It’s Monday tomorrow. Oh, crap, you still didn’t do your English assignment? You must be worried how to dodge the teacher with the best excuse, or to get someone to write a marvelous piece of literature for you. But how far can you get with it?
Will you keep making excuses every time?
No! You should not.
Writing is an art. Each word you write is a reflection of your thoughts on the paper. And how you express them is a way to express yourself. And when you are asked to show up your skills for a given project, it just starts to stress you down. Essay Writing is not some rocket science, just using you skills in a smart and organized manner.
Essay writing is an important part of our academic years. Whether we are kids, undergraduates or doing masters, we always have to write essays or reports of some kind about the knowledge or observation achieved so far. Thus, it is important to polish your skills at this. And moreover, you realize that the more you grow up, the lesser the time you get for your essay assignments and in fact the amount of research efforts you need to put in increases. How lucky were those good old days, when you got almost a week to write an essay on easy topics.
Now it seems that you just have to scribble down your best in a matter of few hours, and it should be an A-grade quality impressive too. So, ready to begin?
Here are the tips to write your essay well, whether it is 100 words, 500 or 1,000. You won’t be scared of the word limit once you start following these tips.
- Surround yourself with the right environment
That is essential. We do not realize the impact of the surroundings on ourselves, but it casts a huge impact. Choose a peaceful area to work, away from all the noises which drag you with them. Create a mood around you where you are motivated to work, so that the ideas can be written down in the best way.
A library is the best place to begin with. The silence and the books are a great option to be in with. A calm place is required for writing, so that you can hear your own thoughts, waiting to be expressed in words. And when you are going to be evaluated for it, then better you gear up in every way to achieve the best!
- Make an effective plan
Planning is really important when it comes to doing any task. Any mind boggling task or the toughest of the projects can be solved with a smart and effective plan. And same is true for writing too.
Before beginning the essay, think of the following topics and how to consider them while writing your essay:-
- Word limit
- Target group
- Major issues and topics to be covered
- Examples of the topics
- Suggestions and recommendations
These are the key areas which you will be covering while writing your essay, and must be explained in a good manner. Hence, sit for a while and think about them first before beginning with the essay.
For example, you’ve got to write a 1,000 words essay on the current water scarcity issues in the world and submit it by tomorrow. With so many ideas flushing down your head, you can simply start preparing up to write by breaking down your essay into sub parts, which discuss the following issues:-
- Reasons for water scarcity across the world
- Regions worst affected due to water scarcity
- Current steps being taken to cure it
- The aftermath if similar situations continue
See, it sounds easier now, right? Your ideas will get organized if you do so.
- Shut out the world
Yes, please! Ditch that phone, or just put it in silent mode. Log out of all the social websites and then get, set, go! As I told earlier, calmness is required to hear your own thoughts. And to do so, you need to stay away from other people’s conversations too. This gives you the right mood to focus on your own work and do your best.
- Do research for your essay
Yes, that is important. You can’t just write a fictitious article all the time! You need facts and relevant data to rely upon. This should be done thoroughly before beginning to write, so that you understand the topic well and the thoughts would generate continuously while writing.
And when you start penning them down and you need help, go back to the reference material and take help. Reference gives you the right direction to go, and the facts are real too. Hence, use such matter to make the best benefits out of it.
- Set realistic goals
Do not aim to write a wonderful piece of your thoughts in just 20 minutes. No, don’t even think to do that. You might just end up get screwed by your teacher. Aim for targets that are realistic and can be achieved by you. You know the best and the worst about yourself, so bring it to use.
Plan for a short break or two in between, decide for which topics you need to refer study material and which ones you can write well on your own. This way, create a rough outline of the time you will be spending in writing.
- Begin with the heading
That is the first part which can make or break you! A headline is the first opening line to the reader which tells about the article. Hence, it should be to-the-point and not very lengthy. A gist of the article should be wrapped around smartly in few words for a heading.
If required, a sub-heading may also be given, if you feel that there is more to be included in your headline section. The headline should be attention grabbing and able to give an idea about the content of the article.
Some of the examples for an effective headline are as follows:-
- Using case studies as an online tool for organizational managers
- Is your child a gifted athlete?
- Current water scarcity scenarios in the world
Notice that each of the headlines is complete in them and gives an idea of what the article would be.
- The smart introduction
It may seem that introduction is the hardest part to write, but is also the most important part of the essay. Introduction is the first section of your essay, giving a brief about the topics discussed in the article. It should be to-the-point and complete in itself. Examples or criticisms is not included in an introduction, keep that in mind.
- Go with the flow
Once you begin with the main content of the essay after the introduction, let your thoughts crawl out of your head and find a place through your words. Don’t judge what you are writing, just keep writing, writing and writing. Once you tune in to the right rhythm of interpreting your ideas in form of words, you should never stop. There should be absolutely no distraction in this process.
There may occur spelling mistakes, grammar mistakes or you may have done some error in page layout, but leave it for later. Whatever is in your head, it should be written down first.
And that’s the place where you end up the flow of your thoughts. All the points should have been discussed, the facts been agreed or been criticized and information displayed properly before your conclusion.
Suggestions can be included in a conclusion, regarding what changes or ideas you can suggest from your side. Also, if you feel that some topic was irrelevant or not up to the mark, it can be mentioned in the conclusion. From the research and the essay written, the things you understood and learnt can be explained in the conclusion. Thus, a conclusion is the end part of your essay.
As heard earlier, the first and the last part of any presentation are the peak points that make an impression on people’s minds. Just as the introduction is required to be crisp and impressive, so id the requirement for the conclusion too.
- The final step- editing
The most crucial one! To avoid someone else pointing out your flaws, dig them out yourself. Editing is even more important when you have written your essay all in a continuous flow, when you do not judge how you are writing, what you are writing. You were just writing. And now, it is the time to polish it out and give it a perfect look.
Take help of spell check and correct all your spellings. If you feel there is not much new terminology in your essay, check out the suggestions in thesaurus for synonyms. But keep in mind that the synonyms too, should be simple ones which are used in regular speech. Erase off the lines which you feel are unnecessary and add the facts that you’ve jumped, but you think that they are important.
Also, correct the flow of your thoughts while editing. That is also an important step. The process should be organized systematically, explaining the process or a problem step by step. The normal flow pf a procedure or problem is as follows:-
- Current scenario
- Conclusion and Recommendations
The information should be organized in a similar manner so as to explain everything properly.
Once you are done with editing all the way, give a final reading to your essay, just to make sure that everything is in order and makes sense.
The art of writing can be mastered only by writing fluently. Do not hesitate to make mistakes, for it is the mistakes that give us lessons. The key is to explain your ideas in the best way possible and to polish your skills. This way, not only you will score good in your evaluation, but also learn the art of expressing yourself through writing.
I can see my own copy up on a high shelf.
I rarely open it, because I know there is no
such thing as a synonym and because I get nervous
around people who always assemble with their own kind,
forming clubs and nailing signs to closed front doors
while others huddle alone in dark streets.
I would rather see words out on their own, away
from their families and the warehouse of Roget,
wandering the world where they sometimes fall
in love with a completely different word.
Surely, you have seen pairs of them standing forever
next to each other on the same line inside a poem,
a small chapel where weddings like these,
between perfect strangers, can take place.
—Billy Collins, “Thesaurus”
It has become something of a literary cliché to bash the thesaurus, or at the very least, to warn fellow writers that it is a book best left alone. Some admonitions might be blunt, others wistful, as with Billy Collins musing on his rarely opened thesaurus. But beyond the romantic anthropomorphizing of words needing to break free from “the warehouse of Roget,” what of Collins’ more pointed criticism, that “there is no/such thing as a synonym”? That would suggest that the whole enterprise of constructing a thesaurus is predicated on a fiction.
It is only a fiction if one holds fast to the notion that synonyms must be exactly equivalent in their meaning, usage, and connotation. Of course, under this strict view, there will never be any “perfect” synonyms. No word does exactly the job of another. In the words of the linguist Roy Harris, “If we believe there are instances where two expressions cannot be differentiated in respect of meaning, we must be deceiving ourselves.”
But the synonyms that we find gathered together in a thesaurus are typically more like siblings that share a striking resemblance. “Brotherly” and “fraternal,” for instance. Or “sisterly” and “sororal.” They may correspond well enough in meaning, but that should not imply that one can always be substituted for another. Consulting a thesaurus to find these closely related sets of words is only the first step for a writer looking for le mot juste: the peculiar individuality of each would-be synonym must then be carefully judged. Mark Twain knew the perils of relying on the family resemblance of words: “Use the right word,” he wrote, “not its second cousin.”
No matter how tempting the metaphor, though, words are not people. We cannot run genetic tests on them to determine their degrees of kinship, and a thesaurus is not a pedigree chart. We can, nonetheless, look to it as a guidebook to help us travel around the semantic space of our shared lexicon, grasping both the similarities that bond words together and the nuances that differentiate them.
This was, in fact, more or less the mission of Peter Mark Roget when he published the first edition of his Thesaurus of English Words and Phrases in the spring of 1852. He organized sets of synonyms according to one thousand categories, neatly arrayed in a two-column format. Roget was utterly obsessive about making lists, keeping a notebook full of them as early as eight years old, and by age twenty-six he had compiled a hundred-page draft of what would become his greatest work. List making was a welcome relief from his chronic depression and tumultuous family life; it was a way of imposing order on a messy reality. In his autobiography, he would not bring himself to explore his personal troubles; instead he dispassionately noted places he visited, moving days, birthdays, and death days. He called it “List of Principal Events.”
In his biography of Roget, The Man Who Made Lists, Joshua Kendall argues that Roget created a “paracosm,” or alternate universe, in the orderly lists of words he began making in childhood: “both a replica of the real world as well as a private, imaginary world.” The thesaurus that would grow out of the lists was even more hyperorderly. The unruliness of language—and the world of concepts that words denote—could be tamed in his pages. When he discovered that he actually had 1,002 concepts listed instead of his planned 1,000, he simply condensed two entries to achieve his round number: “Absence of Intellect” became 450a and “Indiscrimination,” 465a.
Roget’s thesaurus was crucially a conceptual undertaking, and, according to Roget’s deeply held religious beliefs, a tribute to God’s work. His efforts to create order out of linguistic chaos harks back to the story of Adam in the Garden of Eden, who was charged with naming all that was around him, thereby creating a perfectly transparent language. It was, according to the theology of St. Augustine, a language that would lose its perfection with the Fall of Man, and then irreparably shatter following construction of the Tower of Babel. By Roget’s time, Enlightenment ideals had taken hold, suggesting that scientific pursuits and rational inquiry could discover antidotes to Babel, if not a return to the perfect language of Adam. Though we no longer cling so tightly to these Enlightenment notions about language in our postmodern age, we still carry with us Roget’s legacy, the view that language can somehow be wrangled and rationalized by fitting the lexicon into tidy conceptual categories.
Roget intended for his readers to immerse themselves in the orderly classification system of the thesaurus so that they might better understand the full possibilities for human expression. As Roget first conceived it, the book did not even have an alphabetical index—he included it later as an afterthought. His goal, then, was not to provide a simple method of replacing synonym A with synonym B but instead to encourage a fuller understanding of the world of ideas and the language representing it.
In England, the Thesaurus was widely praised upon publication. The Westminster Review lauded the work’s “ideal classification,” which meant that “the whole Thesaurus may be read through, and not prove dry reading either.” An international edition would eventually popularize his work in the United States as well, becoming a household item in the 1920s during the crossword craze. Eventually “Roget” would become synonymous with the thesaurus itself, even if many of the contemporary reference works that bear his name share little resemblance to his careful classification system.
More than a century and a half later, the impact of Roget’s creation continues to reverberate in the proliferation of thesauruses, both in print and electronic varieties. Yet the thesaurus has also come under fire time and time again—what does it have to offer the modern writer?
Qualms about the proper use of the thesaurus go back to Roget’s original. An anonymous review in the September 1852 issue of The Athenaeum voiced the concern that the thesaurus would simply be used as a “crutch” for writers, who would be better off avoiding “the frequent recurrence to a work of this kind.” The view of it as a mere crutch persists to this day, especially among writers of fiction and poetry who see the frequent consultation of it as somehow impeding natural expression. Consider this pronouncement from Stephen King in a 1986 piece for The Writer:
You want to write a story? Fine. Put away your dictionary, your encyclopedias, your World Almanac, and your thesaurus. Better yet, throw your thesaurus into the wastebasket. The only things creepier than a thesaurus are those little paperbacks college students too lazy to read the assigned novels buy around exam time. Any word you have to hunt for in a thesaurus is the wrong word. There are no exceptions to this rule.
The poet Mark Doty was similarly forthright in a 2011 interview:
If you write a poem with the aid of a thesaurus, you will almost inevitably look like a person wearing clothing chosen by someone else. I am not sure that a poet should even own one of the damn things.
