Add new comment

I don't get why my comment you seem to be replying to was removed, but I somewhat appreciate your effort. It's just that you could care more about *rationalizing* your texts as the heavy structure and syntax appear to be in the way of your discourse. It's to me a painstaking read for how you keep unraveling a red carpet before getting to the point, which seems to never really happens, or I just lose interest before that happens.

Writing long sentences requires some skill or talent that little are actually mastering (but many believe themselves to have). A few tricks to learn quickly:

- cut off the "fat" and the protocols, and keep it the secondary ideas for better use later in more appropriate context;
- do a plan or tree of your narrative/discursive structure. I rarely needed that, but this can help a lot for some people;
- priorities first: start by writing the simplest sentence you can make for expressing an idea. Then use additional sentences or sub-sentences to explain, detail, expand or demonstrate;
- avoid delaying too much the core of what you wanna express. It's okay to give it bit by bit as long as you're
- short intros, or even none at all, is better than intros spreading through half a text (of like presenting what you will attempt to do). Personally I think intros aren't really needed, yet there's always a need to launch your subject or its underlying motive, which is more enticing that to keep hyping for some incoming bird out of the egg;
- consider staying away from the academic routines. Many people here are fed up with the same old patterns of the cross-referential obsession and multi-layered argumentation. Is that really needed, considering who are your perceived readers and their interests?