news

한어Русский языкEnglishFrançaisIndonesianSanskrit日本語DeutschPortuguêsΕλληνικάespañolItalianoSuomalainenLatina

chinese people have always pursued the use of concise words to express their views and convey their emotions. the first sentence of ouyang xiu's "the pavilion of the drunken old man" is "mountains surround chu", which is just five words, which is condensed from the first dozens of words. lu xun, who is famous for his sharp writing, is concise, vigorous and to the point, and is deeply loved by readers.we believe that no matter how the times change, fresh, sincere and concise words will never go out of date and will not be rejected by readers.

in fact, innovation in discourse and writing style has always been advocated by our party. comrade mao zedong wrote "oppose party stereotypes", in which the first charge he clearly opposed was "empty talk and meaningless words". while working in zhejiang, comrade xi jinping published an article in the "zhijiang new language" column, pointing out that "what we should oppose most is the eight-part essay that is full of empty talk and meaningless words. we must prevent and overcome the evils of 'putting on boots and hats', empty arguments, piling up materials, empty talk, clichés, 'big and complete', 'small and complete', etc."

however, in reality, some articles are stiff, lengthy, and empty, with a lot of "correct" but useless nonsense, which makes the writers tired and the readers difficult to understand. so, how did such a style of writing come about? how can we avoid it?

image source: visual china

one

"correct" but useless nonsense refers to words that are not wrong in themselves, but have no practical use in the article. in particular, some people are used to "copying" sentences and simply piecing them together. the whole article is full of general principles, but there is not a single word of their own. this is neither helpful in proving the point of view nor in resolving doubts.

truth is often condensed from practice, penetrating and profound, and one sentence is worth ten sentences. for this reason, it is necessary to quote classics. not only should we say what needs to be said, but we should also say it in depth, realistically, and vividly, so that readers can understand and grasp it accurately. however, we cannot ignore the occasion and the object, mechanically apply it, and not make the text irrelevant to the topic, the words fail to express the meaning, and do not explain it. this will easily give people a feeling of "empty talk", and all the articles are the same and stereotyped.

for example, some articles use circular reasoning, using existing conclusions to discuss conclusions, and using opinions themselves to discuss opinions. that is, they do not analyze real problems and then put forward their own opinions. the long articles may seem profound at first glance, but they confuse readers and make it even more difficult to understand their meaning.

some articles avoid the important issues and are accustomed to repeating empty clichés. in particular, they do not mention issues of concern to everyone, but only talk about irrelevant things. readers cannot obtain key information, which makes people feel like chewing wax; some articles try to cover everything, lack of details and omissions, making people feel that they are "eight-part essays" and "running accounts"; while others fall into routine and formatted clichés, and are accustomed to "using one template to cover everything."

writing style refers to work style. nonsense in daily life is sometimes unintentional, but it must be avoided among party members, cadres and media personnel. otherwise, it will not only lead to a distorted writing style, but is also likely to lead to a floating work style and breed formalism and bureaucracy.

cartoon: full of "dry goods" source: xinhua news agency

two

recently, the general office of the cpc central committee and the general office of the state council issued the "several provisions on rectifying formalism to reduce the burden on the grassroots", which is the first time that institutional norms have been formulated and issued in the form of party regulations to reduce the burden on the grassroots. previously, the general office of the cpc central committee issued the "notice on solving prominent issues of formalism to reduce the burden on the grassroots", emphasizing the need to "carry forward the 'short, practical and new' style of writing, resolutely shorten the length of the article, and prevent it from being too long and empty", "hold fewer meetings, hold shorter meetings, and hold meetings that are effective", etc., which are very realistic and targeted.

it should be noted that in recent years, leaders at all levels, from central media units to media practitioners at all levels, have insisted on taking the lead in innovating discourse and improving writing style, and have achieved positive results. in particular, they have actively adapted to the characteristics of the internet era, made good use of internet language, and enhanced the appeal and spread of articles through down-to-earth and youthful expressions. however, objectively speaking, changing writing style is not an overnight task, and some places still have problems with writing style to varying degrees.

