Actually, remove every word you can. You can live without them.
Let me try to argue for the opposite: keep as many words as you can. I have found the strategy of keeping words superior when writing exposition on a dense topic. (Obviously, writing advice will vary depending on the reason you’re writing.)
When speaking, you have reason to be concise: you’re trying to get across your point with as little as possible getting in the way. If you speak a long phrase when a short one will do, you risk that your audience will forget what you started out saying by the time you finish.
When writing, your goal is to be clear, not to save on ink. Whenever you use abbreviations or shorthand or imprecise descriptions, you are saving time for yourself, not for your reader. In the unlikely case that you are writing too much, your reader will be able to skip whatever is redundant.
For example:
“Never write the object of a sentence first, then the verb, and last the subject. Use the opposite order instead.” This version is bad; your reader must expend mental energy to unpack your instruction.
“Never write the object of a sentence first, then the verb, and last the subject. Instead, write the subject first, then the verb, and last the object.” This version is better. You’ve explicitly spelled out what your instruction is.
“Never write the object of a sentence first, then the verb, and last the subject. Instead, use the opposite order: write the subject first, then the verb, and last the object.” This version is even better: you’ve provided both the end result, and how you obtained it. If you have made a mistake, your reader will be able to catch it.
Alarm bells should go off whenever you catch yourself writing “We will only consider the first case; the others are similar.” If the reader is sophisticated enough to be able to extrapolate from the first case, the reader will extrapolate anyway. To help the reader extrapolate, you should certainly say “All these cases are handled similarly.” You should then proceed to consider every single case anyway!
A reader who sees the pattern can use the pattern to skip redundant steps in your argument. A reader who does not see the pattern, or is nsure about the pattern, can read the redundant steps anyway. You should not take away this option.
Let me try to argue for the opposite: keep as many words as you can. I have found the strategy of keeping words superior when writing exposition on a dense topic.
This realllllllllly depends on your goal. If it’s persuasion (e.g. a recommendation, a proposal, a bid, an argument), then it would be a good idea to remember that brevity implies confidence, and confidence is persuasive. Also, the more incidental points you make, the more likely it is your audience will get hung up on one of those points instead of what you’re actually talking about.
Let me try to argue for the opposite: keep as many words as you can. I have found the strategy of keeping words superior when writing exposition on a dense topic. (Obviously, writing advice will vary depending on the reason you’re writing.)
When speaking, you have reason to be concise: you’re trying to get across your point with as little as possible getting in the way. If you speak a long phrase when a short one will do, you risk that your audience will forget what you started out saying by the time you finish.
When writing, your goal is to be clear, not to save on ink. Whenever you use abbreviations or shorthand or imprecise descriptions, you are saving time for yourself, not for your reader. In the unlikely case that you are writing too much, your reader will be able to skip whatever is redundant.
For example:
“Never write the object of a sentence first, then the verb, and last the subject. Use the opposite order instead.” This version is bad; your reader must expend mental energy to unpack your instruction.
“Never write the object of a sentence first, then the verb, and last the subject. Instead, write the subject first, then the verb, and last the object.” This version is better. You’ve explicitly spelled out what your instruction is.
“Never write the object of a sentence first, then the verb, and last the subject. Instead, use the opposite order: write the subject first, then the verb, and last the object.” This version is even better: you’ve provided both the end result, and how you obtained it. If you have made a mistake, your reader will be able to catch it.
Alarm bells should go off whenever you catch yourself writing “We will only consider the first case; the others are similar.” If the reader is sophisticated enough to be able to extrapolate from the first case, the reader will extrapolate anyway. To help the reader extrapolate, you should certainly say “All these cases are handled similarly.” You should then proceed to consider every single case anyway!
A reader who sees the pattern can use the pattern to skip redundant steps in your argument. A reader who does not see the pattern, or is nsure about the pattern, can read the redundant steps anyway. You should not take away this option.
This realllllllllly depends on your goal. If it’s persuasion (e.g. a recommendation, a proposal, a bid, an argument), then it would be a good idea to remember that brevity implies confidence, and confidence is persuasive. Also, the more incidental points you make, the more likely it is your audience will get hung up on one of those points instead of what you’re actually talking about.