Sentences with phrase «many nominalizations»

The CALS construct is defined as a constellation of the high - utility language skills that correspond to linguistic features prevalent in oral and written academic discourse across school content areas and that are infrequent in colloquial conversations (e.g., knowledge of logical connectives, such as nevertheless, consequently; knowledge of structures that pack dense information, such as nominalizations or embedded clauses; knowledge of structures for organizing argumentative texts) Over the last years, as part of the Catalyzing Comprehension Through Discussion Debate project funded by IES to the Strategic Educational Research Partnership, Dr. Paola Uccelli and her research team have produced a research - based, theoretically - grounded, and psychometrically robust instrument to measure core academic language skills (CALS - I) for students in grades 4 - 8.

Maintain a high verb - to - noun ratio and avoid nominalizations.

Nominalizations and buried verbs are a huge problem in legal writing.

In that post, Helen Sword, a professor at the University of Auckland, also called for eliminating nominalizations, which she affectionately labels Zombie Nouns:

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

Recently, I recommended how to eliminate nominalizations and buried verbs from your legal writing.

Professor Sword also recommended that her readers check out her website — The Writer's Diet © — which she claims can give nascent writers an «operationalized assessment of [their]... propensity for nominalization dependence (translation: to diagnose your own zombie habits).»

So, for example, even if a superior repeatedly points out to the person that he should ditch the here - and - there words and other forms of legalese (as The Lawyerist's Andy Mergendahl has advised here), or that nominalizations and buried verbs should be reworked into active voice, or that Enclosed please find (PDF) is silly and should be stricken from all correspondence, a month or two later the superior will see these legal - writing foibles in a letter, memorandum, or, worse, a brief filed with a court.

They can start by targeting two main enemies of efficient legal writing: buried verbs (aka nominalizations) and unnecessary prepositions.

Both results, though, were skewed toward the «Flabby» end of the scale because I needed to use the word nominalization multiple times in the samples because of the purpose of the post.

The heavy reliance on nominalizations and the verb «to be» sucks all the action from the story.

In other words, avoid nominalizations.

It will cross-out words, edit things you don't need or dull words, it will help you get rid of something that we call nominalizations, most lawyers have never even heard that word, but that's part of what makes our writing so dull sometimes is writing with nouns that could be verbs or WordRake will recognize a lot of those and brighten your writing, get rid of the clutter around them.

So why do legal writers use so many nominalizations containing - ion words?

Let's remove the nominalizations, wordy phrases, and passive voice:

Of course, it's common for non-lawyers to use nominalizations and related wordy phrases.

Garner's Modern American Usage defines nominalizations as «verbs that have been changed into nouns.»

In the second sentence, To prepare to clean it is substituted for the nominalization in preparation for our freshen - up (is freshen - up even a word?).

Except for passive voice, the use of nominalizations (a / k / a buried verbs) is perhaps the best sign of poor legal writing.

Striking the nominalization in accordance with, and changing the passive voice smoking is prohibited to active voice, we get: «The Minnesota Clean Air Act prohibits smoking.»

Here are 30 nominalizations taken from Garner's Legal Writing in Plain English, Garner on Language and Writing, and Garner's Advanced Legal Writing & Editing seminar textbook, and the action verbs you should replace them with: