Buddy
The Living Force
The following information was discovered while researching related material. The reader may have some fun exploring self-expression with "E-Prime" as a way of discovering personal forms of "Identification".
[quote author=Benjamin Lee Whorf]
"It was found that the background linguistic system (in other words, the grammar) of each language is not merely a reproducing instrument for voicing ideas but rather is itself the shaper of ideas, the program and guide for the individual's mental activity, for his analysis of impressions, for his synthesis of his mental stock in trade."
(Benjamin Lee Whorf: 'Language, Thought and Reality')[/quote]
Introduction
The English language patterns dealt with in this paper comprise those containing forms of the English Verb 'to be' - 'is, am, are, were, been, etc'. In particular the two common patterns of 'identity' and 'predication', both of which effect the way we perceive things through language, receive detailed analysis.
Existence or Not - The Question?
This essence of this paper comprises a simple tutorial for readers interested in writing, and ultimately speaking, in the ordered and rational language form known as English Prime - E-Prime for short. E-Prime comprises standard English with all forms of the verb 'TO BE' deleted; its use prevents forms of the verb 'TO BE' creating erroneous and irrational generalisations in language and thought. Further techniques presented in here provide for accuracy in linguistic description such as to destroy the peculiar notion held by some that assertions and opinions (using the 'TO BE' verb) exist as 'out there' independent facts; the speaker gets re-attached to his comments and thoughts - as it occurs in reality.
The Identity Form of TO BE
In conventional English...identity structure, which appears as: 'something' IS 'something else', translates into the mathematical form: 'something 1' = 'something 2', where '=' means 'identical to'. Of the two principal forms (identity and predicate), the identity type - in terms of both quality and quantity of statements made - presents the greatest stumbling block in that it provides a vehicle for the strongest dogma and hard line views.
Examples illustrating the form:
..a) Joe Bloggs is a pig
..b) The Zygonwis are heathens
..c) The electron is a particle
..d) Clapton is God
All these statements, irrespective of the speaker's delivery, (dogmatism exists in the language forms anyhow), represent matters of OPINION - the speaker's opinion - and not of fact. They illustrate the way in which the speaker INWARDLY COMPARES one noun phrase with another, not 'out there' immutable fact - and the reader should continually keep this in mind.
Welcome to the Hall of Mirrors
In supplanting the TO BE verb in identity forms, the basic process comprises detaching the speaker's asserted 'identity' from object(s) 'out there' and remapping that perceived relationship accurately in some kind of metaphor. That metaphor, which the speaker implies, firmly resides between his or her ears, and nowhere else in the universe. Things in themselves do not possess word labels and the attachment of such labels comprises a singular human activity, an activity which always has some human agent involved in the process.
Examples of Identity Form Translation:
..a) Joe Bloggs is a pig
.Mrs Bloggs insists that Joe Bloggs behaves like a pig
..b) The Zygonwis are heathens
.Rev. Smith holds that the Zyngowis act in the manner of heathens
..c) The electron is a particle
.Prof Z says that the electron can be modelled as a particle
..d) Clapton is God
.Eric's fan club pronounced that Clapton has some of the characteristics of God
Note how the dogma magically vanishes from the E-Prime statements - this arises primarily due to the reintallation of a 'speaker'. Previously 'out there' cast in stone, stand alone fact becomes revealed as opinion. An electron no longer IS a particle, rather someone says that it can be modelled as a particle. Clapton no longer IS God, the sentence represents the opinion of some of his fans, etc.
[This can be considered similar to the progressive form: Undelete the speaker/observer and reinstall the process (e.g. 'The cat is chasing the mouse' becomes 'Joe saw the cat chasing the mouse')].
General Hints To Experiment With:
..a) Try to open sentences with active VERBS
..b) When opening a sentence with a noun phrase, follow the noun phrase immediately with an active VERB
..c) When describing something, describe the overall PROCESS that takes place and ensure inclusion of the participants (which also means speakers/observers) in the action
..d) Avoid opening sentences with pronouns
Predicate Forms
In this structure, the speaker attaches some QUALITY to the leading noun phrase through the adjective(s) and, since the attachment mechanism involves the dogmatic TO BE form, the phrase or sentence often reads as if the quality exists as an actual 'out there' property of the noun phrase rather than the speaker's perception.
Examples illustrating the form:
..a) Joe Bloggs is stupid
..b) The rose is love
..c) The radiator is hot
The reader might attempt, as an exercise, to disentangle the more pernicious: 'The rose is red' - which genuinely represents a predicate form (clue: redness does not exist in the universe other than as a perception).
