[HN Gopher] Defending adverbs exuberantly if conditionally
___________________________________________________________________
Defending adverbs exuberantly if conditionally
Author : benbreen
Score : 82 points
Date : 2025-06-05 20:12 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (countercraft.substack.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (countercraft.substack.com)
| Charon77 wrote:
| What's wrong with using adverbs that don't change the meaning of
| the word?
|
| "She grins happily". Sure, "She grins" also conveys the same
| thing, but the two sentences differ in word count.
|
| I personally feel that reading has a rhythm to it, and adding
| more filler words just to make it coherent with the surrounding
| sentences isn't bad... fictions, at least...
| o11c wrote:
| Like all rules, you can break adverb if you can afford it in
| your strangeness budget. If you _actually_ have rhythm (which
| depends highly on context) you can probably afford it. See also
| the rule that "editing _any_ sentence, in any direction, makes
| it better ".
|
| Most adult writers seem to err by making their sentences too
| long. Shorter is almost always better; you just need to let the
| length vary except in passages with deliberate repetition.
|
| The usual advice _I_ have heard is that you should probably
| think of a better verb /adjective in the first place. For the
| example you quoted, "She beams" and "Her face lights up [like
| something]" immediately jump out at me.
|
| Now, looking at all the look-like-adverbs in the article:
|
| exuberantly, conditionally - I can't think of a way to merge
| either of these into the verb, plus they have pair structure.
| If not deliberately making a point I would probably change
| these into adjectives describing the noun'ed verb.
|
| recently - sentence level construct, generally considered fine
| if you're not overdoing it (I in fact didn't even notice this
| until I started grepping)
|
| foolishly, incorrectly - these modify a previously-unmodified
| verb that is deliberately repeated 3 times.
|
| lovely - not an adverb despite looking like one; the other
| common meaning of "-ly" but unusual for taking an abstract noun
|
| literally - generally can't merge into verbs; actually used
| correctly for once
|
| swiftly, vigorously - the former has numerous words into which
| it could merge with the verb; the latter less. But this is
| clearly an example of deliberately do it for effect
|
| swimmingly - generally can't merge into verbs, especially since
| it's used for effect
|
| usually - generally can't merge into verbs, so we're stuck with
| it unless you rewrite to use something like "wont", "custom",
| ...
|
| inelegantly, wrongheadedly - these could merge (in particular
| "abuse and misuse" are commonly paired), but are used for
| effect due to the article topic
|
| unthinkingly - this is emphasized; "without thought" would also
| work. I can't think of a merge in any case, though there are
| numerous synonyms
|
| pointlessly - limited merge opportunities in general, usually
| veering into metaphor territory e.g. "flailed". Also, this
| particular sentence feels like it is the whole reason adverbs
| exist.
|
| early - not an adverb despite looking like one. Related to
| "ere" but that's the wrong part of speech?
|
| quickly, happily, sadly, loudly - these are _discussed_ , not
| really a part of the article itself
|
| diligently - hard to merge in general
|
| unfortunately - sentence-level
|
| angrily - many merges exist - "shouted", "roared", "grumbled",
| etc. and this is one of the uncommon cases where killing "said"
| actually can improve the sentence. The cited "improvement" is
| ... actually pretty bad though.
|
| frequently - hard to merge; has a synonym "often" which lacks
| the "-ly" in case you need to fool a blind rule-enforcer
|
| silly - not an adverb and doesn't really look like one despite
| ending with "ly". It's actually the obsolete "seel" (good,
| happiness, fortune) + "-y" (resembling)
|
| flatly - a few merge targets exist ("recited", or with some
| rephrasing you might use "rote") but this isn't an important
| adverb to eliminate
|
| typically - hard to merge, and possible replacements might be
| even worse weasel words
|
| lovingly - used as an explicit contrast structure, and few
| direct merges are in general, but there are many evocative
| other ways to express it. The article is missing a comma before
| it.
|
| happily, sadly, quietly, loudly - again, these are discussed in
| the article itself
|
| really, badly - this is borderline inner dialogue so the
| informality and simple word choice is beneficial. Many merges
| exist (note that since these are both adverbs you'll likely
| still end up with one) if you're in a context that wants them
| however.
