Quote:
Originally Posted by JulianEdgar
(1) When I first started commercially writing (about 37 years ago!) I assumed that the bigger the words I could put in, the better. After all, weren't they great examples of my writing abilities?
(2) When I became a school teacher, I realised that understanding was key - and to use the required words to achieve that.
(3) When I started teaching professional writing, I realised that the clearer I could make the concepts, the better.
(4) When I started writing books, I realised that the simpler the words in which I could express the concepts, the better.
My book chapters - and, I hope, the writing I do here - come in at about Flesch Kincaid 9-10. That is, 9-10 years of schooling.
I haven't run a test on Aerohead's verbiage but I'd guess FK = 13-16. It might just be that Aerohead is a crap writer, but my gut feeling is that he deliberately writes in obscure language. |
There are conventions used in fluid mechanics and aerodynamics, which have unique specificity. They have a particular meaning. Like Verjungsgungsverhaltnis. It means only one thing.
Mechanical engineering requires the use of very specific, multidisciplinary language.
There's less confusion when certain words are understood by all to mean a certain particular thing.
My exercise with Hucho's subject index for example, was predicated upon my own difficulty in navigating his book, as certain, very important topics failed to make it into the back of the book, where an interested reader might have gone initially, targeting specific information to no avail. Since you didn't do it, it was left to someone else.
Go ahead and do the verbiage test. That 'll be fun.