Examples of Predicate Form Translation:
..a) Joe Bloggs is stupid
.Smith says that Joe Bloggs behaves stupidly
..b) The rose is love
.In poet Joe Bloggs' view, the rose symbolises love
..c) The radiator is hot
.According to Sylvia, the radiator feels hot.
..d) The rose is red
.Shakespeare claimed that the rose has the semblance of redness.
..e) Joan is evil
.Jim says that Joan comes across as evil
'Behaves,' 'symbolises,' 'feels,' 'has the semblance,' 'comes across'. Note how, in the translations, the intrinsic properties supposedly possessed by the noun groups become transformed into perceptions, perceptions belonging to the speaker - this represents the true state of affairs. Note how E-Prime produces longer sentences than the originals - mainly due to the reinstatement of a deleted speaker. Note also that the sentences that reflect significantly more information and accuracy.
Restructuring/Undeleting the Speaker/Observer
This represents the most powerful technique. All speech and writing has some kind of a generating agent - for convenience and brevity in this paper I have referred to such an agent as 'the speaker'. All statements - and questions - originate somewhere, they don't suddenly pop into existence out of nowhere and the ACTUAL process in operation involves a speaker or observer.
Confining discussion to progressive forms, the statement: 'The cat is chasing the mouse' represents only part of the story. Who says 'the cat is chasing the mouse?' Who saw it? Does that statement represent the facts accurately? How does one actually 'know' that the cat chases the mouse - if it happens in an uninhabited forest in Siberia, how does anyone know? How much has been deleted from the original sentence - and since language represents a symbol system, will EVERY sentence will contain deletions?
Irrespective of any other deletions the sample sentence has the property - along with multitudes of similar constructions - that the speaker/observer has vanished. In terms of this section, undeleting makes it possible to change the sentence structure and at the same time eliminate the progressive verb. This re-presents an overall view of events as a PROCESS - with an observer - whilst simultaneously overcoming the divisive 'to be' form.
Examples:
..'I can see the cat chasing the mouse'
..'Joe sits watching the cat chase the mouse'
..'I watched the cat chasing the mouse'
..'Can you see the cat chasing the mouse?'
..'I chase the mouse,' said the cat.
...and more complex - to supplant 'It is raining':
..'Joe observed it raining'
..'I watched the rain fall'
..'I felt the rain falling'
..'Joe can hear it raining'
..'I can see the rain falling on the grass'
..'Fred heard the rain falling on his roof' etc.
Note that reinstating the speaker/observer also reinstates sensory verbs/processes into the phrases/sentences, verbs and processes that get neatly deleted in the 'to be' forms.
Although the discussion in this subsection may have seemed lengthy, the application should present the reader with little difficulty. Putting it together, a simple rule might state: 'Reinstate the SPEAKER/OBSERVER, include a perspective using a sensory verb and reword the sentence to eliminate the 'to be' form.
Other Useful Hints
Set the Scene with Verbs
Open sentences with an active verb (this sentence represents an example of itself) to get the movement going. Creating E-Prime becomes easier this way - as does writing in the active voice (which itself assists in eliminating the offending 'to be' form). Look at the alternative, passive, form of the first sentence: 'It can be useful to open sentences with a verb...' 'Be' immediately creeps in, and even more, avoiding an 'is' in the second half of the sentence appears almost impossible due to the implied structure.
If you can't open the sentence with an active verb, get one as near to the front end of the sentence as you can. Try to 'verb' your sentences rather than 'noun' them.
As a footnote, teaching students in scientific disciplines to write in the third person with a passive voice represents bad practice in E-Prime. Such statements as 'The material was weighed in the balance,' and 'The experiments were considered to be...' seem purpose designed to eliminate any observers or participants and permit such to evade any responsibility for involvement in processes referred to - all in the name of so called 'objectivity'. Similar twists in logic permit the 'objective': 'The spacecraft failed', 'The chemical plant exploded'' and such by 'students' when they reach professional maturity.
Avoid Noun Openers?
The advice in this subsection complements that given in E.2. The reader should normally avoid opening a sentence with noun or pronoun words or phrases (this sentence does not represent an example of itself BUT a verb appears quite early on to mitigate the effect). The patterns: NP(verb)NP and NP(verb)AP tend to attract forms of the 'to be' in the verb position, especially when the noun phrase comprises a pronoun. The reason for this lies in primary education: we learned the basic forms: 'I am, You are, He is, She is, It is, We are, They are, I/He/She was, etc.' at a very early age and they represent some of our most basic language patterns.
Given all this, a simple technique does exist for using noun phrase openers, and it comprises deliberately using some form of an ACTIVE verb immediately following the noun phrase in the form NP (active verb) NP.
Examples:
..a) Not 'Jones is a...' but 'Jones acts like a...'