|
| loudly, rudely - discussed for style
|
| surely - the particular shade here is of opinion, which
| prevents what merges might otherwise be possible
|
| reflexively - probably can't merge, but in this sentence I
| definitely feel the strangeness budget straining. If this were
| anything but an article about adverbs I'd take a knife to it.
|
| only - this is an adverb but not for the usual reason.
| Originally "one" + "-ly" by the usual noun-to-adjective
| construction, but has fossilized into its own idea (gaining an
| adverb sense) and should not be avoided. This sentence is a
| fragment, and the paragraph is full of same-length sentences so
| I'd be proper and use a comma; if I want the effect that badly
| then change the rest of the paragraph somehow.
|
| weekly - this is the _other_ other "-ly" rule, used only for
| time nouns
|
| hilariously - the context is minimal but it's clear this needs
| to stay; using a mere pair of adjectives doesn't connect the
| words strongly enough. In other contexts many rephrasings are
| possible.
| ccppurcell wrote:
| Brevity is the soul of wit.
| krige wrote:
| People forget that Polonius, the source of this quote, used
| seven lines, the above included, to say that Hamlet is mad.
| It was meant to be ironic, or a joke.
| dcminter wrote:
| Plus he was a pompous old fool... his advice shouldn't be
| taken at face value!
| whstl wrote:
| That's why we can't have good things.
| garbawarb wrote:
| Brevity is wit.
| SAI_Peregrinus wrote:
| Smol = wit.
|
| 11 characters. Could omit the period and spaces for 8.
| Needed to use the meme spelling "smol" since it's shorter
| than "small". Can we get it shorter without losing the
| meaning entirely? Maybe `wit#smol` though that's not the
| syntax for how `#` is used in modal logic, and still 8
| characters (though a bit closer to the original meaning).
| stevage wrote:
| Not all writing needs to be witty.
| MattPalmer1086 wrote:
| Mostly just that it's redundant information. But there's always
| exceptions to any rule.
| reedf1 wrote:
| "Grins happily", feels awkward, stiff, bloated, and prompts me
| to expect bad dialogue. The contention is one of style. I can
| think of a dozen or so logical reasons why this sounds off, but
| for me it simply _smells_ like bad writing.
| Angostura wrote:
| She grinned nervously, sheepishly, awkwardly, dangerously
| reedf1 wrote:
| Much better
| sandworm101 wrote:
| She grinned happily.
|
| She happily grinned.
|
| Same words. I generally prefer the later, but they have very
| slight differences in emphasis. Without the adverb, the subtle
| difference is lost.
| simonask wrote:
| It's not that subtle. The latter means that she was happy to
| grin, the former that she was grinning in a happy way. The
| line is only really blurred between these in poetic
| registers.
| stevage wrote:
| I don't pick up on that difference in meaning at all. Is
| that some general rule for adverb placement?
| schwartzworld wrote:
| You could grin menacingly. Or nervously. Or reluctantly.
| reverendsteveii wrote:
| I know several people that grin menacingly.
| ofalkaed wrote:
| >"Avoid adverbs" is a common advice in MFA programs
|
| Words fail me, even adverbs seem to be of no help.
| kurthr wrote:
| You can't write clearly, without an adverb.
| globnomulous wrote:
| Apologize for that comma right now.
| kurthr wrote:
| I clearly can't write without,
| marcosdumay wrote:
| It's obviously an attack against the OP's literally
| competence.
| reverendsteveii wrote:
| You can clarify your writing without that sort of
| modification.
| elbear wrote:
| I upvoted just for the title :)
| Bjartr wrote:
| I am reminded of the "Tom Swifty"[1], a sort of pun involving an
| adverb. They gained infamy though the YA books focusing on the
| adventures of Tom Swift. Here's a few examples
|
| > "If you want me, I shall be in the attic," said Tom, loftily.
|
| > "The thermostat is set too high," said Tom heatedly.
|
| > "Don't you love sleeping outdoors," Tom said intently.
|
| > "I just dropped the toothpaste," said Tom crestfallenly.
|
| [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Swifty
| vharuck wrote:
| My favorite, plucked from Terry Pratchett:
|
| "I'm a homosexual necrophiliac," said Tom in dead earnest.
| gadders wrote:
| The thing I have noticed is that most US-English speakers drop
| the "ly" from the end of adverbs.
|
| Is that grammatically correct for US English, or is it slang?
| rjmill wrote:
| Can you give an example? I've never noticed that (except for
| certain specific dialects and slang) but I may be blind to it.
