"The Case for Short Words" written by Richard Lederer is an informational essay explaining how and why short words are just as functional as long words. He notes that one study shows that short words account for 25% of the English language. He provides the reader with two of his ninth graders' monosyllable essays, in which he states that the essays were their most powerful and luminous prose. I thought Lederer's essay was very powerful, considering he wrote a vast majority of it with monosyllabic words. He even accuses the reader of not noticing it. I didn't, but I thought that using more short than long words in an essay about short and long words being equal was very creative and respectable. I believe he used ethos by using quotes by Robert Frost and William Shakespeare. It is proof that powerful quotes or stories can be written with monosyllabic words, rather than polysyllabic words. I sometimes have trouble finding large words that make me sound more sophisticated on the things I write. Now I see the importance of short words and that using larger words all the time isn't necessarily the right way to go about writing.
I entirely agree with your statements, but there's another motive behind including Robert Frost and William Shakespeare. Not only do they build credibility behind using "small" words, but they are also used as a way to show that all levels of writing can utilize "big" words.
However, I must disagree behind your mentality of using bigger words. They are generally used to create an efficiency in writing, meaning that you can say something in less words as opposed to using multiple small words. Besides, who really cares if you don't use sophisticated vocabulary? I believe that when you use vocabulary accessible to every audiences, it proves that you value clarity and the reading experience over the smarts of what you're saying. With the usage of small words, you tend to sound like a better writer. -Jonah Bahr
Richard Lederer wrote the essay "The Case for Short Words" to discuss the implications of 1-syllable words in our everyday lives and in literature. He begins with a fun introduction written only using 1-syllable words. Next, he gives examples of great quotes from great people that consist only of 1-syllable words. He then shows some of his student's work and how they are both beautifully written but also concise. Overall, Lederer does a great job of addressing his issue in a fun way that makes sense. His entire piece is concise and does not go off topic. Each of his examples makes an impact; they all serve a purpose. I've enjoyed this essay the most out of all the ones we've read so far. Although, there is one thing Lederer never mentions. Large words can sometimes create an impact larger than those of small words. This is because most larger words are very specific in their definition while words like "sun", "grass", and "home" could mean multiple things. Grass could mean weeds or just plain grass; home could mean a mansion or hole in the ground. However, Lederer never refutes the argument that large words are not important so I guess he passes.
I agree that Lederer's essay was concise and does not go off topic. On the other hand, I disagree that larger words have more of an impact than short words because they can be in some cases more specific. Why can you not use multiple small words so that it would be specific?
"The Case for Short Words" by Richard Lederer encourages a wider appreciation and use of one syllable words. He provides examples of passages completely written with one syllable words and points out their strengths from using such short words. He states that short words can be more appropriate and powerful than larger words due to their familiarity and blunt sound. Overall, Lederer makes his point strong and clear by doing what he is encouraging: only using concise words. This essay is much more on topic than many of the ones we have read because Lederer makes an effort to only use what is necessary. Lederer's entire message strikes me because I don't really think about the length of the words I choose, I mainly rely on meaning and flow. I am intrigued and interested in attempting to do what he suggests, if only to see how I can manipulate my words. Claire Liu
I agree with your viewpoints. I also think that your summary was clear and concise and you did a good job of evaluating his points. Perhaps you could have talked about some of the evidence that Lederer uses to prove his point, but you still had an overall good response. I also agree with what you said in class, how it doesn't matter that Lederer used longer words in the end of the article because he wasn't saying that you should get rid of long words all together, simply that the balance should be more equal than it is in the norm of writing.
In “The Case for Short Words”, written by Richard Lederer, the author discusses the usability of small words. Lederer takes the stance that small words should be used when it is possible, but if a long word is perfect for your scenario then use it. The author starts by writing the first four paragraphs in words with one syllable. This was very effective because it showed the reader how well you can write using just one syllable words. Through the first four paragraphs Lederer describes the advantages of short words. He uses personification to five words the ability to cast light on more important and clear things. In contrast to small words, big words create darkness and difficulty. To support his claim, the author shows results from a study. The study showed that the 20 words that make up 25% of spoken English words all have one syllable. William Shakespeare was one of the famous authors that was known for wisely using small words. Lederer’s students even created some of their best work through using words with one syllable. I think the author did a very good job explaining his point of view. He used many rhetorical devices, examples from famous authors, statistics from studies, and even evidence from his own student’s work. This essay really makes me think about the vocabulary I use. In many environments using large words is promoted. However, after reading this essay I realized that small words can convey the same meaning and they can make your writing clearer. Shishira
Shishira first summarizes the essay in a clear and concise way. She goes into depth about the topic, and even quotes statistics used in the essay. I admired the way that she included multiple important pieces of evidence, that the author utilized. I also admired the way that she stated her opinion at the end, only after she has discussed all other aspects of the essay. She spoke in the first person making it clear what her opinion was. I agree with Shishira when she said that the author used many things to support his claim. The author used famous examples (such as Shakespeare) which showed many readers that monosyllabic words can actually lead to astonishing pieces of writing. To conclude, I wholly believe that Shishira's response was accurate and descriptive.