..b) Not 'I am...' but 'I feel...'
..c) Not 'It is...' but 'It looks...'
Put the Process back in Place
Again, this refers to verbs - words that indicate process, dynamics and action - rather than the static nature of things implied by nouns and verbs nominalised into nouns (e.g. the verb decide gets nominalised into the noun 'decision') used in 'to be' forms. In life, people and things interract with other people and things and stasis remains uncommon, impossible even should one consider view things on a microcosmic scale.
When someone alleges that something 'is' then, as discussed earlier, a process of deletion occurs/has occured. The supposed 'is' represents a shorthand, a narrow space and time snapshot of some much larger process, mentions of which, more often than not, get conveniently excluded by the speaker.
Reinstalling a broader view of the process (i.e. the specifics represented by 'how, why, when, where, what and who') will usually suggest to the reader a number of potential process verbs which will both serve to better describe events and allow dispensation with 'to be' forms. I can best demonstrate this with a couple of examples:
Statement:
..'Bill Clinton is President of the USA'
Comments/Questions:
..Not forever.
..How did he get there? Process of election.
..When did he get elected?
..Who elected him?
New Statement:
..'The people of the USA ELECTED Bill Clinton President for four years in...'
The process word 'elected' gets rid of the 'is' and tells us what actually went on, tells us about the PROCESS that took/continues to take place. By using that word, we also get to refer to the doer in the process - i.e. 'The people of the USA,' played a vital part. Clinton no longer 'is' President - as if cast in stone eternally - once we discover the underlying process variables.
Statement:
..'The car is damaged'
Comments/Questions:
..How did the car get damaged?
..Who damaged it? (or did it damage itself?)
..What form does the damage take?
..When did it happen to get damaged?
..etc.
New Statement:
..'I drove the car into a wall and dented the front nearside wing last night'
Process words 'drove' and 'dented' displace the 'is' form - a form that could imply that the fairies came along in the middle of the night and inflicted the said damage with magic wands. Note the undeletion of the doer - 'I' - in the process version of events.
Challenging Form
Although primarily designed to assist in writing E-Prime, the templates/lists given can provide a useful tool when challenging dogmatic statements in writing or - more significantly - speech. Paraphrasing a speaker/writer's statement or question in E-Prime provides using an appropriate word form provides the simplest way to do this.
Examples:
..a) 'The Earth is a peardrop'
---- 'So you are saying that in your opinion the Earth resembles a peardrop?' Immediately, in one statement, some measure of rationality becomes restored to debate. The Earth no longer 'is' anything, it resembles something: the maneouvre opens the door to further challenges on the accuracy of the metaphor (see Appendix B.2) on multiple fronts - e.g. Does the Earth taste like a peardrop? Can you buy packets of 'Earths' at the local shop? What about the Earth's colour, does it match that of a peardrop?
..b) The first example, whilst illustrating the point, might appear trivial. The reader might care to use the same process to pull apart statements like:
..b1) Party X is the natural party of Government
..b2) You are a stick in the mud
..b3) Z is public enemy number 1
..b4) The W regime is evil
..b5) Zongopop is cool
The 'to be' process operates in every one of these statements, and statements like these impose their dubious logic upon our consciousness every day of our lives: example a) above illustrates how to unravel the root process that occurs.
Say What You Mean
Often, in short sentence form, particularly with questions, the speaker does not say what he/she means, but rather 'beats around the bush' and presents indirect word forms which, ergo, contain deletions. Take for example the question 'Who are you?' As a response, the speaker doesn't expect: 'A sack of coal,' or 'The Empire State Building,' or such, he expects a name or some kind of business affiliation. So, why doesn't he ask directly: 'Can you tell me your name?' or 'What business do you represent/have here?' Purist as these comments might seem, the (habital) problem does exist and therefore deserves attention.
Multiple examples of this peculiar 'not asking the right question' exist in 'to be' speak and some examples follow. The reader, by now, should possess the ability to compose other E-Prime forms to those shown (of both a specific and general nature).
Examples:
..a) How are you?
How goes it? How has it been going recently?
..b) Is Smith there?
Can I speak to Smith? Tell Smith to report to me. Kindly connect me with Smith.
..c) Where is Z?
Tell me the whereabouts of Z. Where can I find Z? Kindly direct me to Z.
