local standards.
As to Phrases and Clauses.
1. Do not allow a phrase or a clause to string out your expression when one word might answer. Boil your communication to the clearest minimum.
(a). We went back to headquarters with all possible speed. We hurried to headquarters.
Here the specific verb hurried does away with your phrase with all possible speed.
(b). When we were present in the cantonment, the soldiers looked as though they were quite hungry.
Our inspection of the cantonment revealed the soldiers to be hungry.
Here our inspection does away with the clause when we were present; and to be hungry does away with as though they were quite hungry.
This error of spreading words is common to ordinary writers and is most tiring and time-wasting to readers.
2. Do not omit words from your phrases and clauses where there is a chance for misunderstanding. Examples:
The detachment commander will be with the main body until 7 a. m. and thereafter the advance guard.
What is really stated is that the advance guard will be with the main body after 7 a. m.—an unintended statement. Make your grammar accord absolutely with your meaning. Add the with which belongs before the advance, and notice how the sense is brought out. Again,
They order us to go to Brownsville and do impossible things.
In this sentence do they order us to do impossible things, or do they themselves do impossible things?
Add the sign of the infinitive where it belongs before do. And to do impossible things reads unmistakably.
3. Do not use a participial phrase without first inspecting it to see that it holds but one idea.
Having changed our position, the enemy was confused.
What this sentence really says is that the enemy, when he had changed our position, was confused. This meaning is evidently not intended from the very nature of the statement.
It is clearer and more accurate to use a finite form of the verb instead of the participle; as,—
Because we changed our position we confused the enemy.
Or if you can condense with accuracy,
The change in our position confused the enemy.
As to Sentences.
1. Avoid long involved sentences. Even if they are grammatically well constructed, they are liable to rhetorical error. The following sentence because of its length violates unity:
“The organization of the German army is today well known to American Army officers, and experience has shown that German problems and solutions of a complex character changed in translation to conform to American units are often more troublesome for the student to understand than the original would be, as, on account of the difference in the size of the units, it is often necessary in reading such a translation to go back to the German organization in order to explain a distribution of troops, which, though simple for a German division, would be an awkward one for a division organized after our own Field Service Regulations.”
The first thought given to the reader is that “the organization of the German army is today well known to American Army officers.” The last thought of the sentence is that the “explanation of a distribution of troops would be an awkward one for a division organized after our own Field Service Regulations.” The path from the first thought to the second is long and winding. In fact the two do not belong in the same sentence as the sense stands.
With a simple change we can make the whole easier to read:
The organization of the German army is today well known to American Army officers. Their experience has shown that German problems and solutions of a complex character changed in translation to conform to American units are often more troublesome for the student to understand than the original would be. On account of the difference in the size of the units, it is often necessary in reading such a translation to go back to the German organization in order to explain a distribution of troops, which, though simple for a German division, would be an awkward one for a division organized after our own Field Service Regulations.
The reader has been allowed to take in a thought at a time instead of three thoughts at once.
In spite of the injunction in our Field Service Regulations that “short sentences are easily understood,” such long and involved expressions as the above have abounded among military writers. In war, this continuous motion in a single sentence has marred undertakings; in peace, it has robbed efficiency. It has been an incubus upon general orders, and even communications in the field.
CAUTION.—By short sentences we do not mean choppy sentences—sentences unnecessarily short as,—
The battalion halted for the night. It ate supper. Then the battalion relieved the outpost.
Here the reader has been stopped when he should have been kept going, for there is in reality but one thought in the three separate sentences. They should be combined into some such form as this,—
After the battalion had halted for the night and had eaten supper, it relieved the outpost.
The proper relation of ideas is here expressed for the reader. He knows that the relief of the outpost is the main consideration, depending in point of time upon the halt and supper. And the whole thought is not too big for him to take in as he reads.
The first error, illustrated by the sentence concerning German organization, is a fault common to older writers. They have allowed themselves to grow into the habit of adding qualifying phrases and clauses to sentences already completed until their additions come to swamp the originals. The second error, illustrated by the sentence concerning the battalion relieving the outpost, is a fault common to young writers. They have not yet formed the habit of relating in their own minds the separate ideas of a complete thought.
The happy mean between these two indefinite extremes is the one we wish to find—the sentence that gives speedy and accurate intelligence.
2. Do not use compound sentences containing and, save where they cannot be avoided. Here is a common piece of slovenliness found in such a construction.—
The wagon trains pulled out and the troops ate breakfast.
Any one of the following is more definite.
After the wagon trains pulled out the troops ate breakfast.
The wagon trains pulled out before the troops ate breakfast.
As the wagon trains pulled out the troops ate breakfast.
The writer in the first instance was too lazy or stupid to think out the specific meaning of and for the reader.
Remember, also, that the use of and to connect clauses leads us into the treacherous “run-on sentences”—the sentence that flits from subject to subject like an old gossip.
“They fell into the trap and so the commanding officer’s orders were lost and they remained there twenty days and were finally removed to a prison camp and there winter soon came on and finally they were released and went home in the spring.”
The sentence, in addition to having too many ideas in it, has them unrelated.