|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 9:12 pm
I read a book by C.S. Lewis, then read one by Patricia Briggs and I noticed something: there was a huge difference between the two authors. This is something I have noticed. Older authors like Lewis, Tolkien, de Troyes, etc, in their works the sentence structure is complex; they use bigger and less common words; and they have, generally, more detail in their works. More recent authors' stories use smaller, more common words; detail isn't as in depth as older works; and the sentence structure is simpler.
Has anyone else noticed this? Do ya'll think this is true?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 10:02 pm
It's kinda like the thing I mentioned in the graphic novels thread a while ago: People are dumbing everything down. No one wants to read books anymore. They want movies, TV shows, graphic novels, SparkNotes, whatever other shortcuts there are. This counts for vocabulary, syntax, details, and everything else, too. Quick, fun reads are what sell these days.
I know I prefer them. When I read something that's not for class, I generally want entertainment. There are exceptions to this, like when I want to read something to learn. But when reading for fun, I don't want to have to think about it as much. I don't mind the older works with bigger words and everything. I can usually figure out the meaning of words from the context. 'Though I will admit that overly-detailed books bore me. I like being able to imagine my own settings, rather than being told every detail about it.
Anyway. To summarize: Yes, the type of books that sell now are simpler, with easier, more well-known words that pretty much anyone who's gone to school can understand.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 10:26 pm
This fits with an article I read a little while back about how english is becoming "stream-lined" and people only use a few easy to understand and to-the-point words. So, in essence, the English lanuage is shrinking.
Its kind of depressing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:50 am
I couldn't tell you why older authors are so amazingly detailed, probably because I don't read many older authors. However it's likely that they use less than common words because those words were common to them when they were writing, just as our authors use words common to them now. It seems likely that a vast amount more words were put into usage in every day life in comparison to now.
Also, when people were educated in English, it was done very thoroughly, as far as I can recall. Anybody feel free to correct me. They were possibly taught a lot more than the curriculum is teaching us now, which would explain why our authors can't really shake a stick at them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 7:38 pm
Older books are nice like that sometimes, like Charles Dickens or something. It's nice to kinda take a trip back in time and take a trip to the dictionary every other page. Sometimes it's just a heck of a lot easier to read something new and short and sweet. So yes, I have noticed that. But also... correct me if I'm wrong, but I think there are a few fairly recent authors that also use the big words and the big sentences and the long descriptions. Such as... Susanna Clarke... that's the only one that I can think of though...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 10:43 pm
I enjoy using my extensive vocabulary on people who are supposed to be older and "wiser" than me. Then I get to watch them try and figure out what I said. xd
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2008 10:59 am
I like using it to trump people in debates, personally. They can't give a decent response if they don't know what the hell I just said. (:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2008 10:37 pm
NightIntent I like using it to trump people in debates, personally. They can't give a decent response if they don't know what the hell I just said. (: Its really fun when they come up with the wrong definition and try to fisish the arguement. xd
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minerva the Whore 4 Books
|
Posted: Wed Apr 09, 2008 3:00 pm
Very good topic! smile
Western cultures, like the US and UK, are behind in math and science compared to the Asian countries, so to compete less emphasis is put on English and the arts, and more is put on sciences. This a sad reason for the downgrade in vocabulary. rolleyes
A brighter reason that books are simpler now is that it used to be that only wealthy people got educated (even in Tolkien's time free public education stopped at about 13 years-old because the peasants needed to work to support their families), hence books were written for just one class of society. 3nodding It's great that now books are made for everyone.
Most modern authors write with common speech, but those like George Martin and Margaret Weis do not. Their sentence structure isn't as complex as Tolkien because we speak slightly differently now (speech changes over time, look at Shakespeare!) though their vocabulary is as advanced.
I find that I enjoy "difficult" and "easy" books equally. I seek interesting characters, unique plots usually involving sorcery, and plentiful dialogue (preferably with at least one witty comment every chapter). Any book, difficult or easy, can have this. I heart the series Artemis Fowl by Colfer and Liveship Traders by Hobb - one is simple and the other is difficult - and the fact that they're written differently doesn't matter to me.
I'll admit that in more complicated novels I need to pay closer attention becaue of the amount of details. A minor character or location that I haven't read about for five long chapters will be mentioned again and I won't remember who or what it is. gonk Yes, this is annoying, however, easy books irritate me too. I'll read it and think, "Why do you ALWAYS say 'he said' or 'she said?' For God's sake, there are more words for speaking in our language besides 'said!' Even if you just changed it up by writing 'she replied' and not something complex like 'she cautiously elaborated' it would help! I can't handle the same damn term over and over again!!!" scream
Both have their advantages and disadvantages. I like them both...Wow, I've certainly been typing for a long time! sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 09, 2008 3:15 pm
A lot of people think that using fanicer terms for "said" is the sign of a poor writer. I think it's bullshit, but I've heard it said a lot. That may be why some authors don't use them. Or maybe they're just weird like that. Either explanation works. (:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 12, 2008 6:20 pm
I believe Minerva is right that the difference in education now compared to when a lot of the classics were written makes a huge difference. Today we have people from all walks of life writing books. One of my favorite series was written by a teenager (Eragon).
If only the upper class could afford to learn to read and write, we'd still be wading through books like Charles Dickens's.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 12, 2008 8:34 pm
When an author only uses "said" not only is it irritating to hear the same word over and over, but it isn't very discriptive. I think it shows a slight lag in the author's creativity too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2008 12:49 am
I definitely notice the difference between the two. And the difference in mental capacity needed to read them. If I am reading some extremely dumbed-down preteen crap (dangerous), I can sing, watch TV, and hold a conversation. If reading... Jane Eyre, persay, I can barely listen to my Zune. It certainly takes time to get used to reading the old style books, but once you get into the mindset, they become easier to comprehend, and you can acquire a much larger vocabulary than if you sat around reading the Clique books. Oh, God, Clique books. They make me want to gouge out my eyes.
Anyway, about the "said" thing. If you read an old classic, and I will use Jane Austen for a reference, you will see words like "called out", "repeatedly exclaimed," and "mused" right there alongside your plain old "said." I think the reason fancier words are being brought down is because of a lot of horrible teen angsty emo vampire writers trying to imitate that sort of complex writing style. And failing miserably...
And I lost my train of thought. So I'll shut up now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 8:33 am
this is why i like the older "classic" authors.
they were usually either scholars, or men of leisure (the women were wonderful but don't fit the mold; i'll have to treat them elsewhere)
so they wrote for their own set, their group
Tolkein wrote for his fellow Inklings, and much of his work was meant as a linguistic exercise
Lewis was a master of medieval romance and used the books as a recreation within that genre
William Morris was making a socio-political philosophical point with his groundbreaking fantasies.
Lord Dunsany and James Branch Cabell wrote because it gave them something to do that was socially acceptable other than real work.
today these books are mass market moneymakers, written for an entirely different audience, one with less education and taste.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 8:40 pm
I'm finding that the type of books I read depends on my mood. I love to read books that are geared toward more educated people, but sometimes when I'm tired (which seems most often the times I get the chance to read) I just want to pick something up that is easy to digest and just immerse myself simply in the storyline without really analyzing the book.
I am finding though that most peoples normal state is similar to the one I'm in when I am tired...it is a little bit sad that more intelligent books are less read, but I still feel it is a positive thing that more people are reading, no matter what level the books are. neutral
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