List of 'Front End' Forms ("NP V" refers to the "noun phrase-Verb" pattern)
In my view NP V, I think that NP V, In my opinion NP V, I consider NP V, I imagine that NP V, I reckon NP V, I assert NP V, I suppose NP V, I presume NP V, I maintain NP V, I assert that NP V, I figure that NP V, I hold that NP V, In my perception NP V, It seems to me that NP V, In my considered opinion NP V, According to X, NP V, I feel that NP V, It looks to me like NP V, Seems to me like NP V, I hold/hold that NP V, I believe NP V, I believe that NP V, I hold the opinion that NP V, I'm convinced that NP V, In my judgement NP V, I am aware that NP V, I observe that NP V, In my experience NP V, I sense that NP V, According to my information NP V, In your view NP V, You say that in your view/opinion that NP V, According to your/her/his opinion NP V, You believe NP V (adapt 'I' forms into 'you/they/etc.' forms)
Phrases that Replace 'to be'
(For use with Predicate Forms)
behaves, acts, depicts, displays, echoes, emulates, exemplifies, feels, illustrates, indicates, looks, mimics, mirrors, models, personifies, portrays, appears, reflects, replicates, represents, seems, associates with, symbolises, acts like, acts as if, behaves as if, appears as if it, behaves like, comes across as, comes over as, correlates with, cross maps to, demonstrates the qualities of, demonstrates, demonstrates the characteristics of, evokes in me the perception of, exhibits the form of, falls in the category of, gives me the sensation of, gives the impression of, gives the image of, has the semblance of, has the qualities of, has the properties of, impresses me as, looks like, looks like, shows signs of, shows the features of, shows up as, shows the criterion of, simulates, sounds like, stands for, takes the form of, takes the shape of (Non-exhaustive list.)
Phrases that Undelete 'Point of View'
(For use with both Identity and Predicate Forms):
X says that, X believes, X asserts that, In X's opinion, X hold's the view, In X's view, X assumes that, In X's appreciation, In X's understanding, X perceives that, In X's perception, X insists that, X claims, From X's point of view, X said yesterday that, X pronounces that, X pronounced that, X holds that, X holds the opinion that, X has pronounced that, X thinks that, X has the view that, X maintains that, X affirms that, X made it known that, X maintains that, X asserts that, X alleges that, X suggests that, X imagines that, X estimates that, In X's estimation, X claims that, X observes that, According to X, X declares that, X has declared that, In X's observation, X observes that, X contends that, X has argued that
(Non-exhaustive list: user should compose his/her own options.)
Short List of Active Verbs
appears, seems, looks, behaves, walks, smells, tastes, have, get, sounds, feels, works, dreams, hurts, walks, contains, follows, seeks, stands, sits, gives, takes, runs, bubbles, drags, warms, grows, listens, loves, runs, lies, asks, blames, bends, cleans, heats, cools, brings, start, commence, demonstrates, leaves, verifies, avoids, believes, represents, works, radiates, releases, causes, speaks, expects, creates, makes, resembles, duplicates, provides, seems similar to, moves, accords with, acts like, acts as if, represents, come, resembles, wallows, rises, whines, proves, seems like, simulates, stop, apes, approaches, agree, realises, shows, scents, denies, aggrees with, embodies, describes, knows, ignores, understands, defines, clarifies, informs, hides, reveals, approximates, approximates to, behaves like, smells like, sounds like, symbolises, takes after, tallies with, tastes like, typifies, caricatures, coincides with, compares with, conforms with, copies, correlates with, corresponds to, corresponds with, cross maps to, depicts, duplicates, emulates, epitomises, equals, equates to, illustrates, imitates, impersonates, likens to, looks like, matches, means, echoes, mirrors, models, moves like, paraphrases, passes for, performs like, portrays, poses like, reflects.
Note that the above lists represent a 'starter package' suitable for use with either spoken or written forms. The reader should cut and paste them and add his/her preferred forms as developed/required.
Replacement Words/Phrases For Auxilliary 'to be' Verbs:
continues, persists, persists in, carries on, maintains progress in, endures, perseveres, continually, keeps, keeps on, without pausing, without pause, ceaselessly, without respite, without let up, with no let up, unfalteringly, with no break
Apart from the verb 'to be', do other language patterns exist in English that cause distortions in logic?
Source: _http://www.angelfire.com/nd/danscorpio/ep2.html
Dr. D. David Bourland, Jr., a student of the general semanticist, Alfred Korzybski, developed E-prime. A number of books use E-prime, including: Overcoming Religion, by David Mills (Citadel, 1981) and A New Guide to Rational Living, by Albert Ellis and Robert A. Harper (Melvin Powers, 1979; Wishire Book Co., 1961).
[quote author=Dr. Donald E. Simanek, Lock Haven University]
For an exercise, select something you have written, then rewrite it in E-prime. As you rework the sentences to remove the 'be' forms, you will discover, perhaps to your surprise, that the new version gains clarity and vigor.
Source: _http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/eprime.htm
[/quote]
Want to see how your next post tests for e-Prime?