The story "Case for Short Words" by Richard Lederer is a story about how short words are clear and can describe many things. On the other hand, big words may cloud the understanding unless the word is perfect for the case. Lederer uses only one syllable words for the first four paragraphs, and said that it made him present his point more powerfully. Lederer states that using short words can be just or even more powerful than using big words. He backs this up with many quotes from famous people where all of the words were one syllable, he also backs this up with evidence from his students. I do not know if this is true or not because I do not really pay attention to whether or not I use short or big words. Now I can see that small words can send a message just as powerful as big words.
Your summary was pretty acruate, the only part I'm not sure on is the part where he says that using the one syllable words makes his first 4 paragraphs more impactful. I don't think Lederer ever says that the first 4 paragraphs were more powerful than the rest. He simply stated that it did not inhibit his focus on the topic. Also, your last two sentences contradict each other. You say that you do not know if his argument is true, but then you say that you know that small words can be as impactful as large words.
In the essay, a case for short words, Richard does just that, makes a case for short words. He states that you can get your point across with using one syllable words. He argues that monosyllable words can still have the same amount of imagery as complex ones. He uses an example of words such as crisp, grass, and home. I enjoyed how he keeps a casual tone throughout the whole essay. You really can hear Richard's voice through the word choices. He even gives passages from the bible, something that the majority of readers know and care about. He gives examples of monosyllabic passages that are quite powerful. Overall, the author put together a really nice essay.
Elise first starts out by discussing that the authors topic is evident in the title. She then states that the author’s claim was to make the point that writing can be done just as effectively through the use of monosyllabic words. In addition, she provides examples of the words that Lederer uses. Elise describes the authors tone as casual. I do agree with her but sometimes the author leaned towards the argumentative side. Later she goes on to describe how Lederer quotes from the bible which is a text that many people in the Christian religion believe deeply about. Her analyzation of the example from the bible is very valid because if people see short words used in a text they admire they would be more convinced. I do agree with Elise in terms of how she said that the essay is well written and about how the usage of short words was still effective. I believe that the essay was well written because he used lots of ethos and logos. In addition, he was almost leading by example when he used all short words in the first four paragraphs. To conclude, Elise does a good job of summarizing the essay and showing her perspective. - Shishira
"The Case for Shorter Words" by Richard Lederer is about how shorter words with only one syllable can also get the message across. His thesis is "A lot of small words, more than you might think, can meet your needs with strength, grace, and charm that large words do not have."(526) Lederer believes that people should use small words where they can because it would get the point across quicker and easier. People tend to think that in order for the statements to be clear, longer words are always better to use. Lederer states that short words are just as effective as long ones. To support that, he says that studies have shown that only twenty words are twenty-five percent of all words people use are one syllabled. That proves how often humans use one syllable words in their daily lives. Lederer used valid evidence to back up his opinion. I think that at the beginning, where he only used one syllable words in the first four paragraphs shows how effective they really are. This essay helped me realize that longer is not always better. In writing or my opinions, rambling on and on about the same thing is not the best way to explain things.
I agree with most of your statements. Lederer's purpose in this essay is to encourage writers to stop ignoring small words as they are not invalid. However, I believe that Lederer was much more accepting of larger words than what is implied in your response. I don't mean to assume anything, but from my perspective you are very focused on Lederer's adamant support of short words. Even though he does promote the use of monosyllabic words, Lederer also examines the use of long words. When he does so, he states that longer words are still perfectly fine to use when appropriate. In this part I vehemently agree with your statement, "Lederer states that short words are just as effective as long ones." Instead of shunning the use of long words and being a "monosyllabic purist" , Lederer is only promoting the use of short words to combat an assumption that only long words should be used to deliver messages. Claire Liu
I particularly enjoyed the way that he used easy language. It helped him really drive his point home. In addition, I also liked how he organized his paragraphs. He had some with statistics, ethos and logos, and as previously mentioned the pathos (from the bible).
In “The Case for Short Words”, Richard Lederer discusses how short worts (words with only one syllable) can have just as great of an impact as long words can. He begins his essay bewitch four paragraphs created with only short words, and later goes on to point out how he has done this and how it supports his point. Lederer uses ethos and pathos throughout his argument by citing several of the most influential works that only used short words to deliver powerful messages. I believe the Lederer makes a powerful point in his writing and the way he delivers this point is quite effective. Essentially, he demonstrates the power of his point through applying it, causing the whole piece to seem very well supported and quite captivating in the beginning as well. I am glad to have read this because it has helped me reconsider my use of language. Often times it seems that to appear credible, one has to continue rambling on in the most complex terms they can muster, but the truth is, as Einstein once said: “If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.”
