(Without looking it up) tell me what defines a paragraph.
A dictionary.
The author of a dictionary entry.
The dictionary in which the author of the dictionary looked up the definition.
A block of sentences.
For fiction I would say one complete thought/picture used in a scene or passage.
A 'topic' sentence, followed by supporting sentences. You should use as many sentences as needed to define the idea.
One sentence can be a paragraph.
I think that the topic sentence thing is a thesis statement issue, which is gross to me.
I would say an indent at the beginning and a period at the end, followed by a paragraph break.
Gotta watch the paragraph breaks, though. Not standard submission format. Likely to earn you a form rejection.
I meant a single return to go to the next line, not a double paragraph break (I think it's called 'block paragraph' when you use the double enter/return).
I sit corrected. My bad.
A 'topic' sentence, followed by supporting sentences. You should use as many sentences as needed to define the idea. One sentence can be a paragraph.
I read a definition like this before I posted the discussion. A while back I read one of those "big blocks of text without breaks" kind of books and I described it as having "sections rather than paragraphs." So I was wrong. I guess I could have said "long sections rather than clearly defined paragraphs." [The discerning reader can determine where one begins and ends; but I would say the discerning reader hopefully has better things to think about while reading a book, at least on the first time through.]
Could one write a single paragraph (based on the technical definition) and actually use multiple indents and returns? [I'm getting into "where do we draw the line" territory.] If you can do the block-writing, I don't see why you couldn't do "too many" breaks.
I suppose the typography is meant only to influence the way it is read, not to adhere to a formal structure for its own sake. I assume the formal structure was put in place because people thought it would be a good way to do things because it would influence the way the text read. But when you get into inter- / intra- / meta-textual meanings, the whole idea of a paragraph being so easily defined becomes moot (if not useless,) because there are multiple ideas at work, and all we can be sure of is what is printed. Do I then get to redefine "paragraph" based on form alone?
One sentence can be a paragraph.
I really started noticing these (and of course aping them myself) when I got into Palahniuk, because they're such a hallmark of his style, meant to jar the rhythm or give it a punchline/platitude/chorus effect by being on their own line.
Sentegraphs, we call them.
JY sayz: "(Without looking it up) tell me what defines a paragraph."
Hmmm, I wonder immediately what the admonishment not to look it up does to shape the conversation. I for one always look things up and cut and paste them into my currently running journal entry as homage to Weinberg's 'Fieldstones' methodology. But then I am unsure of the conventions and protocols of the forum having just arrived.
In my head, a paragraph is a complete thought. A thought can be about a situation, a scene, a vista or of course anything else that is rattling around in your head. It can be long or short according to your need and how it fits into your writing. Sometimes it just needs to hit the page so that it can be trimmed into action or split into refinements or just cast aside whole like a hairball that leaves you standing in a couple of inches of water after you finish showering.
Now I am thinking, is this too much? What is the propagation speed of a forum message. Does it take a week to get participants assembled? I haven't read enough before jumping in to actually know. In usenet that would have been a sin, an insult to the regulars that would bring flames down about your ears. Gosh, how I miss those days. Grammar and spelling punchups. Personal character assassinations. Even the odd insertion of actual facts added to the roaring blazes. My posts were homophonically 'inciteful' if I might toot my own horn.
Onwards, a person who writes words into the dictionary is called a lexicographer. Erin McKean gave a wonderful TED talk on the topic. It's short. It's fun. And if you are a fan of words you are rewarded with synec'dochical in context.
video:http://www.ted.com/talks/erin_mckean_redefines_the_dictionary.html
This is my second attempt at a post, the first disappeared when I refreshed the screen last night. Strike two. Like my bio attempt you don't get my first thoughts but instead the pale second imitation/recreation. Luckily Saturday morning is my early rise and shiner dedicated solely to wandering the net so that I do have the time to address my mistake.
Gordon, I didn't know there was a word for it! I love sentegraphs. They do wonders for making thinks punchy. They're great for action or quick thought. I love, love, love them. Another thing I really like is dialogue in sentegraphs--none of this 'he said', 'she said' garbage, just nice and snappy.
J.Y., I think that the set-up of traditional paragraphs gives readers a mental breather. All punctuation is a way to communicate flow, and segmenting off smaller ideas in the 'big picture' allows the reader an opportunity to dissect as they go.
I have no interest in trying to break the document I'm reading into smaller paragraphs, if the only reason I'm breaking the work into smaller paragraphs is because some person thinks I should prove I'm a 'clearly discerning reader'. I think it's the author's job to apply a beat to the work, and that the beat/rhythm should carry the story.
For example, I'm fine with misplaced punctuation as long as it has an intended effect. This circles back around to paragraphs.
If
somebody
wrote
an entire book
like this,
then
I
found out
they just
wanted to increase their
page number, at the end?
I
wouldn't
be
impressed.
(Or maybe
I would be,
if they did it well.)
As far as 'too many breaks' goes (note the above), you're really getting more into 'poetry', when you go that route, aren't you?
I can see what you mean, of course, about clearly defined terms, because there really are no clearly defined terms, or set rules. Hell, we should throw all the rules to the wind! What is writing?! What are letters? What is punctuation? Why do we need those?!
Terms and rules are there to smooth discourse--make understanding easier. You could write an entire book backwards, or write it in a secret code, but that doesn't mean anybody will understand it. The goal of writing, as far as I know, is to get an idea or a point across, to reach out and communicate with the world, to aid and to teach, or to entertain.
As long as there's an idea--excluding blatant ignorance--behind not adhering to the standard, I'm fine with it.
Word
Devon, I forgot to address the 'thesis statement issue'. As far as I can dissect, all writings have topic sentences or paragraphs.
Example: James Windwall was frustrated. The day before yesterday (or was that the day before the day before yesterday? Or was that last week? It didn't matter. She said it. He heard her.) his mother said something under her breath. Saying things under her breath was a staple in the household, of course, like Ramen noodles and mustard-and-egg sandwiches, but this time, James Windwall heard it.
If this is your beginning paragraph, you already have multiple themes and topics you can work with, but your MAIN topic is James Windwall's frustration. The rest of the chapter (or maybe even the rest of the book) will be used to explain James Windwall, his mother, and their combat.
I'm sure you could look through the first chapters of your favorite books and find topic sentences. I think they're called 'plot'.
@Tony -
I think what others are saying is that, "James Windwall was frustrated," can and should be completely eliminated from the paragraph. The rest of your paragraph tells you that Windwall is frustrated, why would you feel the need to telegraph it from the first sentence? That first sentence saps descriptive power from the rest of the paragraph. If you're part of the workshop, Chuck's "Beware the Thesis Statement" article is really good, and worth reading.
o i c
Thank you for the suggestion, Popeye. I'm looking into the essay, now!
So "James Windwall was frustrated" could be a paragraph. Or we can describe, over the course of several sentences, the fact he is frustrated, and these sentences form a paragraph becuase they have to do with the same thought: James Windwall's frustration.
Unless the frustration-sentences have nothing to do with anything else in the immediate area, they form their own paragraph.[?]
Can paragraphs overlap like a Venn diagram? Two paragraphs have each their own thought, but also, in describing these thoughts, they involve facts which have to do with each other, a third thought expressed by elements of the two other paragraphs. Is that all one paragraph? Or is it two-and-three paragraphs? Or is it only two?
Exactly what Popeye said. Putting a thesis staement at the beginning of the paragraph, kills everything that comes after it. It is like you are trying to hold the reader's hand.
^ You mean that regarding fiction, right?
Definitely. Non-fiction is a different animal. Usually with non-fiction, you just want to present the information neatly and as straight forward as possible.
Right - I should have clarified that it's a good rule of thumb for fiction only. For non-fiction, you generally want to telegraph where you're going with the sentence and make everything as clear and concise as possible.
You have to understand what you're trying to do. With non-fiction you're shedding light on a topic that requires detailed information.
In writing fiction, if you run on thesis statements, you could ultimately just say so-and-so did this, then this, the end. Resulting in a whole story the size of a synopsis. Fiction writing is a slow reveal, hidden just enough to keep someone reading.
