文章來源：《經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)人》Sep 30th 2023 期 Culture?欄目 How to write well 如何寫得好

?

[Paragraph 1]

Do you edit text messages carefully before sending them??If so, you may be the kind of person who takes pride in crafting even the simplest message.?If you do not, you may see yourself as a?go-getter?for whom verve and speed?outrank?care: get it done decently now rather than perfectly later.

你在發(fā)短信之前會(huì)仔細(xì)編輯嗎？如果會(huì)，你可能是那種樂于打磨文字的人。如果不會(huì)，你可能認(rèn)為自己是一個(gè)雷厲風(fēng)行的人，活力和速度比細(xì)心更重要：先完成，再完美。

?

[Paragraph 2]

A new book makes the argument for being the careful kind of writer, even in informal,?throwaway?messages.?Todd Rogers and Jessica Lasky-Fink are behavioural scientists, both at Harvard. Their “Writing For Busy Readers” is cleverly titled: all readers are busy nowadays.?People are?bombarded?constantly with messages, from the mailbox to the inbox to the text-message alert. (They can also be distracted by TikTok or “Candy Crush” at any moment.)?What to read, what to skim and what to ignore are decisions that nearly everyone has to make dozens, or even hundreds, of times a day.

一本新書提出這樣的觀點(diǎn)：即使在非正式的隨筆短信中，也要做一個(gè)細(xì)心的寫作者。托德·羅杰斯和杰西卡·拉斯基·芬克都是哈佛大學(xué)的行為科學(xué)家。他們的《忙碌讀者的寫作》書名很巧妙：現(xiàn)在所有的讀者都很忙。人們不斷受到各種信息的轟炸，例如來自信箱、收件箱、短信提醒等。（他們也可能隨時(shí)被TikTok或《糖果傳奇》分散注意力。）該讀什么、該略讀什么、該忽略什么，這些幾乎都是每人每天都要作出的決策，可能達(dá)到幾十次，甚至上百次。

?

[Paragraph 3]

The authors present?well-established?principles that have long been prized in guides to writing including The Economist’s style book (which Johnson helped update): cut unnecessary words, choose those that remain from the?bedrock?vocabulary everyone knows and keep?syntax?simple. But “Writing for Busy People” brings evidence.

作者們?cè)敱M闡述了一些早已在寫作指南中備受推崇的既定原則，包括《經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)人》的專欄文章（約翰遜幫助更新該專欄）：刪掉不必要的詞語，從大家所熟知的核心詞匯中選詞，使用簡單的句法結(jié)構(gòu)。但《忙碌讀者的寫作》一書提供了證據(jù)支持。

[Paragraph 4]

Take “l(fā)ess is more”. Most books on writing well?preach?the advice to omit needless words.?The authors, however, have tested the notion. For example, in an email to thousands of school-board members asking them to take a survey, cutting the length from 127 to 49 words almost doubled the response rate (from a paltry 2.7% to 4.8%).?The researchers found that a longer message makes recipients think the task (such as filling out a survey) will take longer, too.

采取“少即是多”的原則。大多數(shù)寫作指南都提倡刪掉不必要的詞語。然而，作者對(duì)這一觀念進(jìn)行了驗(yàn)證。例如，在一封發(fā)給數(shù)千名學(xué)校董事會(huì)成員的電子郵件中，要求他們參加一項(xiàng)調(diào)查，將郵件長度從 127 個(gè)字減少到 49 個(gè)字，回復(fù)率幾乎翻了一番（從可憐的 2.7% 提高到 4.8%）。研究人員發(fā)現(xiàn)，較長的信息會(huì)讓接收者認(rèn)為任務(wù)（如填寫調(diào)查問卷）也需要較長的時(shí)間。

[Paragraph 5]

The same applies to text messages.?In another experiment, a pandemic-era message to parents first included a few sentences acknowledging the difficulties of home-schooling, then asked them to take a survey.?A shorter message inviting them to take the survey got more responses.?Writers must sometimes opt for being?brusque?but effective instead of sympathetic but ignored.

這一原則同樣適用于短信。在另一項(xiàng)實(shí)驗(yàn)中，給家長們發(fā)出的一條關(guān)于疫情時(shí)代的信息，首先肯定了在家上學(xué)的困難，然后請(qǐng)他們參加一項(xiàng)調(diào)查。一條更簡短的調(diào)查邀請(qǐng)信息獲得了更多的回復(fù)。作者有時(shí)必須選擇簡單粗暴但有效的寫作方式，而不是富有同情心但被忽視的方式。

?

[Paragraph 6]

Often it is not just what you say but how briskly you say it.?The value of?brevity?applies even when asking people to donate money, such as to political candidates.?It is plausible that potential donors would be more likely to open their wallets if they could understand as many reasons as possible to do so.?But in an experiment for an American candidate, simply deleting every other paragraph in a fundraising email increased donations by 16% (though it resulted in a?disjointed?message).?Even political obsessives do not want to read endless?self-justification.