In a response to Richard Lederer’s “The Case for Short Words,” Sophia summarizes Lederer’s point, details his rhetorical style, and then provides her personal take on the efficacy of his essay. Her response is concise and well-structured. She says that Lederer’s argument used the ethos of canonical writers and his first four paragraphs which solely used short words. However, she should also state the other ways he supports his thesis, like through statistics and the samples of ninth graders. The latter part is important because it shows that using small words is practicable. Sophia’s conclusion, which combines a quote on Einstein and how “The Case for Shorts Words” affected her personal perception of writing, is enjoyable.
In Sophia's response, she states that how Lederer executed his points were beneficial towards his essay. She noted that Lederer's use of rhetorical devices (ethos and pathos) also added to the overall effect of the essay. I believe that Sophia's response made several valid points addressing the many aspects of the short essay "The Case For Short Words", and I agree to her view on Lederer's essay that states that "he demonstrates the power of his point through applying it, causing the whole piece to seem very well supported...". I also believe that Lederer does a good job in giving examples and showing the reader how efficient short words can be, by doing so, he attracts the reader into his essay.
In the essay, "The Case for Short Words," the author, Richard Lederer, talks about how short words can make a big impact in any type of context as much as long words do. He also believes that smaller words should be more appreciated in the English language. Lederer gives two essays from his students that only consisted of monosyllable and says that the essays are as meaningful as when longer words are used. I believe that Lederer makes a strong case for why shorter words are as meaningful as longer words, especially with such a useless topic similar to this. The essay was very easy to follow especially with such simple words and phrases. I also really liked his example of William Shakespeare and how he used such short yet meaningful words in his plays. It gives the readers a sense of credibility and security, especially knowing that one of the greatest writers of all time used such words to paint a much bigger picture in the readers' minds.
Richard Lederer in "The Case for Short Words" explains that using one syllable words can often achieve the same meaning as longer words. He compares shorter words to things like the sun, grass, and home, and describes the effect "sharp like the blade of a knife". To prove that short words are just as efficient as longer ones, Lederer wrote the first four paragraphs of the essay solely out of words containing one syllable, and he states that many famous writers such as Shakespeare successfully used the short word in many of their works. I believe that his argument was effective since he provided examples that supported his claim, showing the reader that using short words can prove your point just as easily as complex words with examples from Shakespeare, Robert Frost, Winston Churchill, his students' works, and a quote from a study. Throughout his essay, he uses figurative language and rhetorical devices/ questions that strengthen his argument. However, he does not form a counterargument, which I believe, subtly weakens his argument. His short essay about using shorter words in pieces of writing made me feel more comfortable using them because I feel the constant need to write with a sophisticated vocabulary, that I forgot the importance of shorter words.
Margaret´s response to this piece of writing was one that I definitely agree with. She brings up a very valid point with her analysis of the writing, stating that the examples have been effective in supporting his point by applying his main argument to his writing. She also writes that ”he does not form a counterargument, which I believe subtly weakens his argument.” I also agree with her statement that on how the lack of counterargument seems to undermine his main point. However, I feel that in this specific case, it would be difficult for him to argue against large words since it really depends on the style of the writer. After all, I believe his main point was not about the exclusion of long words, but rather how they should be used and perhaps appreciated more. Finally, I find that Margaret´s final response to the writing, stating that it caused her to feel more comfortable with the use of short words, was something that I could certainly relate to.
"The Case for Short Words" is a short story by Richard Lederer about how short, one-syllable, words can be just as powerful as longer, more syllabic words. He starts his essay with four paragraphs that you don't even notice were made up of one-syllable words. His whole introduction is a strong help towards proving his point, that short words can be just as strong and meaningful than longer ones. He uses rhetorical strategies such as ethos and pathos when he cites William Shakespeare's powerful King Lear's dying soliloquy, a heart-wrenching, short-syllable-d paragraph that wouldn’t sound the same if it was written with overly long words and phrases. It had a desperate tone that really deserved shorter words. He is definitely not lacking in examples and credibility, with his own powerful example and citing people like Shakespeare. His point is very effective and I think that this essay is really interesting. We often try to use as long and crazy as possible and I think that this is so interesting. It makes me realize that I'm very bad at thinking about my words and the choices that I make. Lederer has a pretty good balance of examples to his own thoughts, using the right amount of very well-picked passages and mixed length words.
In Claire's response, she gives a good summary about the essay "The Case for Short Words". She talks in depth about how Lederer uses lots of rhetorical strategies like ethos, pathos, and logos in explaining his examples. I like how she also included the Shakespeare example that Lederer had included in his article. I agree with Claire on the fact that we think that using longer words makes the passage more intricate. I think that she could have elaborated more on how monosyllabic words can express ideas as effectively as polysyllabic words. Overall, I think that her response was well written and good at supporting what Lederer wrote and also her own opinions.
