Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    NewHope is offline Senior Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Student or Learner
      • Native Language:
      • Chinese
      • Home Country:
      • China
      • Current Location:
      • China
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    637
    Post Thanks / Like

    The clause: that have simple, easy to understand alternativ

    Context:
    Remember, your writing should be interesting but also easy to read and understand. Does this mean you should avoid technical language? No. You may need to use technical terms, but avoid impressive-sounding nonsense words that have simple, easy to understand alternatives.

    Does the clause meant "It is technical terms that have simple, easy to understand alternatives"?

    In addition, I think the author used "simple, easy to understand" as an adjective to modify "alternatives". Right?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    12,970
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The clause: that have simple, easy to understand altern

    Quote Originally Posted by NewHope
    Context:
    Remember, your writing should be interesting but also easy to read and understand. Does this mean you should avoid technical language? No. You may need to use technical terms, but avoid impressive-sounding nonsense words that have simple, easy to understand alternatives.

    Does the clause meant "It is technical terms that have simple, easy to understand alternatives"?

    In addition, I think the author used "simple, easy to understand" as an adjective to modify "alternatives". Right?
    'impressive-sounding nonsense words' means, big words. Words that you might think make you sound 'smart' but, nonetheless, words that the reader probably isn't familiar with (e.g., Sam is garrulous = Sam is talkative).

    The author is saying that it's important to know your audience. Use words the reader knows. The reason being, you want the reader to be able to understand what you are saying. If you use words that are too complicated--for a given audience--, you'll lose your reader. Know your audience. :D

    Techincal terms are not 'big words' if they are used to refer to specialized language (e.g., Waste Management Engineer = garbageman/garbagewoman).

    All the best, :D

  3. #3
    NewHope is offline Senior Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Student or Learner
      • Native Language:
      • Chinese
      • Home Country:
      • China
      • Current Location:
      • China
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    637
    Post Thanks / Like
    Thanks Casiopea. The reply is good! :D

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    12,970
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by NewHope
    Thanks Casiopea. The reply is good! :D
    You're welcome. :D

Similar Threads

  1. would or will
    By jack in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 80
    Last Post: 21-Oct-2004, 11:10
  2. We can reduce adverb clauses to adverb phrases. Why?
    By Steven D in forum General Language Discussions
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 23-Sep-2004, 15:42
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 30-Aug-2004, 15:54
  4. Conditional Clause
    By Jesse Huang in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 30-Jul-2004, 08:11
  5. The Hidden Evidence: The Past Family
    By shun in forum Teaching English
    Replies: 143
    Last Post: 09-Nov-2003, 01:56

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •