Beware of nominalizations (AKA zombie nouns) - Helen Sword

Summary

This script discusses the overuse of 'nominalizations', or nouns formed from verbs and adjectives, which can obscure meaning and hinder clear communication. Dubbed 'zombie nouns', they are prevalent in academic, legal, and business writing. The speaker illustrates their negative impact by transforming a complex sentence into a simpler, more engaging one. The script also references George Orwell's essay, highlighting the importance of concrete language over abstract nominalizations for effective writing.

Takeaways

• 🧐 Nominalizations are nouns created from verbs, adjectives, or other nouns by adding suffixes like '-ity', '-tion', or '-ism'.
• 📚 They are favored by academics, lawyers, bureaucrats, and business writers but are criticized for making language less clear.
• 🧟‍♂️ The speaker dubs them 'zombie nouns' because they 'consume the living' by replacing active verbs and concrete language with abstract terms.
• 🔍 Overuse of nominalizations can lead to pomposity and abstraction, making it hard to understand who is doing what.
• 🔄 Replacing nominalizations with active verbs and concrete terms can revitalize a sentence and make it more engaging.
• 📈 Nominalizations can be useful for expressing complex ideas like 'perception', 'intelligence', and 'epistemology' when used appropriately.
• 📉 At their worst, nominalizations impede clear communication and should be used sparingly.
• 📝 George Orwell criticized the overuse of nominalizations and abstractions in his essay 'Politics and the English Language'.
• 🌐 Nominalizations can create jargon, turning simple words like 'globe' into complex terms like 'globalization'.
• 💤 A paragraph filled with nominalizations can bore readers, whereas active, concrete sentences can keep them engaged.
• ✏️ To write effectively, use vigorous verb-driven sentences that are concrete, clear, and structured to avoid the 'zombie apocalypse' of nominalizations.

Q & A

What is a nominalization?

A nominalization is a noun created by adding a suffix such as '-ity', '-tion', or '-ism' to an adjective, verb, or another noun.

Why are nominalizations referred to as 'zombie nouns' in the script?

Nominalizations are called 'zombie nouns' because they are seen as consuming the vitality of language by replacing active verbs and concrete language with abstract entities.

Who are the groups of people that tend to use nominalizations according to the script?

The groups that tend to use nominalizations include academics, lawyers, bureaucrats, and business writers.

What is the effect of nominalizations on sentence clarity?

Nominalizations can impede clear communication by making sentences sound pompous and abstract, often obscuring who is doing what.

How does the script suggest improving a sentence filled with nominalizations?

The script suggests eliminating or reanimating most of the nominalizations, adding human subjects, and using active verbs to make the sentence more lively and clear.

What is the role of nominalizations in expressing complex ideas?

At their best, nominalizations can help express complex ideas such as 'perception', 'intelligence', and 'epistemology'.

How does the script use George Orwell's essay 'Politics and the English Language' to illustrate the point about nominalizations?

The script uses Orwell's essay to show the difference between concrete language and the overuse of nominalizations, which can lead to vague and less engaging prose.

What is the effect of nominalizations when they gather in jargon-generating packs?

When nominalizations gather in jargon-generating packs, they can create dense and difficult-to-understand language that can put readers to sleep.

What is the example given in the script of a complex nominalization?

The example given is 'antidisestablishmentarianism', which contains multiple verbs, adjectives, and nouns within it.

What is the recommended way to write sentences to avoid the pitfalls of nominalizations?

The recommended way is to use vigorous, verb-driven sentences that are concrete and clearly structured to keep the sentences lively and engaging.

How does the script suggest one can test the impact of nominalizations on a sentence?

One can test the impact by releasing a few nominalizations into a lively sentence and observing how they sap the energy and clarity from it.

