How the heck did this get so heavy? I thought we were all having a laugh? Off to bed with a good book...

Frankie,

Many thanks for your explanation of David, (which I don't fully understand) and 'Ceef' or 'Keef' - very interesting, do you happen to know Keith’s second name?

The scientific article, quoted (in italics) in my comment box was from off the Internet, hence the wording 'pinched from off the internet'. Perhaps you misunderstood what I was saying? - There were no accusations of anyone else pinching anything. By my 'pinching' it, I meant I was 'quoting' it.

A comment not being returned might indicate nothing more than the other person has something more pressing to do in the intervening time - was it 5 minutes?

Sorry you took it the wrong way.

I'm off to bed now - so don't take offence if no more explanations of crossed wires tonight. – and now I feel like I am walking on eggs. (How’s that for mixed metaphors?)

A )

I thought Keef was a guy I knew once..

wordy can be wonderful..as long as its not for the sake of using them but.. if you create a picture so as not be aware of the words then that's what words are for .. does this make sense? I will Cee fit to shut up now...

Ellie ..

Ellie, I love you too...

This entire conversation is a perfect example of why some discussions are better discussed in person.

Internet forum chat rule no.1 - never jump to conclusions.

yes, I agree IB - this whole chat has a touch of the Pythonesque absurd.

To explain the 'humour' once more for the last time, so as to leave no element of doubt -

porcine cumulus and mural granulosa cells can secrete cumulus expansion-enabling factor (CEEF) (Hence the reference to pig sweat) was an example that I took (ie pinched) of the internet - to illustrate the very thing we were talking about - (or so I thought) ...not only was it 'ceef' but also CEEF! in two ways - ie it is verbose, but also the initials made up CEEF.

Sorry if others missed the humour in this - my apologies, I hope my explanation is now sufficicient. Mybe I have a different sense of humour from others?

Andrew )

I rest my case.

"Think before you post: Don't poke your nose in just to be a smartass."

I think I rest my case too IB

A )

I completely agree, Nell - it's not written in stone. What makes you think it is? It's no different to any other writing 'rule' (I hate that word!) or guideline. Sorry if I've upset anyone - my post was meant to be informative, not inflammatory.

By the same token, when I critique, I'll advise a writer if I feel he's being unnecessarily wordy - whether or not a writer accepts that advice, or any other, is entirely up to him/her.

But wordiness is something publishers and editors don't like, and, as writers, we need to be aware of that.

:-((

Ellenna, being 'wordy' (or 'ceef' is never, ever 'wonderful'. I think you may have misunderstood the meaning of 'wordiness', as so many do, but my link on page 1 should hopefully clarify things! :-))

I've been trying to stay out of this argument - sorry, discussion - but I'm dragged in.
I've checked that site, Tabitha, and it's good. It has many valid points.
My problem is with the current trend towards, what I feel is, hacking swathes through descriptive narrative.
We are wordsmiths. Why should we not use words? Who tells artists they are using too many colours? Are musicians criticised for over-use of notes?
Why should writers be different? I'm not sure I know what is meant by 'wordiness' but I think we all understand the difference between descriptive narrative and padding out.
This started out as an interesting discussion. Can we bring it back on line? Please?
Dee.

Well, in fact this is just what I said , I think, that words for words sake are NOT wonderful .. but my god you
CAN use many words and produce something visually,spiritually, emotionally wonderful.. as always with anything it's a fine line and anyone with any sensitivity knows the difference I think between waffle and good descriptive prose..

I think I understand the term " wordiness " pretty well.

Ellie

<Added>

aka

Ellieminate

I notice that 'otiose' hasn't reared its lovely head yet!

Best to all,

Mike

Bait taken; point missed. No matter. 'Try again. Fail again. Fail better.' Old Sam said it best.

Best,

Mike.

Ellenna, your post tells me that you have no idea at all what 'wordiness' means, despite your protestations to the contrary.

Correctly-used, beautiful and descriptive words are NOT an example of 'wordiness'. 'Wordiness' is the use of REDUNDANT WORDS WHICH ADD NOTHING TO A PIECE OF NARRATIVE, as Frankie has already so helpfully indicated, and which the link CLEARLY indicates.

I am beginning to wish I hadn't bothered to post this damn link at all, as it seems to have attracted a bunch of people who don't seem to be even remotely interested in understanding what 'wordiness' is, let alone take on board the advice contained within it. I would be grateful if everyone reading this thread would grant me the simple courtesy of taking the time and trouble to understand what I am talking about BY CAREFULLY READING the information within the link BEFORE slagging off a well-intentioned piece of information or the messenger of it.