there are many reasons for this. some people have misunderstandings. influenced by their surroundings, they misunderstand mainstream discourse and think that writing is about pursuing "high-end" styles. some people say "correct" but useless nonsense out of habitual self-protection, thinking that this will never be wrong and they are afraid of being "picked on" by others. some people have limited knowledge and grasp of situations, and they repeat the same idea over and over again in a lengthy and tedious manner, using boring language, and so on.

thoughts should be fresh, and so should language. the lack of language often indicates the poverty of thought. some people do not pay attention to learning and thinking, and are willing to be "lazy" in thought, so they do not have their own opinions on work, and their words are always dry and light. at this time, speaking "correct" but useless nonsense is to cover up the lack of their own knowledge. however, language is the "outer garment" of thought. if thought does not have "substances", it is difficult to cover it up with language.

looking at the literary masters and great writers in the history of our country, most of them are models of speaking with substance and not talking nonsense. han yu advocated that "when you take it from your heart and put it into your hands, you must get rid of clichés", that is, when you write down what you think, you must get rid of those clichés. lu xun said in "answering the questions of beidou magazine": "after writing, read it at least twice, and try your best to delete unnecessary words, sentences, and paragraphs, without regret." zhu guangqian said: "the conditions for literature are very simple. first, there is something worth saying, and second, it is said just right."

it can be seen that speaking less "correct" but useless nonsense should be a social trend. although it is not easy to do, it should become everyone's conscious pursuit.

image source: visual china

three

since the oracle bone script of yinxu more than 3,000 years ago, the structure of chinese characters has never changed. it is the only ancient self-origin writing system in the world that is still in use today. with such a profound cultural heritage, our language style should be unique and charming, rather than stiff, stereotyped, and boring, otherwise it will affect the cultural identity of the younger generation. here, the author thinks of three sentences.

if you don’t have to say anything, don’t say it.if you talk too much nonsense, the article will be too long. if it is empty and meaningless, it will easily make people lose patience and even become annoying. what to say, how to say it, and how to choose in a limited time are not trivial matters. they reflect a kind of foundation and level.

there is a cognitive misunderstanding that must be reversed. it does not mean that the longer the article, the deeper it is, and the shorter it is, the shallower it is. in fact, this is not the case. most of the confucian classics that have been passed down for thousands of years are only tens of thousands of words. for example, "the analects" is less than 16,000 words, divided into 20 chapters. if it were today's article, it would only take about an hour to read it all. "the song of everlasting regret", "preface to the pavilion of prince teng", "ode to the goddess of the luo river", "preface to sending off ma sheng of dongyang" and other famous works are all less than 1,000 words, but they are still shining and inspiring thousands of years later.

the content should be beautiful, not the form.the purpose of writing is to explain the truth and viewpoints. this is the basic premise. zhou dunyi of the song dynasty said in tongshu wenci: "literature is used to carry the truth. if the wheel and shaft are decorated but people do not use them, it is just decoration, let alone an empty vehicle." this means that writing is used to carry truth. if there is no truth, it is like a vehicle without objects. no matter how good the decoration is, it is just empty. this is the origin of the idiom "literature carries the truth". many classics that have survived the test of time and are still handed down to this day carry profound ideas and viewpoints.

of course, necessary forms are sometimes needed, and we cannot generalize. but we must not lose sight of the main point and lose the idea in the deliberate pursuit of form. it is like a good outfit can show temperament. we do not deny the importance of outfit, but temperament is always the core, which radiates from the inside out. "if you have poetry and books in your belly, you will be elegant." read more, think more, and enrich your thoughts, so as not to fall into the vicious circle of focusing on form and neglecting content.

speak useful words, speak your own words.either point directly to the problem, or solve people's problems, or express feelings, this is the "value judgment" to measure the quality of the discourse style. it should be targeted rather than moaning without reason, so that people can listen and read it.

if speaking useful words is a sign of respect for readers, then speaking one's own words is a sign of attitude. the reason why some people pursue "take-it-as-it-is" and "book-it-is" and copy a lot of other people's words is because they don't have their own attitude. those words that are copied and replaced easily make people feel that they are just slogans, and they are neither truly implementing the teachings of the superiors nor being truly responsible to the subordinates.

we should also realize that it is unrealistic to make every sentence thought-provoking, but we should try to say more useful words and make the discourse style more deeply rooted in the hearts of the people. i believe this is what the grassroots and the masses are very much looking forward to, and we must persevere in our efforts.