Outlines

00:00

🧟‍♂️ Nominalizations: The Zombie Nouns

The paragraph discusses the concept of nominalizations, which are nouns formed from other parts of speech by adding suffixes like '-ity', '-tion', or '-ism'. It humorously refers to these as 'zombie nouns' because they tend to make language less lively and more abstract. The speaker criticizes their overuse in academic, legal, and business writing, suggesting that they obscure meaning rather than clarify it. An example is given where a sentence filled with nominalizations is made more understandable by replacing them with active verbs and concrete language. The paragraph concludes by advising writers to use nominalizations sparingly and to favor clear, active sentences to engage readers.

Keywords

💡Nominalizations

Nominalizations are nouns formed from other parts of speech, such as adjectives, verbs, or other nouns, by adding suffixes like '-ity', '-tion', or '-ism'. In the video, they are referred to as 'zombie nouns' because they are said to consume the liveliness of language by replacing active verbs and concrete descriptions with abstract terms. The example given is 'proliferation' from the verb 'proliferate', which is a nominalization. The video argues that overuse of nominalizations can lead to pompous and unclear communication.

💡Zombie Nouns

Zombie nouns is a metaphor used in the video to describe nominalizations that 'eat away' at the clarity and vigor of language. They are likened to zombies because they are seen as draining the life out of sentences by replacing more direct and active language with abstract and passive terms. For instance, the script mentions that 'tendency' and 'abstraction' are zombie nouns that can be replaced with the verbs 'tend' and 'abstract' to make the sentence more lively.

💡Pomposity

Pomposity refers to an overly high-minded or pretentious language style. In the context of the video, pomposity is associated with the overuse of nominalizations, which can make writing or speech sound more pretentious and less clear. The video suggests that writers who use too many nominalizations tend to sound pompous, as in the revised sentence: 'Writers who overload their sentences with nominalizations tend to sound pompous and abstract.'

💡Abstraction

Abstraction, in this video, refers to the use of vague or general terms that lack concreteness. It is used to criticize the overuse of nominalizations, which can lead to abstract language that is harder to understand. The video contrasts the concrete language of the Bible verse with Orwell's abstract translation, highlighting how abstraction can obscure meaning.

💡Concrete Language

Concrete language uses specific, tangible terms that are easily understood and relatable. The video praises the Bible verse for its use of concrete nouns like 'race', 'battle', 'riches', 'time', and 'chance', which make the language immediate and impactful. This is contrasted with the nominalizations and abstractions of Orwell's version, which are less clear and engaging.

💡Jargon

Jargon refers to the specialized terminology or vocabulary used by a particular group or profession. The video suggests that nominalizations can contribute to the creation of jargon, especially when they form packs and replace clear nouns, verbs, and adjectives with complex terms. An example given is the progression from 'globe' to 'globalize' to 'globalization'.

💡Antidisestablishmentarianism

Antidisestablishmentarianism is cited in the video as the 'grandfather of all nominalizations' due to its complexity and the number of verbs, adjectives, and nouns it contains. It is used to illustrate how nominalizations can become excessively long and difficult to understand, thus hindering clear communication.

💡Vigorous Verb-Driven Sentences

Vigorous verb-driven sentences are those that are powered by active verbs and are concrete and clearly structured. The video encourages the use of such sentences to counter the negative effects of nominalizations. It suggests that sentences should be lively and direct, rather than filled with abstract terms that can put readers to sleep.

💡Clear Communication

Clear communication is a central theme of the video, which is achieved by using language that is easy to understand and directly conveys the intended message. The video argues that nominalizations can impede clear communication by making language abstract and difficult to follow, urging writers to avoid them in favor of more straightforward expressions.

💡George Orwell

George Orwell is mentioned as an example of a writer who critiqued nominalizations and abstract language. His essay 'Politics and the English Language' is referenced, where he transforms a clear and concrete Bible verse into a nominalization-filled, abstract version to demonstrate the loss of clarity that can result from overusing such language.

Highlights

Nominalizations are nouns created by adding suffixes to adjectives, verbs, or other nouns.

Examples of nominalizations include 'implacability', 'proliferation', and 'cronyism'.

Nominalizations are popular in academic, legal, bureaucratic, and business writing.

