• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Wave

Rocker moth
61 Badges
Sep 12, 2009
946
34
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Semper Fi
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Magicka
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • For the Motherland
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Field Marshal
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • BATTLETECH
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Magicka 2
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Magicka: Wizard Wars Founder Wizard
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Steel Division: Normand 44 Sign-up
  • 500k Club
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV
Heya!

I stumbled upon this image maybe a month or two ago and now remembered it as I've started writing my CK2 AAR (insert shameless advertising here) and decided to share it.

5065d126093c0f016190a0ef22817492.jpg


This is basically a chart which gives you a few extra words which you could use when describing a certain feeling, for those who speak english as their native language this probably isn't much of use, but I believe that other people and even those who speak and write english very well can benefit from this.

I find myself often using very simple language because I think in english when I write english and thus the voice inside my head has quite limited vocabulary because the thoughts come and go pretty fast and then they include simple words that come to the mind at first, instead of those "more complicated words". I also have to admit that often when writing a long story I just want to get it done so I may not use so much time on thinking how could I make this better.


Now let's see what good could that chart do.
As an example, if I'd describe a heated debate between two people and wanted to give you the expression of them being angry I might write something like the following:

Person X's answer offended person Z so he angrily hit the table with his fist.
-- insert maybe 2 lines of text --
Person X was angry because zero progress was achieved despite the long debate


Here you see me using the word "angry" twice in a very quick succession, as the writer I won't probably even notice it because it seems rather logical way of expressing myself. However the reader may lose his interest in the text if there is very little variation for expressing things. The following is an example how to write the same thing but it doesn't sound as simplified and thus (at least for me) looks a lot more interesting: (Proofreading note: You can see me using the word interesting here twice even if I could have ended that with the synonym attractive to make it... more attractive :D)

Person X's answer offended person Z so he angrily bashed the table.
-- insert maybe 2 lines of text --
Person X was infuriated because zero progress was achieved despite the long debate


Gives a bit different feeling?


If you use a translator a lot when writing to make sure that you have the right words when writing (like I do), think about using some other word than the first one the translator gives you (especially if it gives you multiple words) but then make sure that the word actually makes any sense there.
J.K Rowling uses the word "ejaculate" quite constantly in Harry Potter books. Native english speakers may understand here already where I'm aiming but others are thinking that I'm not totally off topic. It is apparently a totally valid word to use for a quick exclamation or a shout, but even I wouldn't have known that if I didn't look for alternatives for the word "shout" a couple of days ago when writing my AAR so it may be worthwhile to think a bit before using such words because in multicultural forums not everyone understands everything and then you might scare off readers if your text is too difficult to read and is teeming with words that you have to check trough a translator.


Writers who talk english as their first language!

Because you must notice these things a lot more often than I do, please, give us others a hint or two when you pass by.
What are the most important things to do to make the text appealing and interesting?
 
Last edited:
Personally, I think that the best way to enhance one's vocabulary in any language is to read in and listen to said language as often as is possible. I'm currently seriously learning three languages and studying two others on a somewhat more casual basis, and I try to use them whenever possible to keep what I know fresh and try and acquire new vocab and structures and so forth. Especially with the first three, I try and get hold of films in those language as often as possible. They tend to be great for developing an understanding of how words may actually be used in context by native speakers.

That said, reading and watching stuff as a means of development can take a great deal of time, so for those working on a more immediate basis, I'd simply recommend making use of one or a few of the many thesauri that can be found online. Provided that one understands the context in which each suggested word would be used, then they can be very useful. :)
 
And damn Densley, five is not enough. Make it six. :D

There are so many languages that I want to learn, it's an inevitability that I'll make it six one day. I just need to get GCSE's out of the way first. :D
 
Read Densley's AARs and posts a lot. It will make you smarter every time.

No, I'm not joking. DB has one of the most extensive vocabularies of all people on these forums and beyond, and I've learnt many a word reading his writing.

Also, watch out with that chart. Some of the words there are superlatives rather than synonyms - in the case of your example, infuriated may not necessarily be a good substitute for angry.
 
Read Densley's AARs and posts a lot. It will make you smarter every time.

No, I'm not joking. DB has one of the most extensive vocabularies of all people on these forums and beyond, and I've learnt many a word reading his writing.

Also, watch out with that chart. Some of the words there are superlatives rather than synonyms - in the case of your example, infuriated may not necessarily be a good substitute for angry.

The key is to speak hebrew.

Or take the SAT's. Either one works.
 
Just my two cents as a writer and grad student, enhancing your vocab is the most overrated thing ever. It doesn't matter how many "50-cent" words you know, in your own writing, you'll never actually use them because the editors will just reply back and tell you to use words that people know and don't have to look up to understand what you're writing. In the USA, the G.R.E. (standardized test for graduate studies admission) is the most bogus thing ever, it's just a fluff test that you can pat yourself on the back saying "Wow, I know so many trivial words," when, in reality, you'll never use those words in any professional writing.