| halper wrote:
| I hear it most often with "real": it is real bad, good or
| weird. The Offspring wants you bad.
| colanderman wrote:
| Oh yes! This works with other intensifiers as well. "Crazy
| good", "wicked bad", "mad smart", etc. To my ears, eliding
| the -ly changes the meaning from the literal reading, to
| specifically the intensifier reading.
| gadders wrote:
| "Think Different" "That went perfect" etc
| colanderman wrote:
| I do this. I think this applies only to adverbs modifying
| verbs. Adverbs modifying adjectives or participles stay put.
|
| "She runs quick," is a thing I'd say.
|
| "***The topic was hot debated," would be ungrammatical to my
| ears.
|
| Not sure how widespread it is. I think it just falls out of a
| natural tendency to elide utterances which don't alter the
| meaning of a sentence. In many positions it's obvious that an
| adjective is meant to modify the verb rather than a noun.
|
| It's not a hard and fast rule. In formal writing I'd use
| adjectives per standard grammar.
|
| Maybe also related to the (standard) use of adjectives as
| describing the state into which something is transformed by a
| verb. In "I painted the wall red," "red" is properly an
| adjective and modifies the transformative act, not the object.
| I suspect this construction has been unconsciously widened to
| apply to nontransformative verbs also.
|
| Notably "***she quick runs" sounds highly ungrammatical to my
| ears.
| Nicook wrote:
| Flashbacks to my driver's ed teacher in highschool who would
| say adverbs correctly then correct himself by saying it again
| without the -ly. This drove me insane. And no I haven't noticed
| this generally in US english speakers. I would assume some
| negative things about people who drop the -ly from adverbs.
| chrisweekly wrote:
| See also the excellent book "First You Write a Sentence" by Joe
| Moran.
| throwanem wrote:
| I would rather do so with conditional exuberance.
| tempodox wrote:
| But that's non-adverbially.
| throwanem wrote:
| Yes. I don't defend my favorite habanero sauce by using it
| 20% by volume in a recipe, either. Unwise excess is always
| unwise, and there, I used an adverb just to make you happy.
| tempodox wrote:
| Did I detect a hint of adverbialism in this title?
| topaz0 wrote:
| The problem with all syntax-based writing advice is that it's an
| extremely poor substitute for taste, and taste has to be
| developed by years of sitting with prose, good and bad, and
| seeing what makes you cringe and what gives delight. If you
| closely read the expert writers and teachers of writing who
| purvey these rules, you find that none of them follow their own
| admonitions entirely. That doesn't mean the rules come from
| nowhere -- in this example, I have observed plenty of novice
| writers who use adverbs _badly_ , so if you're trying to learn to
| write well, adverb-dense prose is a common sign of inelegant
| writing, and a sign that that prose might need some attention.
| But the solution is not "eliminate the adverbs at all costs" --
| the solution is to read closely, feel it grate against your ears,
| and try revisions until it doesn't grate anymore.
| reverendsteveii wrote:
| Idk, I can get behind some of it as a mechanical exercise. When
| I was a young'n and honestly thought I was gonna be an english
| lit major one of my teachers made me go a whole year without
| using any prepositional phrases. Did that instantly improve all
| of my writing? No, in fact everything I turned out under that
| rule was clunky and overedited. But after that year any time I
| ran into a prepositional phrase that I didn't like I had the
| experience to know how to rewrite it effectively. The point is
| training, not product refinement. Find a device you lean on too
| much, eliminate it entirely for a while, and emerge from the
| other side of this process with a better understanding of the
| crutch, knowledge of several ways to work around it and wisdom
| to know when to do that. It's not a substitute for taste, it's
| a tool for developing taste and the ability to refine things to
| your taste.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| One rule has worked well for me in all my writing: don't be lazy.
|
| Put some effort into each sentence. Read it back to yourself. If
| something is clumsy, try rewriting it a few different ways. As
| Strunk said, "Rewrite and revise. Do not be afraid to seize what
| you have and cut it to ribbons."
|
| Yes it takes longer, but for most writing, it is worth it. All of
| the other rules are just advice to consider, and perhaps reject.
| stevage wrote:
| Essentially the advice here is "avoid redundant adverbs" but it
| takes the author a lot of words to say it.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-06-06 23:02 UTC)