# Repeating Yourself.



## Olly Buckle (Aug 8, 2017)

Repeating Yourself.
Beware of rules people propose for writing, people who write about writing nearly all have at least one rule, but rules only apply if you want them to. This can lead to the baby being thrown out with the bath water; the reader can usually spot the fallacy, and may dismiss the writer out of hand.

To my mind it is more helpful to show people ways of doing things, so they can decide if and how they will use them. Warn them of the dangers by all means, but let them try it; how would you stop them? There are always edits and rewrites if it is not working.

For example; I was recently told I must highlight all the uses of ‘and’ in a manuscript, then strip out the surplus ones.

‘You must always do it, it is the commonest word and it will make the text tighter’, was the rational.

I have tried it, it can make a difference, but ‘must’? Sometimes extra ands can be a device in themselves, for example within a list to break it up;

“Pots and pans, kettles and teapots, brushes and brooms, the entire contents of the kitchen.”

Repeating conjunctions, rather than using commas, is often cited as a ‘no-no’, but there is a recognised rhetorical figure in which conjunctions are deliberately repeated within a list, thus;

“And a man came and he was angry and he shouted and other men came and they shouted too ...”

In that example the effect is to make it sound childlike, but overwhelming emotions like fear and confusion can be implied in the same way by a skilled writer,

I said, "Who killed him?" and he said, "I don't know who killed him but he's dead all right," and it was dark and there was water standing in the street and no lights and windows broke and boats all up in the town and trees blown down and everything all blown and I got a skiff and went out and found my boat where I had her inside Mango Bay and she was all right only she was full of water. 


That example is from Hemingway’s “After the Storm”, it’s called polysyndeton.


Sometimes it is useful to repeat for emphasis, sometimes it is useful to repeat for learning, and sometimes it is useful to repeat to illustrate a way of repeating. That is an illustration of the way in which a few words at the beginning of a phrase or clause can be repeated at the beginning of subsequent phrases or clauses. It is called ‘anaphora’, and can be used to give force to a point;

“We shall fight them in France, we shall fight them at sea, we shall fight them on the beaches ...”

The same sort of thing can be done by putting the repeated phrase on the end rather than the beginning;

“Monday was theory Mr Quinn, you were late, Tuesday was theory, you were late, On Wednesday we had a practical, you were late ...”, they call that one an antistrophe.

If you repeat the meaning it is called tautology; that is often used for emphasis as in, “Boys will be boys” or “That’s that, done and dusted”. The second example both repeats itself and rephrases something with different words, keeps the same meaning but express it another way, it uses other words to say the same thing. It is tautology if you use the same words or if you change them, but the latter is usually meant.

It can also be useful when you want to make sure that something like a metaphor or simile has been picked up, but be careful. “Wandering nomad families supplementing their diet with additions of imported food from overseas, regularly give birth to two twins.” is not good in the normal course of things.

Rhyme, assonance, consonance and alliteration are the repetition of sounds.
Rhyme is the repetition of a group of sounds.
With alliteration it is the repetition of the same sound at the start of words.
Assonance is the repetition of the same vowel sounds within words close to each other.
Consonance is the same thing, but with consonants instead of vowels.

For those familiar with Poe’s “Raven”, (As used in the Simpson’s “Tree house of horror.”), the last verse displays all of these, and an antistrophe with double meaning, in the first line,

“And the raven, never flitting, still is sitting, still is sitting”

It also provides an illustration of the sort of care needed when using these things. Personally I think Poe takes it right to the edge, there are those who think he goes too far.

When you resort to rhetoric beware labyrinthine melodies of words where sound exceeds sense, and romantic ramblings where the clangour and clamour are inappropriate to place and meaning. Sparing use also makes things noteworthy.

One last one to be leaving with; anadiplosis. It is related to the anaphora and antistrophe and is when a word or phrase used to end a clause is repeated at the beginning of successive clauses, thus;

“After reading this one should be able to use various combinations of repetition; repetition of words and phrases at the beginning and end of clauses; repetition of sounds in the same way; and repetition of sounds and words within the word or clause; alliteration, assonance, anaphora, antistrophe, anadiplosis, consonance and tautology.”

The choice of form and the occasion to use it is the author’s prerogative; it is my opinion that widening the writer’s choices can lead to better writing. There are so many ways to repeat oneself, but be careful, it is easily overdone.


----------



## EmmaSohan (Aug 9, 2017)

Yeah, elegant efficient prose has its place, and usually the goal is to eliminate repetition. But I rate simple repetition as one of the easier ways to improve your writing. To me, the obvious time for repetition is when something important is too short (hence will be read too quickly, hence will not receive the importance it needs).

The day's drama was over, but we knew nothing -- nothing -- had been resolved. (_We Are Unprepared_, Reilly)​
Usually the punctuation changes:

OK. Don't panic. Don't _panic_. (_Shopaholic to the Stars, _Sophie Kinsella)​
I hate to fly. Seriously. HATE. It. (_Meant to Be_, Lauren Morrill)​
In an action scene repetition shows fixation.

The door is locked the door is locked. (_Speak_, Anderson)​
So repetition can mimic thinking. My favorite repetition:

She looked again at the head, the arms, the hands --
The hands.
She felt a chill when she looked at the kid's hands.
(Michael Crichton, _Jurassic Park_, page 5)
​


----------



## VonBradstein (Oct 18, 2017)

It's a weird one. One of my worst habits is repeating myself. Recently while editing my WIP I did a document search of the word 'stared' as in "he/she stared at..." and found that I had used it something like three hundred times over the course of 122,000 words - which is definitely an absurd overload. More importantly, when I looked back there were probably less than ten instances when it actually needed used. That isn't to say it was used inappropriately, just that it wasn't strictly needed. So I cut it out. The worst part wasn't even the number of times I used the word but how it was distributed. In certain parts I had used it three or more times within a couple of paragraphs. I found a similar problem with the words 'smiled', 'nodded', and 'sighed'. In almost every case the words were used subconsciously. 

I never intentionally do this. I find most of my problematic repetitions to relate to either (1) I discover a word I really like and subconsciously can't help it (2) It's easier than finding a more creative way to communicate an emotion - for example if you want to communicate happiness it's obviously easy to have the character smiling than any other action (3) A need to have the character 'doing something' so the verb is tagged on. As it stands this is one of the main things I am working on because I assume if this grates on me it will grate on any publisher. So that's an example of a rule I tend to follow that proves right.

I will say I find repeating words and phrases to work well sometimes. You illustrate a lot of good examples of this. As with most things, I find the best rule of thumb is to work from reality. People seldom do really 'stare' or 'smile' or 'sigh' but when they speak they do repeat themselves. 

An example is one can say "you did, Tom" when accusing another, but in real life may be even more likely to say "you did, Tom. I know you did. you did and everybody saw you." In this case, the repetition of 'did' works because it closely follows how people talk in emphasis. In my work when I use repetition it is usually for emphasis, and sometimes (in dialogue or with an unreliable narrator) to indicate an unsettled or unstable mindset.


----------



## Jack of all trades (Oct 18, 2017)

Repeating yourself is probably not a good idea. It can be annoying when you repeat yourself too often. Saying something over and over again, repeating oneself, may deter readers and is not a very good idea.


----------



## clark (Nov 14, 2017)

But Jack's embedded example of mawkish and ineffective repetition is just that--a poor instance of repetition written by a skilled writer to make a point.  Repetition, _anaphora _in poetry (prose as well?), is used by poets and novelists to underscore a critical point--the generality of Jack's caution holds, however.  Beginning writers may use repetition out of nervous misgivings that rep. is NEEDED to make a point.  Such is rarely the case.


----------



## moderan (Nov 14, 2017)

Can also be used to simulate the mc's stress level, as adequately illustrated here:
Indiscipline


----------



## Ralph Rotten (Nov 25, 2017)

It seems like every writer has different overused words or phrases that they don't see.  We all have a hole in our swing.

Was looking at my wife's book the other day and she had used SHE and HE a lot so I showed her how to identify her characters in the beginning by a trait or phrase, so that instead of saying HE all the time, she could refer to him as _the redheaded mechanic,_ or the _big mechanic_, or _Mickey,_ or HE.  Now instead of one term, she would have variety.

My pet peeve is when I use the same word too close to another usage of the same word.  I've gotten where I pick it up subconsciously during editing, but it bugs me to use the same term within a paragraph or two of each other.


----------



## VonBradstein (Nov 26, 2017)

Ralph Rotten said:


> It seems like every writer has different overused words or phrases that they don't see.  We all have a hole in our swing.
> 
> Was looking at my wife's book the other day and she had used SHE and HE a lot so I showed her how to identify her characters in the beginning by a trait or phrase, so that instead of saying HE all the time, she could refer to him as _the redheaded mechanic,_ or the _big mechanic_, or _Mickey,_ or HE.  Now instead of one term, she would have variety.
> 
> My pet peeve is when I use the same word too close to another usage of the same word.  I've gotten where I pick it up subconsciously during editing, but it bugs me to use the same term within a paragraph or two of each other.



Was this in dialogue attribution or action-narrative? If it's in dialogue attribution I prefer 'he' or 'she' when attribution is actually needed and nothing when it is not. 

There's something amateurish about neurotically ascribing a speaker to every piece of dialogue. The majority of the time the context and the speech itself lends itself to a particular speaker and there's no reason for it other than to jack up the word count.


----------



## Olly Buckle (Nov 26, 2017)

@ Clark

Anaphora. One of the figures of rhetoric, so also from the oral tradition. 

You might enjoy, 'Silva Rhetoricae', 'The forest of rhetoric', an excellent web site set up by Brigham Young University, who have a considerable interest


----------



## Jack of all trades (Nov 26, 2017)

Ralph Rotten said:


> It seems like every writer has different overused words or phrases that they don't see.  We all have a hole in our swing.
> 
> Was looking at my wife's book the other day and she had used SHE and HE a lot so I showed her how to identify her characters in the beginning by a trait or phrase, so that instead of saying HE all the time, she could refer to him as _the redheaded mechanic,_ or the _big mechanic_, or _Mickey,_ or HE.  Now instead of one term, she would have variety.
> 
> My pet peeve is when I use the same word too close to another usage of the same word.  I've gotten where I pick it up subconsciously during editing, but it bugs me to use the same term within a paragraph or two of each other.



You're right. One needs to read a manuscript to see where one needs to be more specific. That's just not the sort of thing that can be determined blind. And I, too, try to catch words used two or more times in a short space. I find reading out loud helps me catch that more easily. 

And it's great that you can help your wife like that! Beta reader at home. I use multiple beta readers because each one catches different things.


----------



## Olly Buckle (Nov 26, 2017)

Reading aloud is great for catching things, even better if you get someone to read it back to you and note every little hesitation and correction as they get the emphasis wrong or almost misunderstand then catch themselves. It is easier if you know what is coming, if you don't it has to be really good to be read straight off.


----------



## VonBradstein (Nov 26, 2017)

If you have Microsoft Word there’s a free function for reading it out. Google for the how-to.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Jack of all trades (Nov 27, 2017)

VonBradstein said:


> If you have Microsoft Word there’s a free function for reading it out. Google for the how-to.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



That wouldn't help catch awkward phrasing, etc, as computer programs don't stumble. It also doesn't show emphasis.


----------



## VonBradstein (Nov 27, 2017)

Jack of all trades said:


> That wouldn't help catch awkward phrasing, etc, as computer programs don't stumble. It also doesn't show emphasis.



You mean it wouldn’t help you. 

I have been using it for years for exactly this because hearing words spoken audibly regardless of “emphasis” and “stumbling” helps to highlight. 

Actually the fact it pronounces every instance of the same word identically makes it slightly easier to my ear because it’s easier to recognize familiar phonetic patterns and register repetition where it occurs when nothing is disguised by the quirks of human intonation. Which is part of why I️ prefer to use a digital voice to a human one.

Maybe consider not applying blanket statements and presenting as fact opinions on subjective and highly personal matters. It doesn’t work for you. It works for me. It might for other people. Some people might not have a person they can turn to to read everything. End of story.


----------



## Ralph Rotten (Nov 27, 2017)

Actually, reading your work aloud is one of the critical steps laid down in [can't remember name of book] which is considered the writer's bible when it comes to writing effective literature.

Does anyone remember the name of that book?  Written like 30 years ago (or more), outlines all the things you gotta do to not stink.


----------



## Jack of all trades (Nov 27, 2017)

VonBradstein said:


> You mean it wouldn’t help you.
> 
> I have been using it for years for exactly this because hearing words spoken audibly regardless of “emphasis” and “stumbling” helps to highlight.
> 
> ...



You first.

Even if you get some use out of it, there's still problems with it. It doesn't do anyone any good to present something without acknowledging the difficulties. If you notice, I did not say it should not be used. I simply pointed out the weaknesses.


----------



## VonBradstein (Nov 27, 2017)

Jack of all trades said:


> I did not say it should not be used. I simply pointed out the weaknesses.



You said it would not help. That is tantamount to saying it should not be used, unless you routinely advocate the use of methods that do not work. Lordy, word chess is tiresome.



Jack of all trades said:


> That wouldn't help catch awkward phrasing, etc, as computer programs don't stumble. It also doesn't show emphasis.



Thread dismissed.


----------



## Jack of all trades (Nov 27, 2017)

VonBradstein said:


> You said it would not help. That is tantamount to saying it should not be used, unless you routinely advocate the use of methods that do not work. Lordy, word chess is tiresome.
> 
> 
> 
> Thread dismissed.



If you've dismissed the thread, why do you keep coming back?

I said, 


> That wouldn't help catch awkward phrasing, etc, as computer programs don't stumble. It also doesn't show emphasis.



That does not say, "It wouldn't help." It points out the weaknesses.


----------