In Richard Lederer's "The Case for Short Words," the author talks about his preference of small, simplistic words compared to long ones. He then introduces the readers to the use of monosyllabic in the literary word, saying that words such as, I, you, the, a to, is, it, and more make about 25% of spoken English words. He develops this idea by quoting provers using small words, such as, "Where there's a will, there's a way" and "A stitch in time saves nine." Lederer later goes into the many people who have utilized these short words, them being William Shakespeare, Winston Churchill, Robert Frost, and finally William H. Johnson.
Lederer goes on to state that a person doesn't have to be qualified to use small words, as he gives an example of two 9th graders using only small words, creating works of literary art. In his closing statement, he reaches out to the reader and shows that anyone can use small words.
In my opinion, I don't agree with always using small words, as they a phrase can be said, in fewer words while be as concise, if not, more concise. But in the aspect of readability for all audiences, I do consider small words to the be the best choice. -Jonah Bahr
In Jonah's response, he gives a quick, concise summary of what happened in the essay. He specifically touches about how Lederer uses ethos for credibility to show the reader how other famous writers use monosyllabic words. Jonah then talks about his own opinion, which is that using small words all the time isn't very effective. However, he believes that for all audiences, using shorter words can be very concise and easy to read.
(Ryan Clark) In “The Case for Short Words,” writer Richard Lederer argues why small words are often best. “A lost of small words … can meet your needs with a strength, grace, and charm that large words do not have” (526). Lederer begins his piece with an interesting rhetorical device: he only writes with monosyllabic words for its first four paragraphs. He then brings the reader's attention to the fact and says that using small words “helped me to focus on the power of the message I was trying to put across” (527). Although it may at first seem an impossible task to write only with small words, Lederer demonstrates that it is possible it both via the start of his essay as was aforementioned and some statistics about common word choice. Twenty single-syllable words comprise the twenty-five percent of all spoken English words, and the fifty most common words in written English are also only one syllable each. Moreover, Lederer notes, the usage of simple words does not indicate that a writer is unskilled or inexperienced. Some of the greatest writers in history like poet Robert Frost, playwright William Shakespeare, and the translators of the King James Bible all used small words often and to great effect. However, even those who are still learning to write can use monosyllabic words with great success. Lederer copies two passages written by two ninth graders he taught written only with single-syllable words as he directed. Although they are unseasoned writers, their use of plain vocabulary makes for what Lederer thinks is “powerful and luminous prose” (528). Thus, Lederer concludes, “You too can tap into the vitality and vigor of compact expression” (529). Lederer’s thesis should be remembered, and his essay is creative and well-reasoned. More modern writers like Ernest Hemingway and George Orwell also despised decadent prose and self-indulgent word choice. If more writers followed the essay’s recommendations, the world would be a clearer place. Furthermore, the simplest words are often the most emphatic. Lederer’s rhetorical style is broad and effective. He is wise in using the ethos of Robert Frost, William Shakespeare, and even the King James Bible to support his point. Displaying examples of the minimalist word-choice he prefers and the usage of statistics about the matter is so logically persuasive that it would be nearly impossible to contend that Lederer’s position is impracticable. However, “The Case for Short Words,” comes mostly down to opinion, albeit one based on reason and experience. It would be bad if the writing style Lederer advocates was universally used. Would The Anatomy of Melancholy be the classic that it is if Robert Burton used one-syllable words throughout his magnum opus? No. Faulkner employed spare prose and simple words to great effect, but he also knew when to use more complex writing, like how he writes for Darl in As I Lay Dying: "[Vernon] watches Jewel as he passes, the horse moving with a light, high kneed driving gait, three hundred yards back. We go on, with a motion so soporific, so dreamlike as to be uninferant of progress, as though time and not space were decreasing between us and it” (101). Thus, there is a time for small words and a time for big words. Lederer’s assertion is that the time for small words is more often than most authors think. This message should be taken to heart.
n Ryan's response, he responds to the story "A Case for Short Words" by explaining how short words have a sort of grace that longer words seem to lack. He uses the term "wise" to describe Lederer's choice to use quotes from the Bible, as well as quotes from Robert Frost and William Shakespeare that were written entirely from monosyllabic words (which are words with only one syllable.) Ryan ends his response by including an assertion from Lederer, and that it should be taken to heart.