很多時(shí)候，關(guān)鍵不在于你說了什么，而在于你說得有多干脆。即使是在要求人們捐款的時(shí)候，簡潔也同樣重要，比如給政治候選人捐款。如果潛在捐款人能夠了解盡可能多的捐款理由，他們就更有可能慷慨解囊，這一點(diǎn)是有道理的。但在一項(xiàng)為美國候選人進(jìn)行的實(shí)驗(yàn)中，僅僅刪除了籌款電子郵件中的每個(gè)段落，捐款就增加了 16%（盡管這樣做會(huì)導(dǎo)致信息不連貫）。即使對(duì)于政治狂熱者來說，他們也不想閱讀無休止的自我辯護(hù)。

[Paragraph 7]

Word-count is not the only thing to cut. Keeping messages to a single idea—or as few as absolutely needed—helps ensure that they will be read, remembered and acted on.?Reducing the number of possible actions has the same effect, too: a link in an email (from, appropriately enough, Behavioral Scientist magazine) attracted 50% more clicks when it was solo than when it was sent alongside a second, “bonus” link.

削減字?jǐn)?shù)并非是唯一的改進(jìn)之處。將信息集中在一個(gè)主題上--或者只寫必要的內(nèi)容--有助于讀者閱讀信息、記住信息并采取行動(dòng)。同樣地，減少行動(dòng)選擇也會(huì)產(chǎn)生相同的效果：一封電子郵件中的鏈接（來自《行為科學(xué)家》雜志）在單獨(dú)發(fā)送時(shí)，點(diǎn)擊率增加了50%，而與第二個(gè)“額外”的鏈接一起發(fā)送時(shí)，點(diǎn)擊率就低。

[Paragraph 8]

Syntax and word-choice matter, too. Short and active sentences, with common words that everyone uses, are best.?From Facebook posts to online-travel reviews, even brief, informal pieces of writing that follow these rules get more likes, shares and so on.Serious writers should also take note.?A study of the ethics codes of 188 public companies found that those using long sentences and complicated words were seen as less moral and trustworthy.

句法和選詞也很重要。使用簡短而有力的句子，使用大家都常用的通俗詞語是最佳選擇。無論是Facebook帖子還是在線旅行評(píng)論，甚至是簡短的非正式文案，只要遵循這些規(guī)則都能獲得更多點(diǎn)贊、分享等。嚴(yán)肅的寫作者也應(yīng)該注意這一點(diǎn)。一項(xiàng)對(duì)188家上市公司的道德準(zhǔn)則的研究發(fā)現(xiàn)，那些使用長句和復(fù)雜詞語的公司被認(rèn)為道德和可信度較低。

?

[Paragraph 9]

The authors’ other points are less about writing than about design and informational packaging.?Organisation matters: a redesigned?summons?issued by New York City police (for small offences on the street) reduced court no-shows by 13%.?Bullet points, headings and formatting for emphasis are good—when used judiciously.?But mixing up different forms of emphasis like highlighting, bolding and italics are the “equivalent of a peanut butter, ham and Gorgonzola sandwich on banana bread: a combination of ingredients that add up to an unpleasant, off-putting whole”.

作者的其他觀點(diǎn)與其說是關(guān)于寫作，不如說是關(guān)于設(shè)計(jì)和信息包裝。結(jié)構(gòu)設(shè)計(jì)很重要：紐約市警察重新設(shè)計(jì)的傳票（用于處理街頭輕度違規(guī)事件）將不出庭率降低了 13%。列123要點(diǎn)、標(biāo)題和強(qiáng)調(diào)的格式是好的——但是要適度使用。但是，如果把不同形式的強(qiáng)調(diào)（如高亮、加粗和斜體）混在一起，就“相當(dāng)于香蕉面包上加花生醬、火腿和高樂斯奶酪三明治：各種成分加在一起，就是一個(gè)令人不悅、令人反感的混合怪物”。

?

[Paragraph 10]

If everyone is a busy reader, everyone is a busy writer, too.?That may make it tempting to fire off as many messages as quickly as possible and hope for the best.?But from essays to text messages organising dinner plans, devoting time to the needs of readers has provable benefits.?If you are so busy that you write an undisciplined message that readers scan, ignore and delete, then you might as well have not written it at all.

如果每個(gè)人都是忙碌的讀者，那么每個(gè)人也是忙碌的寫作者。這可能會(huì)導(dǎo)致人們盡可能快地發(fā)送盡可能多的信息，并希望能得到最好的結(jié)果。但事實(shí)證明，無論是寫文章還是發(fā)送短信組織晚餐計(jì)劃，花時(shí)間關(guān)注讀者的需求是有好處的。如果你忙得不可開交，寫出的內(nèi)容毫無章法，讀者只會(huì)掃視一眼、忽略掉并刪除掉，那你還不如不寫。