The speaker refers to nominalizations as 'zombie nouns' due to their abstract nature.

Zombie nouns can make sentences sound pompous and abstract.

A sentence with seven nominalizations is provided as an example of unclear communication.

Rewriting the example sentence with fewer nominalizations makes it clearer and more engaging.

At their best, nominalizations can express complex ideas like 'perception', 'intelligence', and 'epistemology'.

At their worst, nominalizations impede clear communication.

George Orwell's essay 'Politics in the English Language' is referenced to illustrate the overuse of nominalizations.

Orwell's translation of a Bible verse is used to contrast concrete language with nominalizations.

Concrete nouns and active verbs are more engaging than nominalizations.

Nominalizations can form jargon and obscure meaning when used excessively.

The example of 'antidisestablishmentarianism' shows how nominalizations can become bloated with multiple parts of speech.

Overuse of nominalizations can cause readers to lose interest and fall asleep.

To avoid the 'zombie apocalypse' of nominalizations, use vigorous, verb-driven sentences that are concrete and clearly structured.

The goal is to create sentences that are lively and engaging, rather than dull and abstract.

Transcripts

Transcriber: tom carter Reviewer: Bedirhan Cinar

Take an adjective such as "implacable,"

or a verb like "proliferate,"

or even another noun, "crony,"

and add a suffix, such as "-ity," or "-tion," or "-ism."

You've created a new noun.

"Implacability," "proliferation," "cronyism."

Sounds impressive, right?

Wrong! You've just unleashed a flesh-eating zombie.

Nouns made from other parts of speech are called nominalizations.

Academics love them.

So do lawyers, bureaucrats, business writers.

I call them zombie nouns, because they consume the living.

They cannibalize active verbs, they suck the lifeblood from adjectives,

and they substitute abstract entities for human beings.

Here's an example.

"The proliferation of nominalizations in a discursive formation may be an indication

of a tendency towards pomposity and abstraction." Huh?

This sentence contains no fewer than seven nominalizations,

yet it fails to tell us who is doing what.

When we eliminate, or reanimate, most of the zombie nouns,

so "tendency" becomes "tend," "abstraction" becomes "abstract,"

then we add a human subject and some active verbs,

the sentence springs back to life.

"Writers who overload their sentences with nominalizations tend to sound pompous and abstract."

Only one zombie noun -- the key word "nominalizations" --

has been allowed to remain standing.

At their best, nominalizations help us express complex ideas,

perception, intelligence, epistemology.

At their worst, they impede clear communication.

To get a feeling for how zombie nouns work, release a few of them into a lively sentence

and watch them sap all its energy.

George Orwell played this game in his essay "Politics in the English Language."

He started with a well-known verse from the book of Ecclesiastes in the Bible.

It says "I returned and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong,

neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favor to men of skill;

but time and chance happeneth to them all."

Now here's Orwell's modern English version.

"Objective considerations of contemporary phenomena compel the conclusion that success or failure in competitive activities

exhibits no tendency to be commensurate with innate capacity, but that a considerable element of the unpredictable

must invariably be taken into account."

The Bible passage speaks to our senses and emotions with concrete nouns,

descriptions of people, and punchy, abstract nouns such as "race,"

"battle," "riches," "time," "chance."

Not a zombie among them.

Orwell's satirical translation, on the other hand, is teeming with nominalizations and other vague abstractions.

The zombies have taken over, and the humans have fled the village.

Zombie nouns do their worst damage when they gather in jargon-generating packs

and swallow every noun, verb and adjective in sight.

So "globe" becomes "global," becomes "globalize," becomes "globalization."

The grandfather of all nominalizations, antidisestablishmentarianism,

contains at least two verbs, three adjectives, and six other nouns

inside its distended belly.

A paragraph heavily populated by nominalizations will send your readers straight to sleep.

Rescue them from the zombie apocalypse with vigorous verb-driven sentences

that are concrete and clearly structured.

You want your sentences to live,

not to join the living dead.