I know from experience. My editors constantly tell me to revise word choices or to explain what I mean by some words. Frankly, "impressing" people with your words isn't as important as people actually knowing what is being said or written. Only in the company of refined and extremely erudite and well-educated (*cough* your PhD. Adviser) will you ever have the opportunity to show-off your impressive vocabulary. If I have to use a dictionary for a word every sentence, it's not the reader who's to blame, it's the writer. We expect clarity, brevity, and simplicity above all things. Occasionally throwing in a fancy word every few pages is fine, and encouraged, beyond that, it's a waste of time and if you publish work like I do, your editors will harp on you all day and night to make your writing more accessible.

So improving your vocab is a purely personal and self-congratulatory thing, it'll rarely be applicable if you write and publish.
 
Last edited:
Just my two cents as a writer and grad student, enhancing your vocab is the most overrated thing ever. It doesn't matter how many "50-cent" words you know, in your own writing, you'll never actually use them because the editors will just reply back and tell you to use words that people know and don't have to look up to understand what you're writing. In the USA, the G.R.E. (standardized test for graduate studies admission) is the most bogus thing ever, it's just a fluff test that you can pat yourself on the back saying "Wow, I know so many trivial words," when, in reality, you'll never use those words in any professional writing.

I know from experience. My editors constantly tell me to revise word choices or to explain what I mean by some words. Frankly, "impressing" people with your words isn't as important as people actually knowing what is being said or written. Only in the company of refined and extremely erudite and well-educated (*cough* your PhD. Adviser) will you ever have the opportunity to show-off your impressive vocabulary. If I have to use a dictionary for a word every sentence, it's not the reader who's to blame, it's the writer. We expect clarity, brevity, and simplicity above all things. Occasionally throwing in a fancy word every few pages is fine, and encouraged, beyond that, it's a waste of time and if you publish work like I do, your editors will harp on you all day and night to make your writing more accessible.

So improving your vocab is a purely personal and self-congratulatory thing, it'll rarely be applicable if you write and publish.

Implying you don't use the word defenestrate daily.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Implying you don't use the word defenestrate daily.

Another example of an amazing fluff word that should only be used if talking to a professor of European history, especially if talking the 30 Years' War. Just saying 'to throw out' is better in almost all circumstances. I can't tell you how many of my professors and editors have always said, "If a high school student can't understanding what you're saying, then you need to go back and re-write your paper." Of course, this is assuming that you're using high school level words that these students should, in fact, know (if not, then that's a serious problem). ;)

Even in journals, the main medium of my work, I hardly ever see such fancy, "Oh wow, this writer really knows vocabulary well" moments. Just my tirade against the fact we force students to take a G.R.E. and get scored on how many such trivial words they do, in fact, know, and then for them to learn while obtaining their Master or PhD., "Oh, by the way, the G.R.E. was pretty much pointless" and you wasted $200 (or more) just to learn that you'll never see or use those words again. :confused:

Frankly, since I have to read well over 3,000 pages of material a month, I'm not going to spend the time flipping through a dictionary because some author thought it'd be wise to undertake thesaurus abuse in his/her writing... This is not to say someone shouldn't have a good vocabulary, but in writing, you'll never actually use it.
 
Another example of an amazing fluff word that should only be used if talking to a professor of European history, especially if talking the 30 Years' War. Just saying 'to throw out' is better in almost all circumstances. I can't tell you how many of my professors and editors have always said, "If a high school student can't understanding what you're saying, then you need to go back and re-write your paper." Of course, this is assuming that you're using high school level words that these students should, in fact, know (if not, then that's a serious problem). ;)

Even in journals, the main medium of my work, I hardly ever see such fancy, "Oh wow, this writer really knows vocabulary well" moments. Just my tirade against the fact we force students to take a G.R.E. and get scored on how many such trivial words they do, in fact, know, and then for them to learn while obtaining their Master or PhD., "Oh, by the way, the G.R.E. was pretty much pointless" and you wasted $200 (or more) just to learn that you'll never see or use those words again. :confused:

Frankly, since I have to read well over 3,000 pages of material a month, I'm not going to spend the time flipping through a dictionary because some author thought it'd be wise to undertake thesaurus abuse in his/her writing... This is not to say someone shouldn't have a good vocabulary, but in writing, you'll never actually use it.

Nebulous gobbledygook is pulchritudinous.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I feel it should be noted that there is a very important difference between a native speaker of a language improving their vocabulary to impress a don and a non-native speaker trying to bolster their lexical arsenal for writing an AAR. It's the difference between me trying to fit 'defenestrate' or 'pulchritudinous' into an essay, and me using 'winzig' instead of simply writing 'klein' countless times in a piece of German writing. The former is superfluous; the latter is often direly needed. :)
 
I feel it should be noted that there is a very important difference between a native speaker of a language improving their vocabulary to impress a don and a non-native speaker trying to bolster their lexical arsenal for writing an AAR. It's the difference between me trying to fit 'defenestrate' or 'pulchritudinous' into an essay, and me using 'winzig' instead of simply writing 'klein' countless times in a piece of German writing. The former is superfluous; the latter is often direly needed. :)

I thought winzig klein is usually used together. Winzig alone is weird, therefore it is said 'winzig klein' meaning really tiny. Sounds to me like normal daily German language. Germany has less never used words than English, simply because English has a megaton of Latin and French words no one nowadays uses. Germany does not have the same amount of weird sounding Latin words in its history.
Then again I have taken less interest in weird German words, focusing more on being understood. And I tend to use far more English nowadays than German.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I thought winzig klein is usually used together. Winzig alone is weird, therefore it is said 'winzig klein' meaning really tiny. Sounds to me like normal daily German language.

I've always been taught that one can simply use them as synonyms, but it's not beyond the realms of possibility (and in fact quite likely) that the British education system is wrong here. That said, some quick research would suggest that it can be used without and instead of klein in phrases like ein winziges bisschen. I think it depends what you're describing.

That said, this probably isn't the place to discuss the usage of German adjectives. :)
 
That said, this probably isn't the place to discuss the usage of German adjectives. :)
Not really.


Anyway...

I am in the process of finishing up my first novel. In fiction, most editors will tell you to simply simplify. The same in most real-life technical papers. I work as an engineer in industry trying to bridge the gap between computer people (like me) and mechanical people (of yesteryear). Talking like you are smarter and therefore better is a good way to erect barriers rather than tear them down. That is for real life, anyway.

In fiction there are obviously times when it is and isn't appropriate. An omniscient narrator should speak plainly. A character trying to act smarter than they are might use big words in dialogue (perhaps even incorrectly) but smaller ones when "thinking" (in the case of a POV novel). A character that really is above everyone else might use confusing words both in speech and in thought.

In a tangent: contractions. Contractions are a huge no-no in many engineering publications still run by old farts (like my old uni), which has hurt my fiction writing because I usually have to go back and add contractions to my characters.

But yeah, simply simplify - write clearly, no one is impressed when you use a 40 character word in place of two five character words. Use "said." That is one of the biggest issues one of my first readers had with my first draft. If everything is "spit" or "hissed" or "yelled" or "cackled" it takes away from the influence using one of those words in a critical place might have made.
 
It depends on who you write for. Anyone struggling to keep their brain cells from starving while reading a Dan Brown novel will welcome a bit more color in their content. Compared to Dan Brown, the use of two-syllable words and more-than-four-word sentences will seem excitingly exotic.

On the other extreme, it is best to refrain from showing how many obscure and polysyllabic words you can command. This comes off as pedantic and condescending... and unless that is how you want to sound, I would advise simplicity. As an example in excess, read Ann Rice. She can take up two chapters describing the color of the paint in the corner of a room you will never hear of again (a slight exaggeration for effect).

My advice is to read, read, read. You will - if you are lucky - find a voice based on the authors you enjoy.
 
On the other extreme, it is best to refrain from showing how many obscure and polysyllabic words you can command. This comes off as pedantic and condescending... and unless that is how you want to sound, I would advise simplicity. As an example in excess, read Ann Rice. She can take up two chapters describing the color of the paint in the corner of a room you will never hear of again (a slight exaggeration for effect).

This is especially true in academic publication in the humanities (unless you happen to be a postmodernist :glare:). Reviewers will often criticize your tone of academic writing. Plus, I've had editors tell me, deliberately, to change words or provide a more concise definition than assume people will know what I'm talking about or referring to.

If it can be said in ten words or less in a sentence, do so. Don't write a paragraph filled with spectacular fluff words to say what could have been said 15 lines ago, or better yet, don't continue to write what you explained 3 pages ago. This is the greatest sin in academic writing. There's no reason to read a 50 page paper if the author has already made his/her point by page 5, and has since spent the time loading it with fluff words and theories.

I knew a student who asked one of my Econ profs to write a letter of recommendation for her. The recommendation letter said, "Take her, you won't regret it." That's it (or so I'm told according to the prof). She's in the graduate program...
 
I'm a graduate student, and I've had some academic work published, along with an irregularly updated blog (to establish my credentials). I've hardly written any fiction, unless AARs count.

I'm of two minds here. Varying vocabulary can be useful to keep your writing fresh, but don't use long multisyllabic words unless the situation warrants it or you are quite clear on the precise meaning of the word.

The best way to enhance your vocabulary is, as Director said, to read. You could, alternately, read and memorize portions of the dictionary. I do not recommend this exercise.

I must disagree with anybody who says not to use the "defenestrate," however. Opportunities to use it come about so rarely that we are obligated to do so.
 
I must disagree with anybody who says not to use the "defenestrate," however. Opportunities to use it come about so rarely that we are obligated to do so.

I agree. This is a glorious word; criticising its use is nothing short of heresy and should be penable by either a long jail sentence or death by... defenestration.