A topic in the Open Knowledge Graph — a free, open map of 15,290 topics and the order to learn them in.
Concise writing communicates its meaning in the fewest words necessary without sacrificing nuance, precision, or voice. Common sources of wordiness include nominalizations (turning verbs into nouns, as in "make a decision" instead of "decide"), expletive constructions ("there are many reasons why..." instead of leading with the reasons), redundant pairs ("each and every"), and passive constructions that obscure the agent of action. Clarity and concision are related but distinct: a sentence can be short yet unclear, or long yet perfectly clear if every word earns its place. The revision process of cutting unnecessary words is one of the highest-leverage editing skills because it simultaneously improves readability, strengthens argument, and sharpens the writer's own thinking.
Take a paragraph from a draft and challenge yourself to cut it by one-third without losing any meaning. Circle every preposition and "to be" verb — these often signal opportunities for tighter construction. Compare a wordy passage with a revised version to train the eye to spot unnecessary words. Read concise stylists (George Orwell, Joan Didion) and imitate their sentence structures in practice exercises.
From your work with revision strategies, you know that revision is not just proofreading — it involves rethinking at the level of structure, argument, and language. Concision is a specific revision target: the removal of words that consume the reader's attention without adding meaning. The goal is not shortness for its own sake but signal density — every word should be doing work. A sentence full of filler makes the reader work harder to extract the same information. A concise sentence respects that work.
The most common wordiness patterns are mechanical and learnable. Nominalization converts a verb into a noun phrase, which then requires a helper verb: "make a decision" instead of "decide," "conduct an investigation" instead of "investigate," "provide assistance" instead of "help." The nominalized version adds syllables and weakens the action. Expletive constructions delay the subject: "There are many historians who believe..." instead of "Many historians believe..." The phrase "there are" contributes nothing — cut it and lead with the noun. Redundant pairs like "each and every," "null and void," "first and foremost" say the same thing twice; pick one. Weak passive constructions like "mistakes were made" hide the agent of action and add auxiliary verbs; "the committee made mistakes" is more direct.
Clarity is related to concision but distinct. A long sentence is not automatically unclear, and a short sentence is not automatically clear. Clarity fails when the logical relationship between ideas is obscured — when pronouns lack clear referents, when subordinate clauses pile up without signaling their relationship to the main clause, or when technical vocabulary appears without context. The clearest sentences follow a simple structure: subject, verb, object — with the most important information placed at the end (the position of greatest emphasis). Sentences that bury the main point in a subordinate clause lose the reader's attention before delivering the payload.
The practical test for a word is: what would be lost if I removed it? If the answer is nothing, cut it. If the answer is nuance or precision, keep it. "He ran quickly" can become "he sprinted." "The very large building" becomes "the skyscraper." But "she seemed to hesitate" is not the same as "she hesitated" — the uncertainty is the point, and removing "seemed" changes the meaning. Concision requires judgment, not mechanical subtraction. The writer who has internalized this distinction can cut a paragraph by a third and make it stronger, not emptier.