Enter some text in the box at this site and SUBMIT QUERY:
_http://www.manifestation.com/neurotoys/eprime.pl
[quote author=Benjamin Lee Whorf]
"It was found that the background linguistic system (in other words, the grammar) of each language is not merely a reproducing instrument for voicing ideas but rather is itself the shaper of ideas, the program and guide for the individual's mental activity, for his analysis of impressions, for his synthesis of his mental stock in trade."
(Benjamin Lee Whorf: 'Language, Thought and Reality')[/quote]
Introduction
The English language patterns dealt with in this paper comprise those containing forms of the English Verb 'to be' - 'is, am, are, were, been, etc'. In particular the two common patterns of 'identity' and 'predication', both of which effect the way we perceive things through language, receive detailed analysis.
Existence or Not - The Question?
This essence of this paper comprises a simple tutorial for readers interested in writing, and ultimately speaking, in the ordered and rational language form known as English Prime - E-Prime for short. E-Prime comprises standard English with all forms of the verb 'TO BE' deleted; its use prevents forms of the verb 'TO BE' creating erroneous and irrational generalisations in language and thought. Further techniques presented in here provide for accuracy in linguistic description such as to destroy the peculiar notion held by some that assertions and opinions (using the 'TO BE' verb) exist as 'out there' independent facts; the speaker gets re-attached to his comments and thoughts - as it occurs in reality.
The Identity Form of TO BE
In conventional English...identity structure, which appears as: 'something' IS 'something else', translates into the mathematical form: 'something 1' = 'something 2', where '=' means 'identical to'. Of the two principal forms (identity and predicate), the identity type - in terms of both quality and quantity of statements made - presents the greatest stumbling block in that it provides a vehicle for the strongest dogma and hard line views.
Examples illustrating the form:
..a) Joe Bloggs is a pig
..b) The Zygonwis are heathens
..c) The electron is a particle
..d) Clapton is God
All these statements, irrespective of the speaker's delivery, (dogmatism exists in the language forms anyhow), represent matters of OPINION - the speaker's opinion - and not of fact. They illustrate the way in which the speaker INWARDLY COMPARES one noun phrase with another, not 'out there' immutable fact - and the reader should continually keep this in mind.
Welcome to the Hall of Mirrors
In supplanting the TO BE verb in identity forms, the basic process comprises detaching the speaker's asserted 'identity' from object(s) 'out there' and remapping that perceived relationship accurately in some kind of metaphor. That metaphor, which the speaker implies, firmly resides between his or her ears, and nowhere else in the universe. Things in themselves do not possess word labels and the attachment of such labels comprises a singular human activity, an activity which always has some human agent involved in the process.
Examples of Identity Form Translation:
..a) Joe Bloggs is a pig
.Mrs Bloggs insists that Joe Bloggs behaves like a pig
..b) The Zygonwis are heathens
.Rev. Smith holds that the Zyngowis act in the manner of heathens
..c) The electron is a particle
.Prof Z says that the electron can be modelled as a particle
..d) Clapton is God
.Eric's fan club pronounced that Clapton has some of the characteristics of God
Note how the dogma magically vanishes from the E-Prime statements - this arises primarily due to the reintallation of a 'speaker'. Previously 'out there' cast in stone, stand alone fact becomes revealed as opinion. An electron no longer IS a particle, rather someone says that it can be modelled as a particle. Clapton no longer IS God, the sentence represents the opinion of some of his fans, etc.
[This can be considered similar to the progressive form: Undelete the speaker/observer and reinstall the process (e.g. 'The cat is chasing the mouse' becomes 'Joe saw the cat chasing the mouse')].
General Hints To Experiment With:
..a) Try to open sentences with active VERBS
..b) When opening a sentence with a noun phrase, follow the noun phrase immediately with an active VERB
..c) When describing something, describe the overall PROCESS that takes place and ensure inclusion of the participants (which also means speakers/observers) in the action
..d) Avoid opening sentences with pronouns
Predicate Forms
In this structure, the speaker attaches some QUALITY to the leading noun phrase through the adjective(s) and, since the attachment mechanism involves the dogmatic TO BE form, the phrase or sentence often reads as if the quality exists as an actual 'out there' property of the noun phrase rather than the speaker's perception.
Examples illustrating the form:
..a) Joe Bloggs is stupid
..b) The rose is love
..c) The radiator is hot
The reader might attempt, as an exercise, to disentangle the more pernicious: 'The rose is red' - which genuinely represents a predicate form (clue: redness does not exist in the universe other than as a perception).
Examples of Predicate Form Translation:
..a) Joe Bloggs is stupid
.Smith says that Joe Bloggs behaves stupidly
..b) The rose is love
.In poet Joe Bloggs' view, the rose symbolises love
..c) The radiator is hot
.According to Sylvia, the radiator feels hot.