"The Case for Short Words" written by Richard Lederer is an informational essay explaining how and why short words are just as functional as long words. He notes that one study shows that short words account for 25% of the English language. He provides the reader with two of his ninth graders' monosyllable essays, in which he states that the essays were their most powerful and luminous prose. I thought Lederer's essay was very powerful, considering he wrote a vast majority of it with monosyllabic words. He even accuses the reader of not noticing it. I didn't, but I thought that using more short than long words in an essay about short and long words being equal was very creative and respectable. I believe he used ethos by using quotes by Robert Frost and William Shakespeare. It is proof that powerful quotes or stories can be written with monosyllabic words, rather than polysyllabic words. I sometimes have trouble finding large words that make me sound more sophisticated on the things I write. Now I see the importance of short words and that using larger words all the time isn't necessarily the right way to go about writing.
ReplyDeleteI entirely agree with your statements, but there's another motive behind including Robert Frost and William Shakespeare. Not only do they build credibility behind using "small" words, but they are also used as a way to show that all levels of writing can utilize "big" words.
DeleteHowever, I must disagree behind your mentality of using bigger words. They are generally used to create an efficiency in writing, meaning that you can say something in less words as opposed to using multiple small words. Besides, who really cares if you don't use sophisticated vocabulary? I believe that when you use vocabulary accessible to every audiences, it proves that you value clarity and the reading experience over the smarts of what you're saying. With the usage of small words, you tend to sound like a better writer.
-Jonah Bahr
Richard Lederer wrote the essay "The Case for Short Words" to discuss the implications of 1-syllable words in our everyday lives and in literature. He begins with a fun introduction written only using 1-syllable words. Next, he gives examples of great quotes from great people that consist only of 1-syllable words. He then shows some of his student's work and how they are both beautifully written but also concise. Overall, Lederer does a great job of addressing his issue in a fun way that makes sense. His entire piece is concise and does not go off topic. Each of his examples makes an impact; they all serve a purpose. I've enjoyed this essay the most out of all the ones we've read so far.
ReplyDeleteAlthough, there is one thing Lederer never mentions. Large words can sometimes create an impact larger than those of small words. This is because most larger words are very specific in their definition while words like "sun", "grass", and "home" could mean multiple things. Grass could mean weeds or just plain grass; home could mean a mansion or hole in the ground. However, Lederer never refutes the argument that large words are not important so I guess he passes.
I agree that Lederer's essay was concise and does not go off topic. On the other hand, I disagree that larger words have more of an impact than short words because they can be in some cases more specific. Why can you not use multiple small words so that it would be specific?
Delete"The Case for Short Words" by Richard Lederer encourages a wider appreciation and use of one syllable words. He provides examples of passages completely written with one syllable words and points out their strengths from using such short words. He states that short words can be more appropriate and powerful than larger words due to their familiarity and blunt sound.
ReplyDeleteOverall, Lederer makes his point strong and clear by doing what he is encouraging: only using concise words. This essay is much more on topic than many of the ones we have read because Lederer makes an effort to only use what is necessary.
Lederer's entire message strikes me because I don't really think about the length of the words I choose, I mainly rely on meaning and flow. I am intrigued and interested in attempting to do what he suggests, if only to see how I can manipulate my words.
Claire Liu
I agree with your viewpoints. I also think that your summary was clear and concise and you did a good job of evaluating his points. Perhaps you could have talked about some of the evidence that Lederer uses to prove his point, but you still had an overall good response.
DeleteI also agree with what you said in class, how it doesn't matter that Lederer used longer words in the end of the article because he wasn't saying that you should get rid of long words all together, simply that the balance should be more equal than it is in the norm of writing.
In “The Case for Short Words”, written by Richard Lederer, the author discusses the usability of small words. Lederer takes the stance that small words should be used when it is possible, but if a long word is perfect for your scenario then use it. The author starts by writing the first four paragraphs in words with one syllable. This was very effective because it showed the reader how well you can write using just one syllable words. Through the first four paragraphs Lederer describes the advantages of short words. He uses personification to five words the ability to cast light on more important and clear things. In contrast to small words, big words create darkness and difficulty. To support his claim, the author shows results from a study. The study showed that the 20 words that make up 25% of spoken English words all have one syllable. William Shakespeare was one of the famous authors that was known for wisely using small words. Lederer’s students even created some of their best work through using words with one syllable. I think the author did a very good job explaining his point of view. He used many rhetorical devices, examples from famous authors, statistics from studies, and even evidence from his own student’s work. This essay really makes me think about the vocabulary I use. In many environments using large words is promoted. However, after reading this essay I realized that small words can convey the same meaning and they can make your writing clearer.
ReplyDeleteShishira
Shishira first summarizes the essay in a clear and concise way. She goes into depth about the topic, and even quotes statistics used in the essay. I admired the way that she included multiple important pieces of evidence, that the author utilized. I also admired the way that she stated her opinion at the end, only after she has discussed all other aspects of the essay.
DeleteShe spoke in the first person making it clear what her opinion was. I agree with Shishira when she said that the author used many things to support his claim. The author used famous examples (such as Shakespeare) which showed many readers that monosyllabic words can actually lead to astonishing pieces of writing. To conclude, I wholly believe that Shishira's response was accurate and descriptive.
The reply was from Elise
DeleteThe story "Case for Short Words" by Richard Lederer is a story about how short words are clear and can describe many things. On the other hand, big words may cloud the understanding unless the word is perfect for the case. Lederer uses only one syllable words for the first four paragraphs, and said that it made him present his point more powerfully.
ReplyDeleteLederer states that using short words can be just or even more powerful than using big words. He backs this up with many quotes from famous people where all of the words were one syllable, he also backs this up with evidence from his students.
I do not know if this is true or not because I do not really pay attention to whether or not I use short or big words. Now I can see that small words can send a message just as powerful as big words.
Your summary was pretty acruate, the only part I'm not sure on is the part where he says that using the one syllable words makes his first 4 paragraphs more impactful. I don't think Lederer ever says that the first 4 paragraphs were more powerful than the rest. He simply stated that it did not inhibit his focus on the topic.
DeleteAlso, your last two sentences contradict each other. You say that you do not know if his argument is true, but then you say that you know that small words can be as impactful as large words.
In the essay, a case for short words, Richard does just that, makes a case for short words. He states that you can get your point across with using one syllable words. He argues that monosyllable words can still have the same amount of imagery as complex ones. He uses an example of words such as crisp, grass, and home.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed how he keeps a casual tone throughout the whole essay. You really can hear Richard's voice through the word choices. He even gives passages from the bible, something that the majority of readers know and care about. He gives examples of monosyllabic passages that are quite powerful. Overall, the author put together a really nice essay.
The response up above is from me
DeleteElise first starts out by discussing that the authors topic is evident in the title. She then states that the author’s claim was to make the point that writing can be done just as effectively through the use of monosyllabic words. In addition, she provides examples of the words that Lederer uses. Elise describes the authors tone as casual. I do agree with her but sometimes the author leaned towards the argumentative side. Later she goes on to describe how Lederer quotes from the bible which is a text that many people in the Christian religion believe deeply about. Her analyzation of the example from the bible is very valid because if people see short words used in a text they admire they would be more convinced. I do agree with Elise in terms of how she said that the essay is well written and about how the usage of short words was still effective. I believe that the essay was well written because he used lots of ethos and logos. In addition, he was almost leading by example when he used all short words in the first four paragraphs. To conclude, Elise does a good job of summarizing the essay and showing her perspective.
Delete- Shishira
"The Case for Shorter Words" by Richard Lederer is about how shorter words with only one syllable can also get the message across. His thesis is "A lot of small words, more than you might think, can meet your needs with strength, grace, and charm that large words do not have."(526) Lederer believes that people should use small words where they can because it would get the point across quicker and easier. People tend to think that in order for the statements to be clear, longer words are always better to use. Lederer states that short words are just as effective as long ones. To support that, he says that studies have shown that only twenty words are twenty-five percent of all words people use are one syllabled. That proves how often humans use one syllable words in their daily lives.
ReplyDeleteLederer used valid evidence to back up his opinion. I think that at the beginning, where he only used one syllable words in the first four paragraphs shows how effective they really are.
This essay helped me realize that longer is not always better. In writing or my opinions, rambling on and on about the same thing is not the best way to explain things.
I agree with most of your statements. Lederer's purpose in this essay is to encourage writers to stop ignoring small words as they are not invalid. However, I believe that Lederer was much more accepting of larger words than what is implied in your response. I don't mean to assume anything, but from my perspective you are very focused on Lederer's adamant support of short words. Even though he does promote the use of monosyllabic words, Lederer also examines the use of long words. When he does so, he states that longer words are still perfectly fine to use when appropriate. In this part I vehemently agree with your statement, "Lederer states that short words are just as effective as long ones." Instead of shunning the use of long words and being a "monosyllabic purist" , Lederer is only promoting the use of short words to combat an assumption that only long words should be used to deliver messages.
DeleteClaire Liu
I particularly enjoyed the way that he used easy language. It helped him really drive his point home. In addition, I also liked how he organized his paragraphs. He had some with statistics, ethos and logos, and as previously mentioned the pathos (from the bible).
ReplyDeleteIn “The Case for Short Words”, Richard Lederer discusses how short worts (words with only one syllable) can have just as great of an impact as long words can. He begins his essay bewitch four paragraphs created with only short words, and later goes on to point out how he has done this and how it supports his point. Lederer uses ethos and pathos throughout his argument by citing several of the most influential works that only used short words to deliver powerful messages.