Some writers counsel that a thesaurus should, at the very least, be kept at arm’s length, like Billy Collins’ “copy up on a high shelf.” When the Guardian asked Irish novelist Roddy Doyle for his rules for aspiring writers, one of them was as follows:
Do keep a thesaurus, but in the shed at the back of the garden or behind the fridge, somewhere that demands travel or effort. Chances are the words that come into your head will do fine.
Margaret Atwood, on the other hand, supplied her own cardinal rule of writing to the Guardian: “You most likely need a thesaurus, a rudimentary grammar book, and a grip on reality.”
A young Sylvia Plath was more enthusiastic, calling her thesaurus the book that she “would rather live with on a desert isle than a Bible.” She relied on her copy of Roget heavily when composing the poems in her first collection, The Colossus, though she apparently outgrew her thesaurus dependence by the time she wrote her famous Ariel poems. Dylan Thomas, Plath’s contemporary, leaned heavily on a thesaurus when writing his later poetry, as researchers have discovered by analyzing his manuscripts. For Thomas, his thesaurus likely did serve as a crutch of sorts, since he was in the grips of alcoholism and his writing was deteriorating. We can think of Thomas’ case as an object lesson in approaching all things in moderation, be it the bottle or the thesaurus.
To be sure, the potential for abuse is a constant danger, especially for eager students who may go overboard when hunting for impressive words. When I speak to student groups about the use and misuse of the thesaurus, I like to open with a cautionary tale. The story, I explain, is told in the memoir of a prominent American politician, recounting his experience as a new student at a prestigious Eastern boarding school:
I remember the first paper I wrote. I thought I was in over my head, so I consulted the Roget’s Thesaurus Mother had given me, searching for some big, impressive words. I wanted to show off for my Eastern professors. It was a story about emotions, and I was trying to find a unique way to describe “tears” running down my face. My discussion of “lacerates” falling from my eyes did catch the teacher’s attention, but not in the way I had hoped. The paper came back with a “zero” marked so emphatically that it left an impression visible all the way through to the back of the blue book. So much for trying to sound smart.
My student audience can usually guess pretty quickly that the memoirist in question is George W. Bush. The former president uses the anecdote in A Charge to Keep to illustrate his fish-out-of-water status attending the Phillips Academy prep school at Andover, and also to own up to his much-derided linguistic shortcomings. In a 2000 profile of Bush in Vanity Fair, Gail Sheehy even used the episode as circumstantial evidence that he was dyslexic, quoting an expert as saying that his confusion over word choice suggested that “he really didn’t understand the language.” The simpler explanation is that he didn’t understand how to use the thesaurus his mother gave him, and thus got tripped up by the homography of “tears.”
Every teacher of composition probably has a few horror stories along these lines. Unlike Bush with his print thesaurus, students these days would more likely consult one online or directly built into their computer’s operating system. The simplicity of using an electronic thesaurus is a double-edged sword, tempting students into quick substitutions without thinking carefully about nuances of word usage. In a critique of thesauruses (and Roget in particular) published in The Atlantic in 2001, Simon Winchester gave the example of a student who “attempted to improve the phrase ‘his earthly fingers’ by changing it to ‘his chthonic digits.’” Elsewhere he calls the thesaurus “a calculator for the lexically lazy: used too often, relied on at all, it will cause the most valuable part of the brain to atrophy, the core of human expression to wither.”
Winchester is quite right to be concerned about the ease of search-and-replace synonymy in the age of the word processor. Unthinking substitutions along the lines of the young Mr. Bush’s “lacerates” can now be multiplied many times over, with lightning speed. Fans of the television show Friends may recall the episode in which the dim-witted Joey Tribbiani discovers the built-in thesaurus in his word-processing program and tries to spruce up a letter of recommendation for his friends’ adoption agency. He thesaurusizes every word, so that the sentence “They are warm, nice people with big hearts” turns into “They are humid, prepossessing homo sapiens with full-sized aortic pumps.”
That bit of sitcom silliness has actually turned into a grim reality, now that online content farms use so-called spinning software to modify a source text by automatically swapping out words with ostensible synonyms. (The goal is to create new textual fodder that can be used on websites without search engines like Google suspecting that the content has been duplicated from elsewhere.) I recently came across a particularly ham-handed example on a news aggregator which lifted an article from the Star-Ledger about a looming fight between two congressional candidates. The original said that “the Democratic showdown…will be bloody and fairly evenly matched considering the county machinery behind each candidate.” In the “spun” version, the showdown “will be full of blood and sincerely uniformly suited deliberation the county equipment at the back any candidate.” Sadly, this sort of thesaurus-driven gobbledygook can be found in abundance online, as if Joey and his full-sized aortic pump had taken over the Internet.
