Y12W22WR Why your writing loses readers
Take a recent piece of your own writing, diagnose the specific weaknesses using the research-based principles, and rewrite a paragraph applying your diagnosis.
1Retrieval check
Q1.What principles do Pinker and Zinsser converge on for clear writing?
- ALong sentences, passive voice, abstract nouns
- BConcrete verbs, active voice, specific nouns, short sentences where possible
- CTechnical jargon to signal expertise
- DOpening with a thesis every time
Q2.What does Pinker mean by the ‘curse of knowledge’?
- AKnowing too much makes you a worse writer overall
- BExperts forget what non-experts don’t know, producing writing that assumes too much
- CReading too many books distorts your style
- DResearch findings are a curse for writers
Show answer key
Q1 → B. Concrete verbs, active voice, specific nouns, short sentences where possible.Clear prose favours strong verbs and specific nouns; simplification isn’t dumbing down.
Q2 → B. Experts forget what non-experts don’t know, producing writing that assumes too much.The curse makes your own gaps invisible to you; revise for the reader, not yourself.
2Prompt deconstruction
- Stimulus
- Pinker’s and Zinsser’s research-based principles; the curse of knowledge.
- Scope
- Reference specific principles; use a real piece of your own writing.
- Case
- One paragraph — originally written by you — diagnosed and rewritten.
- Thinking
- Honest diagnosis against your own work; most writers resist seeing their weaknesses.
- Output
- Original + diagnosis + rewrite + what the exercise taught you.
3Position nudge
Where on the range does your proposal sit?
Pole ALight touch (preserve original voice)
Pole BHeavy rewrite (enforce every principle)
Commit to a specific point; defend it in your planner.
4Planner — design the thing, then the trade-offs
5Sentence stems
- My proposal is ___.
- I am grounding this in [researcher]’s finding that ___.
- The main trade-off is ___: this design gains ___ but loses ___.
- The most predictable objection is ___, and my response is ___.
- I would know it was working after [time] if ___.
- What I am most likely to abandon is ___, so I will build in ___ to prevent that.
6Exemplar paragraph (not about this article)
(1) My proposal is to rewrite the opening paragraph of a recent English analytical essay, applying Zinsser’s concrete-verb test and Pinker’s curse-of-knowledge check. (2) I am grounding this in Zinsser’s finding that abstract nouns and weak verbs are the two most common causes of reader drop-off. (3) The main trade-off is voice: this design gains clarity but loses some of the self-consciously formal register my essay was trying to maintain. (4) The most predictable objection is that the ‘analytical’ voice requires abstraction, and my response is that the voice is not in the abstractions — it is in the precision of the concrete — and that my original paragraph confused being vague with being formal. (5) I would know it was working after one paragraph if a peer could paraphrase my opening sentence without reading it twice. (6) What I am most likely to abandon is the concrete-verb discipline under time pressure, so I will build in a revision pass specifically for verbs — a thirty-second scan before I submit.
What this paragraph does, move by move
- States scope: one paragraph + two specific tests.
- Grounds in Zinsser’s mechanism (verbs + abstract nouns).
- Names the voice trade-off honestly.
- Reframes the most likely objection (formal ≠ vague).
- Specifies a peer-paraphrase success signal.
- Builds in a verb-only revision pass as the anti-abandonment move.
- 选择某一选项会使整个页面刷新。
- 在新窗口中打开。