: Paragraph flow, verb inversion and last sentence tone The paragraph below is a conclusion for an essay. I have three problems with the paragraph that I would like to review with you. This

Vote Up Vote Down

To help with the tone, consider using shorter, more concise sentences.

To gain punch, you can simplify your sentence structures,eliminate some abstract words ("exacerbates", "denial"), and put your key words at the end of each sentence.

To gain force at the end, you might consier reoranizing the last sentence to connect tightly the causes and effects.

An example:

Ignoring a conflict often makes it worse. When I ignored some bullies, they increased their bullying. Eventually they stopped, but only after I confronted them. Telling them to stop was not easy. I needed to overcome my fear of being hurt, and I had to work hard to understand my own nature. Having done both, the gain in courage was worth it.

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

A couple of the other answers made me look at your paragraph again. I can't tell for sure which end of the bullying "you" were on (if it is actually about you).

I deduce that you were bullied, but, especially in a conclusion, the reader shouldn't have to deduce anything. It should be laid out as a summation of what has already been presented, or reinforce your main conclusions in some other way.

"bullying conflict" and "bullying experience" sound like you're still distancing yourself from the experience by abstraction (which may be valid if the issues remain unresolved). But these terms are the place to put the "punch", no pun intended, of real experience/emotion to give your conclusion more impact and give the readers something they can identify with. "The intimidation I suffered", "The terror and dehumanization", "powerlessness" - or if you were on the other side, the "hardening", "destructive self-image", "devaluing of life", "consuming anger", "shutting down".

I may have gone a little too far if this is supposed to be a more formal, "objective" essay, but having been subjected to a lot of bullying and teasing myself, it hits home.

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

On point #1 , your inversion is only valid if you do as suggested in above answers OR if you removed the "it was". e.g.

Only when I decided to confront the problem and call the people involved was I able to move towards a solution.

But you really need to minimise the gap between 'when' and 'was I'. One way to do this would be to remove superfluous verbs and 'I' and make the rest active. e.g.

Only after confronting the problem and calling those involved was I able to move towards a solution.

On point #2 the pauses are just fine. The amount of punctuation is not the greatest problem here. In my humble opinion it is just "waffly". I'd just remove as many words as I could without removing the meaning. (But then I mainly ever only do technical writing).

On point #3 Here's how I would revise the last two sentences for punch. Brackets for where you should replace the words with the accurate noun/adverb to the experience you had.

I suggest replacing 'myself' with what you actually better understood otherwise the reader is left with a feeling that you've said nothing at all.

Last suggestion in brackets optional. It's less formal but does add punch. Generally the more old English words (short and blunt words) the stronger the prose will be. Conversely the more long Latin-derived words (our Prime Minister got famous for saying 'programmatic specificity') the more difficult to read and potentially weak the prose will be. Think about not saying "my experience" but "dealing with Tina's behaviour" or whatever it was. This reinforces to the reader that there's a real concrete story here, something engaging, not just some theoretical situation full of legal words.

However, calling the people was not an easy thing for me; it required me to confront my fear of being hurt and, more importantly, forced me to understand [my own needs]. This in turn gave me the courage I needed. Above all, [the event] was a lesson on how to build the courage to confront conflicts [head on].

(0)