J.Y., Yes. 'James Windwall was frustrated,' could be its very own paragraph, and probably should be, because it's a complete idea.
Or, yes, you could describe, over the course of several sentences, the fact he is frustrated. These would compose a paragraph.
If the frustration sentences have nothing to do with anything else in the immediate area, they should probably be in their own chapter, not just a new paragraph, because they're an idea of their own, all together.
Think of it this way: Each paragraph supports the chapter idea, each chapter idea supports the story's overall idea. If you have two paragraphs about two different things, then you make a third paragraph that ties them into a neat little bow, but still manages to carry forward. Each paragraph has no certain amount of sentences. You use however many sentences you need to use to get the point across.
I like the Venn diagram idea, but on paper the Venn would get over-complicated, unless you had a very big piece of paper and very small handwriting. The best I, personally, would be able to do with a Venn--mentally--is call the entire diagram the 'chapter', then each circle would be a paragraph. Inside the circles, I would station the points. The 'overlapping' parts of the circles would be the 'transitions' from one paragraph to the next.
Devon&Popeye, I, personally, think that there are exceptions to every rule, even as far as showing and telling goes. I do agree, though, that you can't run on thesis statements.
@TK --- That all makes sense to me. Actually drawing a Venn for a whole chapter would be hard. Some other scheme would make a better depiction. Maybe one of those molecular ball-and-stick things.
For Anybody's Information: I didn't start this to advocate anything in particular, but to get an idea of how the concept of a paragraph is shaped in people's minds.
Tony: "As far as 'too many breaks' goes (note the above), you're really getting more into 'poetry', when you go that route, aren't you?"
Poetry is not defined by line breaks. If you want to compare poetry to prose, think of a stanza as a paragraph. Poetry is more defined by its use of language and grammar than it is by where line breaks go. Some poems have no line breaks. Some have 100.
Tony: "Terms and rules are there to smooth discourse--make understanding easier. You could write an entire book backwards, or write it in a secret code, but that doesn't mean anybody will understand it. The goal of writing, as far as I know, is to get an idea or a point across, to reach out and communicate with the world, to aid and to teach, or to entertain"
Sometimes the best way to get that idea across is by abandoning all rules. If you set out to write a book about language, it might be useful to deconstruct and recreate language. Or sometimes the goal of a book is to make us look at language from a new perspective but because our use of language is so dominant, the only way to change the perspective is to change the way language relates to us.
There is no rule for what makes a paragraph. There is no such thing as a paragraph that is too long or too short or using too many paragraph breaks or too few.
It seems like you guys really like rules and conventions here.
Tony: "As long as there's an idea--excluding blatant ignorance--behind not adhering to the standard, I'm fine with it."
pendragon, thank you for clarifying the 'poetry' thing. I was discussing that with somebody just the other day, trying to ask them what made what they wrote 'poetry', because it was written like prose. They said they didn't know, that their publisher said it was 'poetry', so it must be. I like your answer a lot better.
I really, really dislike "rules" in writing. I think that either you write good stuff or you don't.
Some rules are certainly a good thing & understanding those rules is very important but they should never hold you back or limit you.
I feel the same way about the speed limit and the age of consent.
Rules are made to be broken. Having said that, things that appear to be rules are often conventions. Conventions are things that work and have been proven useful over time for making sure that the goals of writing are achieved. You want to communicate with your reader. My mind to your mind. If you fail to engage your reader or make the reading of the story itself an effort then you risk breaking trust with your audience.
Human endeavour is iterative. Hour after hour. Day after day. Instance after instance. Insight after insight. Experience after experience. That's what you want your readers to do, treat your story as an experience they've had.
Readers are smarter than you think. They'll see the contrivances you put into play to cover over plot holes. Your stick and paper characters. At that point you will have broken the implicit promises made in the beginning of your efforts. They wanted to go somewhere else and you said you'd be taking them there.
Best to learn all the rules and practice a bit then ignore them. If you think you are ready I guess that's what the critiques are all about. They'll answer the question of whether or not you were indeed successful.
things that appear to be rules are often conventions
yes