..d) The rose is red
.Shakespeare claimed that the rose has the semblance of redness.
..e) Joan is evil
.Jim says that Joan comes across as evil
'Behaves,' 'symbolises,' 'feels,' 'has the semblance,' 'comes across'. Note how, in the translations, the intrinsic properties supposedly possessed by the noun groups become transformed into perceptions, perceptions belonging to the speaker - this represents the true state of affairs. Note how E-Prime produces longer sentences than the originals - mainly due to the reinstatement of a deleted speaker. Note also that the sentences that reflect significantly more information and accuracy.
Restructuring/Undeleting the Speaker/Observer
This represents the most powerful technique. All speech and writing has some kind of a generating agent - for convenience and brevity in this paper I have referred to such an agent as 'the speaker'. All statements - and questions - originate somewhere, they don't suddenly pop into existence out of nowhere and the ACTUAL process in operation involves a speaker or observer.
Confining discussion to progressive forms, the statement: 'The cat is chasing the mouse' represents only part of the story. Who says 'the cat is chasing the mouse?' Who saw it? Does that statement represent the facts accurately? How does one actually 'know' that the cat chases the mouse - if it happens in an uninhabited forest in Siberia, how does anyone know? How much has been deleted from the original sentence - and since language represents a symbol system, will EVERY sentence will contain deletions?
Irrespective of any other deletions the sample sentence has the property - along with multitudes of similar constructions - that the speaker/observer has vanished. In terms of this section, undeleting makes it possible to change the sentence structure and at the same time eliminate the progressive verb. This re-presents an overall view of events as a PROCESS - with an observer - whilst simultaneously overcoming the divisive 'to be' form.
Examples:
..'I can see the cat chasing the mouse'
..'Joe sits watching the cat chase the mouse'
..'I watched the cat chasing the mouse'
..'Can you see the cat chasing the mouse?'
..'I chase the mouse,' said the cat.
...and more complex - to supplant 'It is raining':
..'Joe observed it raining'
..'I watched the rain fall'
..'I felt the rain falling'
..'Joe can hear it raining'
..'I can see the rain falling on the grass'
..'Fred heard the rain falling on his roof' etc.
Note that reinstating the speaker/observer also reinstates sensory verbs/processes into the phrases/sentences, verbs and processes that get neatly deleted in the 'to be' forms.
Although the discussion in this subsection may have seemed lengthy, the application should present the reader with little difficulty. Putting it together, a simple rule might state: 'Reinstate the SPEAKER/OBSERVER, include a perspective using a sensory verb and reword the sentence to eliminate the 'to be' form.
Other Useful Hints
Set the Scene with Verbs
Open sentences with an active verb (this sentence represents an example of itself) to get the movement going. Creating E-Prime becomes easier this way - as does writing in the active voice (which itself assists in eliminating the offending 'to be' form). Look at the alternative, passive, form of the first sentence: 'It can be useful to open sentences with a verb...' 'Be' immediately creeps in, and even more, avoiding an 'is' in the second half of the sentence appears almost impossible due to the implied structure.
If you can't open the sentence with an active verb, get one as near to the front end of the sentence as you can. Try to 'verb' your sentences rather than 'noun' them.
As a footnote, teaching students in scientific disciplines to write in the third person with a passive voice represents bad practice in E-Prime. Such statements as 'The material was weighed in the balance,' and 'The experiments were considered to be...' seem purpose designed to eliminate any observers or participants and permit such to evade any responsibility for involvement in processes referred to - all in the name of so called 'objectivity'. Similar twists in logic permit the 'objective': 'The spacecraft failed', 'The chemical plant exploded'' and such by 'students' when they reach professional maturity.
Avoid Noun Openers?
The advice in this subsection complements that given in E.2. The reader should normally avoid opening a sentence with noun or pronoun words or phrases (this sentence does not represent an example of itself BUT a verb appears quite early on to mitigate the effect). The patterns: NP(verb)NP and NP(verb)AP tend to attract forms of the 'to be' in the verb position, especially when the noun phrase comprises a pronoun. The reason for this lies in primary education: we learned the basic forms: 'I am, You are, He is, She is, It is, We are, They are, I/He/She was, etc.' at a very early age and they represent some of our most basic language patterns.
Given all this, a simple technique does exist for using noun phrase openers, and it comprises deliberately using some form of an ACTIVE verb immediately following the noun phrase in the form NP (active verb) NP.
Examples:
..a) Not 'Jones is a...' but 'Jones acts like a...'
..b) Not 'I am...' but 'I feel...'
..c) Not 'It is...' but 'It looks...'
Put the Process back in Place
Again, this refers to verbs - words that indicate process, dynamics and action - rather than the static nature of things implied by nouns and verbs nominalised into nouns (e.g. the verb decide gets nominalised into the noun 'decision') used in 'to be' forms. In life, people and things interract with other people and things and stasis remains uncommon, impossible even should one consider view things on a microcosmic scale.
When someone alleges that something 'is' then, as discussed earlier, a process of deletion occurs/has occured. The supposed 'is' represents a shorthand, a narrow space and time snapshot of some much larger process, mentions of which, more often than not, get conveniently excluded by the speaker.
Reinstalling a broader view of the process (i.e. the specifics represented by 'how, why, when, where, what and who') will usually suggest to the reader a number of potential process verbs which will both serve to better describe events and allow dispensation with 'to be' forms. I can best demonstrate this with a couple of examples:
Statement:
..'Bill Clinton is President of the USA'
Comments/Questions:
..Not forever.
..How did he get there? Process of election.
..When did he get elected?
..Who elected him?
New Statement:
..'The people of the USA ELECTED Bill Clinton President for four years in...'
The process word 'elected' gets rid of the 'is' and tells us what actually went on, tells us about the PROCESS that took/continues to take place. By using that word, we also get to refer to the doer in the process - i.e. 'The people of the USA,' played a vital part. Clinton no longer 'is' President - as if cast in stone eternally - once we discover the underlying process variables.
Statement:
..'The car is damaged'
Comments/Questions:
..How did the car get damaged?
..Who damaged it? (or did it damage itself?)
..What form does the damage take?
..When did it happen to get damaged?
..etc.
New Statement:
..'I drove the car into a wall and dented the front nearside wing last night'
Process words 'drove' and 'dented' displace the 'is' form - a form that could imply that the fairies came along in the middle of the night and inflicted the said damage with magic wands. Note the undeletion of the doer - 'I' - in the process version of events.
Challenging Form
Although primarily designed to assist in writing E-Prime, the templates/lists given can provide a useful tool when challenging dogmatic statements in writing or - more significantly - speech. Paraphrasing a speaker/writer's statement or question in E-Prime provides using an appropriate word form provides the simplest way to do this.
Examples:
..a) 'The Earth is a peardrop'
---- 'So you are saying that in your opinion the Earth resembles a peardrop?' Immediately, in one statement, some measure of rationality becomes restored to debate. The Earth no longer 'is' anything, it resembles something: the maneouvre opens the door to further challenges on the accuracy of the metaphor (see Appendix B.2) on multiple fronts - e.g. Does the Earth taste like a peardrop? Can you buy packets of 'Earths' at the local shop? What about the Earth's colour, does it match that of a peardrop?
..b) The first example, whilst illustrating the point, might appear trivial. The reader might care to use the same process to pull apart statements like:
..b1) Party X is the natural party of Government
..b2) You are a stick in the mud
..b3) Z is public enemy number 1
..b4) The W regime is evil
..b5) Zongopop is cool
The 'to be' process operates in every one of these statements, and statements like these impose their dubious logic upon our consciousness every day of our lives: example a) above illustrates how to unravel the root process that occurs.
Say What You Mean
Often, in short sentence form, particularly with questions, the speaker does not say what he/she means, but rather 'beats around the bush' and presents indirect word forms which, ergo, contain deletions. Take for example the question 'Who are you?' As a response, the speaker doesn't expect: 'A sack of coal,' or 'The Empire State Building,' or such, he expects a name or some kind of business affiliation. So, why doesn't he ask directly: 'Can you tell me your name?' or 'What business do you represent/have here?' Purist as these comments might seem, the (habital) problem does exist and therefore deserves attention.
Multiple examples of this peculiar 'not asking the right question' exist in 'to be' speak and some examples follow. The reader, by now, should possess the ability to compose other E-Prime forms to those shown (of both a specific and general nature).
Examples:
..a) How are you?
How goes it? How has it been going recently?
..b) Is Smith there?
Can I speak to Smith? Tell Smith to report to me. Kindly connect me with Smith.
..c) Where is Z?
Tell me the whereabouts of Z. Where can I find Z? Kindly direct me to Z.
List of 'Front End' Forms ("NP V" refers to the "noun phrase-Verb" pattern)
In my view NP V, I think that NP V, In my opinion NP V, I consider NP V, I imagine that NP V, I reckon NP V, I assert NP V, I suppose NP V, I presume NP V, I maintain NP V, I assert that NP V, I figure that NP V, I hold that NP V, In my perception NP V, It seems to me that NP V, In my considered opinion NP V, According to X, NP V, I feel that NP V, It looks to me like NP V, Seems to me like NP V, I hold/hold that NP V, I believe NP V, I believe that NP V, I hold the opinion that NP V, I'm convinced that NP V, In my judgement NP V, I am aware that NP V, I observe that NP V, In my experience NP V, I sense that NP V, According to my information NP V, In your view NP V, You say that in your view/opinion that NP V, According to your/her/his opinion NP V, You believe NP V (adapt 'I' forms into 'you/they/etc.' forms)
Phrases that Replace 'to be'
(For use with Predicate Forms)
behaves, acts, depicts, displays, echoes, emulates, exemplifies, feels, illustrates, indicates, looks, mimics, mirrors, models, personifies, portrays, appears, reflects, replicates, represents, seems, associates with, symbolises, acts like, acts as if, behaves as if, appears as if it, behaves like, comes across as, comes over as, correlates with, cross maps to, demonstrates the qualities of, demonstrates, demonstrates the characteristics of, evokes in me the perception of, exhibits the form of, falls in the category of, gives me the sensation of, gives the impression of, gives the image of, has the semblance of, has the qualities of, has the properties of, impresses me as, looks like, looks like, shows signs of, shows the features of, shows up as, shows the criterion of, simulates, sounds like, stands for, takes the form of, takes the shape of (Non-exhaustive list.)
Phrases that Undelete 'Point of View'
(For use with both Identity and Predicate Forms):
X says that, X believes, X asserts that, In X's opinion, X hold's the view, In X's view, X assumes that, In X's appreciation, In X's understanding, X perceives that, In X's perception, X insists that, X claims, From X's point of view, X said yesterday that, X pronounces that, X pronounced that, X holds that, X holds the opinion that, X has pronounced that, X thinks that, X has the view that, X maintains that, X affirms that, X made it known that, X maintains that, X asserts that, X alleges that, X suggests that, X imagines that, X estimates that, In X's estimation, X claims that, X observes that, According to X, X declares that, X has declared that, In X's observation, X observes that, X contends that, X has argued that
(Non-exhaustive list: user should compose his/her own options.)
Short List of Active Verbs
appears, seems, looks, behaves, walks, smells, tastes, have, get, sounds, feels, works, dreams, hurts, walks, contains, follows, seeks, stands, sits, gives, takes, runs, bubbles, drags, warms, grows, listens, loves, runs, lies, asks, blames, bends, cleans, heats, cools, brings, start, commence, demonstrates, leaves, verifies, avoids, believes, represents, works, radiates, releases, causes, speaks, expects, creates, makes, resembles, duplicates, provides, seems similar to, moves, accords with, acts like, acts as if, represents, come, resembles, wallows, rises, whines, proves, seems like, simulates, stop, apes, approaches, agree, realises, shows, scents, denies, aggrees with, embodies, describes, knows, ignores, understands, defines, clarifies, informs, hides, reveals, approximates, approximates to, behaves like, smells like, sounds like, symbolises, takes after, tallies with, tastes like, typifies, caricatures, coincides with, compares with, conforms with, copies, correlates with, corresponds to, corresponds with, cross maps to, depicts, duplicates, emulates, epitomises, equals, equates to, illustrates, imitates, impersonates, likens to, looks like, matches, means, echoes, mirrors, models, moves like, paraphrases, passes for, performs like, portrays, poses like, reflects.
Note that the above lists represent a 'starter package' suitable for use with either spoken or written forms. The reader should cut and paste them and add his/her preferred forms as developed/required.
Replacement Words/Phrases For Auxilliary 'to be' Verbs:
continues, persists, persists in, carries on, maintains progress in, endures, perseveres, continually, keeps, keeps on, without pausing, without pause, ceaselessly, without respite, without let up, with no let up, unfalteringly, with no break
Apart from the verb 'to be', do other language patterns exist in English that cause distortions in logic?
Source: _http://www.angelfire.com/nd/danscorpio/ep2.html
Dr. D. David Bourland, Jr., a student of the general semanticist, Alfred Korzybski, developed E-prime. A number of books use E-prime, including: Overcoming Religion, by David Mills (Citadel, 1981) and A New Guide to Rational Living, by Albert Ellis and Robert A. Harper (Melvin Powers, 1979; Wishire Book Co., 1961).
[quote author=Dr. Donald E. Simanek, Lock Haven University]
For an exercise, select something you have written, then rewrite it in E-prime. As you rework the sentences to remove the 'be' forms, you will discover, perhaps to your surprise, that the new version gains clarity and vigor.
Source: _http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/eprime.htm
[/quote]
Want to see how your next post tests for e-Prime?
Enter some text in the box at this site and SUBMIT QUERY:
_http://www.manifestation.com/neurotoys/eprime.pl
