Module 5 Omit Surplus Words

University of the Cordilleras
School of Law
Legal Writing
Second Semester, 2020
OMIT SURPLUS WORDS

Module 5
A. How to Spot Bad Construction

In every English sentence are two kinds of words: working words and glue words. The working
words carry the meaning of the sentence. In the preceding sentence--the working words carry the
meaning of the sentence--the working words are these: working, words, carry, meaning, and
sentence. The others are glue words: the, the, of, and the. The glue words do perform a vital
service. They hold the working words together to form a proper, grammatical sentence. Without
them the sentence would read like a telegram. But if the proportion of glue words is too high,
that is a symptom of a badly constructed sentence.
A well constructed sentence is like fine cabinetwork. The pieces are cut and shaped to fit
together with scarcely any glue. When you find too many glue words in a sentence, take it apart
and reshape the pieces to fit together tighter. Consider this example:
A motion to dismiss the complaint was filed by the defendant.
If the working words are underlined, the sentence looks like this:
A motion to dismiss the complaint was filed by the defendant.
Six words in that eleven-word sentence are glue: a, to, the, was, by, and the. The proportion of
glue words is too high.
How can we say the same thing in a tighter sentence with less glue? The answer is simple: move
defendant to the front and make it the subject of the sentence. The sentence would thus read:
The defendant filed a motion to dismiss the complaint.
If the working words are underlined, the rewritten sentence looks like this:
The defendant filed a motion to dismiss the complaint.
Again there are five working words, but the glue words have been cut from six to four. The
sentence means the same as the original , but it is tighter and shorter.
Here is another example:
The ruling by the trial judge was prejudicial error for the reason that it cut off cross-
examination with respect to issues that were vital.
In a sentence of twenty-four words, eleven carry the meaning and thirteen are glue. Again, the
proportion of glue is too high.
Note the string of words the ruling by the trial judge. That tells us that it was the trial judge’s
ruling. Why not just say the trial judge’s ruling? The same treatment will tighten the words at the
end of the sentence. Issues that were vital tells us that they were vital issues. Why not say vital
issues? Now note the phrase for the reason that. Does it say any more than because? If not, we
can use one word in place of four. Likewise, with respect to can be reduced to on. Rewritten, the
sentence looks like this:
The trial judge’s ruling was prejudicial error because it cut off cross-examination on vital
issues.
Here it is with the working words underlined:
The trial judge’s ruling was prejudicial error because it cut off cross-examination on vital
issues.
The revised sentence uses fifteen words in place of the original twenty-four, and ten of the
fifteen are working words. The revised sentence is both tighter and stronger than the original.
B. Avoid Compound Constructions
Compound constructions use three or four words to do the work of one or two words. They suck
the vital juices from your writing. You saw some examples in the last section. With respect to
was used instead of on. For the reason that was used instead of because.
Every time you see one of these pests on your page, swat it. Use a simple form instead. Here is a
list of examples:
Compound Simple
at that point in time then
by means of by
by reason of because of
by virtue of by, under
for the purpose of to
for the reason that because
in accordance with by, under
inasmuch as since
in connection with by, under
in favor of for
in order to to
in relation to about, concerning
in the event that if
in the nature of like
prior to before
subsequent to after
with a view to to
with reference to about, concerning
C. Avoid Word-Wasting Idioms
Once you develop a distaste for surplus words, you will find many word-wasting idioms to trim
from your sentences with no loss of meaning. For instance:
The fact that the defendant was young may have influenced the court.
What meaning does the fact that add? Why not say:
The defendant’s youth may have influenced the court.
The fact that is almost always surplus. See how it can be trimmed from these examples:
Verbose Concise
the fact that she had died her death
he was aware of the fact that he knew that
despite the fact that although, even though
because of the fact that because
Likewise, words like case, instance, and situation spawn verbosity:
Verbose Concise
in some instances the parties can sometimes the parties can
in many cases you will find often you will find
that was a situation in which the court there the court
disability claims are now more frequent disability claims are more
than was formerly the case frequent now
injunctive relief is required in the injunctive relief is required when
situation in which
in the majority of instances usually the grantor will
the grantor will
Other examples of common word-wasting idioms that you can eliminate with no loss of meaning
are:
Verbose Concise
during the time that during, while
for the period of for
insofar as…is concerned (omit it and start with the subject)
there is no doubt but that doubtless, no doubt
the question as to whether whether, the question whether
this is a topic that this topic
until such time as until
-----END-----

Module 5 Omit Surplus Words

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Module 5 Omit Surplus Words

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Module 5 Omit Surplus Words

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

University of the Cordilleras

OMIT SURPLUS WORDS

A. How to Spot Bad Construction

You might also like