ReplyDeleteI believe the Lederer makes a powerful point in his writing and the way he delivers this point is quite effective. Essentially, he demonstrates the power of his point through applying it, causing the whole piece to seem very well supported and quite captivating in the beginning as well. I am glad to have read this because it has helped me reconsider my use of language. Often times it seems that to appear credible, one has to continue rambling on in the most complex terms they can muster, but the truth is, as Einstein once said: “If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.”
(Ryan Clark)
DeleteIn a response to Richard Lederer’s “The Case for Short Words,” Sophia summarizes Lederer’s point, details his rhetorical style, and then provides her personal take on the efficacy of his essay. Her response is concise and well-structured. She says that Lederer’s argument used the ethos of canonical writers and his first four paragraphs which solely used short words. However, she should also state the other ways he supports his thesis, like through statistics and the samples of ninth graders. The latter part is important because it shows that using small words is practicable. Sophia’s conclusion, which combines a quote on Einstein and how “The Case for Shorts Words” affected her personal perception of writing, is enjoyable.
In Sophia's response, she states that how Lederer executed his points were beneficial towards his essay. She noted that Lederer's use of rhetorical devices (ethos and pathos) also added to the overall effect of the essay. I believe that Sophia's response made several valid points addressing the many aspects of the short essay "The Case For Short Words", and I agree to her view on Lederer's essay that states that "he demonstrates the power of his point through applying it, causing the whole piece to seem very well supported...". I also believe that Lederer does a good job in giving examples and showing the reader how efficient short words can be, by doing so, he attracts the reader into his essay.
DeleteIn the essay, "The Case for Short Words," the author, Richard Lederer, talks about how short words can make a big impact in any type of context as much as long words do. He also believes that smaller words should be more appreciated in the English language. Lederer gives two essays from his students that only consisted of monosyllable and says that the essays are as meaningful as when longer words are used.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Lederer makes a strong case for why shorter words are as meaningful as longer words, especially with such a useless topic similar to this. The essay was very easy to follow especially with such simple words and phrases. I also really liked his example of William Shakespeare and how he used such short yet meaningful words in his plays. It gives the readers a sense of credibility and security, especially knowing that one of the greatest writers of all time used such words to paint a much bigger picture in the readers' minds.
-connor
DeleteRichard Lederer in "The Case for Short Words" explains that using one syllable words can often achieve the same meaning as longer words. He compares shorter words to things like the sun, grass, and home, and describes the effect "sharp like the blade of a knife". To prove that short words are just as efficient as longer ones, Lederer wrote the first four paragraphs of the essay solely out of words containing one syllable, and he states that many famous writers such as Shakespeare successfully used the short word in many of their works.
ReplyDeleteI believe that his argument was effective since he provided examples that supported his claim, showing the reader that using short words can prove your point just as easily as complex words with examples from Shakespeare, Robert Frost, Winston Churchill, his students' works, and a quote from a study. Throughout his essay, he uses figurative language and rhetorical devices/ questions that strengthen his argument. However, he does not form a counterargument, which I believe, subtly weakens his argument.
His short essay about using shorter words in pieces of writing made me feel more comfortable using them because I feel the constant need to write with a sophisticated vocabulary, that I forgot the importance of shorter words.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteMargaret´s response to this piece of writing was one that I definitely agree with. She brings up a very valid point with her analysis of the writing, stating that the examples have been effective in supporting his point by applying his main argument to his writing. She also writes that ”he does not form a counterargument, which I believe subtly weakens his argument.” I also agree with her statement that on how the lack of counterargument seems to undermine his main point. However, I feel that in this specific case, it would be difficult for him to argue against large words since it really depends on the style of the writer. After all, I believe his main point was not about the exclusion of long words, but rather how they should be used and perhaps appreciated more.
DeleteFinally, I find that Margaret´s final response to the writing, stating that it caused her to feel more comfortable with the use of short words, was something that I could certainly relate to.
"The Case for Short Words" is a short story by Richard Lederer about how short, one-syllable, words can be just as powerful as longer, more syllabic words. He starts his essay with four paragraphs that you don't even notice were made up of one-syllable words. His whole introduction is a strong help towards proving his point, that short words can be just as strong and meaningful than longer ones. He uses rhetorical strategies such as ethos and pathos when he cites William Shakespeare's powerful King Lear's dying soliloquy, a heart-wrenching, short-syllable-d paragraph that wouldn’t sound the same if it was written with overly long words and phrases. It had a desperate tone that really deserved shorter words.
ReplyDeleteHe is definitely not lacking in examples and credibility, with his own powerful example and citing people like Shakespeare. His point is very effective and I think that this essay is really interesting. We often try to use as long and crazy as possible and I think that this is so interesting. It makes me realize that I'm very bad at thinking about my words and the choices that I make.
Lederer has a pretty good balance of examples to his own thoughts, using the right amount of very well-picked passages and mixed length words.
In Claire's response, she gives a good summary about the essay "The Case for Short Words". She talks in depth about how Lederer uses lots of rhetorical strategies like ethos, pathos, and logos in explaining his examples. I like how she also included the Shakespeare example that Lederer had included in his article. I agree with Claire on the fact that we think that using longer words makes the passage more intricate. I think that she could have elaborated more on how monosyllabic words can express ideas as effectively as polysyllabic words. Overall, I think that her response was well written and good at supporting what Lederer wrote and also her own opinions.
DeleteIn Richard Lederer's "The Case for Short Words," the author talks about his preference of small, simplistic words compared to long ones. He then introduces the readers to the use of monosyllabic in the literary word, saying that words such as, I, you, the, a to, is, it, and more make about 25% of spoken English words. He develops this idea by quoting provers using small words, such as, "Where there's a will, there's a way" and "A stitch in time saves nine." Lederer later goes into the many people who have utilized these short words, them being William Shakespeare, Winston Churchill, Robert Frost, and finally William H. Johnson.
ReplyDeleteLederer goes on to state that a person doesn't have to be qualified to use small words, as he gives an example of two 9th graders using only small words, creating works of literary art. In his closing statement, he reaches out to the reader and shows that anyone can use small words.
In my opinion, I don't agree with always using small words, as they a phrase can be said, in fewer words while be as concise, if not, more concise. But in the aspect of readability for all audiences, I do consider small words to the be the best choice.
-Jonah Bahr
In Jonah's response, he gives a quick, concise summary of what happened in the essay. He specifically touches about how Lederer uses ethos for credibility to show the reader how other famous writers use monosyllabic words. Jonah then talks about his own opinion, which is that using small words all the time isn't very effective. However, he believes that for all audiences, using shorter words can be very concise and easy to read.
Deleteconnor
Delete(Ryan Clark)
ReplyDeleteIn “The Case for Short Words,” writer Richard Lederer argues why small words are often best. “A lost of small words … can meet your needs with a strength, grace, and charm that large words do not have” (526). Lederer begins his piece with an interesting rhetorical device: he only writes with monosyllabic words for its first four paragraphs. He then brings the reader's attention to the fact and says that using small words “helped me to focus on the power of the message I was trying to put across” (527). Although it may at first seem an impossible task to write only with small words, Lederer demonstrates that it is possible it both via the start of his essay as was aforementioned and some statistics about common word choice. Twenty single-syllable words comprise the twenty-five percent of all spoken English words, and the fifty most common words in written English are also only one syllable each. Moreover, Lederer notes, the usage of simple words does not indicate that a writer is unskilled or inexperienced. Some of the greatest writers in history like poet Robert Frost, playwright William Shakespeare, and the translators of the King James Bible all used small words often and to great effect. However, even those who are still learning to write can use monosyllabic words with great success. Lederer copies two passages written by two ninth graders he taught written only with single-syllable words as he directed. Although they are unseasoned writers, their use of plain vocabulary makes for what Lederer thinks is “powerful and luminous prose” (528). Thus, Lederer concludes, “You too can tap into the vitality and vigor of compact expression” (529).
Lederer’s thesis should be remembered, and his essay is creative and well-reasoned. More modern writers like Ernest Hemingway and George Orwell also despised decadent prose and self-indulgent word choice. If more writers followed the essay’s recommendations, the world would be a clearer place. Furthermore, the simplest words are often the most emphatic. Lederer’s rhetorical style is broad and effective. He is wise in using the ethos of Robert Frost, William Shakespeare, and even the King James Bible to support his point. Displaying examples of the minimalist word-choice he prefers and the usage of statistics about the matter is so logically persuasive that it would be nearly impossible to contend that Lederer’s position is impracticable. However, “The Case for Short Words,” comes mostly down to opinion, albeit one based on reason and experience. It would be bad if the writing style Lederer advocates was universally used. Would The Anatomy of Melancholy be the classic that it is if Robert Burton used one-syllable words throughout his magnum opus? No. Faulkner employed spare prose and simple words to great effect, but he also knew when to use more complex writing, like how he writes for Darl in As I Lay Dying: "[Vernon] watches Jewel as he passes, the horse moving with a light, high kneed driving gait, three hundred yards back. We go on, with a motion so soporific, so dreamlike as to be uninferant of progress, as though time and not space were decreasing between us and it” (101). Thus, there is a time for small words and a time for big words. Lederer’s assertion is that the time for small words is more often than most authors think. This message should be taken to heart.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Deleten Ryan's response, he responds to the story "A Case for Short Words" by explaining how short words have a sort of grace that longer words seem to lack. He uses the term "wise" to describe Lederer's choice to use quotes from the Bible, as well as quotes from Robert Frost and William Shakespeare that were written entirely from monosyllabic words (which are words with only one syllable.)
DeleteRyan ends his response by including an assertion from Lederer, and that it should be taken to heart.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete