• The Scientist

    Life and Times of a permanently bemused British postdoc in exile.

    • On writing

      Thursday, 22 May 2008 - 03:20 UTC

      Lovely little article on turning the clumsy and ambiguous

      CIA interrogators stripped naked and played earsplitting music to Abu Zubaydah, the first henchman of Osama bin Laden captured by US after the September 11 attacks there five years ago, according to a media report.

      into the much more satisfying

      CIA interrogators used harsh questioning methods on Abu Zubaydah, the first henchman of Osama bin Laden captured by (the) US after the September 11 attacks there five years ago, stripping him naked and also playing earsplitting music to him.

      Go read. It’s a fascinating insight into common gotchas, and how experienced writers construct sentences more or less on autopilot.

      (HT: Jenny F. Scientist )

      Last updated: Thursday, 22 May 2008 - 03:20 UTC

      • Comments

        • Date:
          Thursday, 22 May 2008 - 07:10 UTC
          Henry Gee said:

          I think I’d have split it into two sentences, something like…

          CIA interrogators used harsh questioning methods on Abu Zubaydah, stripping him naked and playing earsplitting music to him. Zubaydah was first of Osama bin Laden’s Men of Hench toi have been captured by (the) US after 9/11.

          although naturally I prefer

          to request D company D that eliminates shiningly and the music of D the game Abu Zubaydah, man of spandrel of underflow D of the party of D of the load with the cable of Osama only enters of D the S.U.A. later before which of that one a quinquennial one has attacked settembri of 11 D of here, therefore registry of mediae.

          It’s the ‘spandrel’ that does it, don’t you agree?

        • Date:
          Thursday, 22 May 2008 - 07:53 UTC
          Brian Clegg said:

          I like a good spandrel, Henry, though I think the babel machine was a bit D obsessed. Heartily agree that it should be two sentences.

        • Date:
          Thursday, 22 May 2008 - 09:18 UTC
          Richard Grant said:

          That’s the conclusion I reached. One of the grad students asked me about it and I had to say I would have split it up.

          I took the opportunity to point out that when writing papers (in particular), shorter punchier sentences are much more readable.

        • Date:
          Thursday, 22 May 2008 - 11:39 UTC
          Katherine Haxton said:

          It is just a terrible mental image…naked CIA agents? Playing trombones, tubas and tomtoms? Don’t know where that came from, but thanks for polluting my mind with such terrible images.

        • Date:
          Thursday, 22 May 2008 - 13:34 UTC
          Maxine Clarke said:

          I guess the author or sub of the original version wanted to get “stripped nak#d” in as early as possible.

        • Date:
          Thursday, 22 May 2008 - 22:38 UTC
          Jennifer Rohn said:

          Short sentences…this is something you grow into, like a fine wine. When you’re younger, you feel you have to spew forth monstrosities. I used to be terrible. I’m still fond of o’erly long sentences, but make an effort to break them up in the editing process.

          Maxine, was that hash symbol a typo, or actually a rather admirable but cute attempt to shield our sensitive eyes from the N-word?

        • Date:
          Friday, 23 May 2008 - 05:55 UTC
          Henry Gee said:

          When you’re younger, you feel you have to spew forth monstrosities.

          Ah. I may be 46, but inside, I shall be forever 17.

        • Date:
          Friday, 23 May 2008 - 06:26 UTC
          Richard Grant said:

          QED, Henry. QED.


Search blogs

web feed Want a blog?

Submit this post to

Advertisement