If automatic search and replace represents the dark side of synonymy in the digital age, there are plenty of causes for optimism in more sophisticated approaches to contemporary thesaurus making. A thesaurus, like any reference tool, requires active participation from its readers to unlock its potential utility. But one that is well-designed, whether print or digital, also makes that participation enjoyable and enlightening, encouraging the user to do more than take in a quick drive-by of synonyms. In compiling the first English thesaurus, Roget’s hope was that his readers would immerse themselves in a realm of concepts and their linguistic associations. One hundred and sixty years later, there are many novel ways that a thesaurus can provide that kind of immersion in the world of words.
Twenty-first-century reference works seem to be moving inexorably toward an online-only existence, but for the time being we can appreciate the distinct pleasures of both print and electronic creations. The print thesaurus affords a more leisurely stroll through its pages, with possibilities ripe for serendipitous discovery. The electronic versions, on the other hand, may appeal to our “give me a word now” impulse for instant gratification. But they can also stimulate the exploration of language by means of free-flowing user interfaces, with hyperlinks or other navigational tools carrying the user from word to word and from meaning to meaning.
Online thesauruses can go even further in bringing the interconnectedness of the English lexicon to life on the screen. The Visual Thesaurus (for which I serve as executive producer) creates interactive displays of the relationships between words and between senses of words. Moving through this type of semantic visualization, the jumps can be unexpected, allowing for the emergence of a different kind of serendipity than the kind that a print reference normally provides. The entire inventory of senses for a given word, with accompanying synonyms for each sense, can blossom forth like a flower on the screen. Such a visual efflorescence inspired George L. Dillon, a professor of English at the University of Washington, to write, “If indeed it is the case that we access all of the senses of words for a very brief interval when processing natural language, what wonderful things must be swimming about in our minds!”
Another significant effort in contemporary thesaurus-making admirably straddles the print/digital divide. The Historical Thesaurus of the Oxford English Dictionary was conceived in 1965 at the University of Glasgow as a project that would index all the words in the OED, organizing them by their meanings and by their first known date of use. In 2009, at long last, HTOED was published in two massive volumes, the first providing a chronological listing of words in different conceptual classes and the second providing an index to find particular meanings of words in the book’s elaborate Roget-style hierarchy, from the abstract to the specific. While it is easy to get lost in its pages, HTOED clearly needed an online home to maximize its practicality for both casual and scholarly readers. Thus it was incorporated into the online OED in 2010, and there it truly thrives. Because the categories of words are presented chronologically, one can quickly see, for instance, how 149 terms for a “contemptible person” extend from “worm” and “wretch” in Old English to late-twentieth-century slang offerings like “scuzzbag” and “sleazeball.” For a writer, searching for just the right word can turn into an adventure in historical verisimilitude. A novelist or playwright seeking epithets for dialog set in the early seventeenth century can zero in on such terms as “viliaco” (1600), “snotty-nose” (1604), “sprat” (1605), “wormling” (1605), and “shag-rag” (1611).
What, then, should we expect a thesaurus to do for us? Simply allow us to replace one word with a near equivalent in a mechanical fashion? Such arid utilitarianism does little justice to the various ways that a thesaurus can shed light on language and encourage lexical explorations. A thesaurus, as we have seen, can mine rich usage data from textual corpora to paint a picture of how words are used in actual context. It can create new spatial metaphors for semantic connections. Or it can add a historical dimension to trace how words related to a given concept have ebbed and flowed over the centuries. These are but some of the directions that the twenty-first-century thesaurus is headed in, directions unforeseen by Roget in his time. Though we can be sure that he would have deplored the mindlessness of the word processor’s search-and-replace shortcuts, I feel equally confident that Roget would have appreciated the ways that new technologies can deepen our appreciation of the lexicon’s richness in all of its interwoven splendor.
In the case of news, we should always wait for the sacrament of confirmation.—Voltaire, 1764
Ben Zimmer is a linguist, a lexicographer, and the language columnist for the Wall Street Journal. His writing about language has appeared in The Atlantic, the New York Times, and The New York Times Book Review, among others. Zimmer has also worked as the executive editor of VisualThesaurus.com and Vocabulary.com, the editor for American dictionaries at Oxford University Press, and a consultant to the Oxford English Dictionary.
Back to Issue