Coherence, in language, is basically a state when things all fit together to make sense. Being coherent takes a lot of things working in the right way when speaking. A speaker must know the right language to use for his audience and he must also know the right words to use in that language. He must also speak clearly and concisely, in an appropriate manner to suit his audience. The written language has a few benefits for coherence's sake: namely, the ability to really think about what words one will use; less potential for "stage fright" causing nervousness; and the use of technology (such as spell checkers and online reference libraries.)
That said, there are some amazingly incoherent writers out there. I know I'm a stickler for details such as spelling and grammar. I admit that sometimes I'm too harsh when it comes to judging these things. People say, "As long as you know what I'm trying to say, does it matter if everything's spelled correctly?" To a certain extent, I can agree with that. The most important thing when writing something is getting your meaning across -- if a typo or grammatical error pops up here or there, what's the big deal?
A writer must be careful, however, that he does not lose credibility through repeated mistakes. A reader will make judgments on the trustworthiness of an article and its author based on the evidence they have available. With the absence of a physical presence, the writer's words are the main things a reader can use. If the writer's words are misspelled or misused, a reader might dismiss the writer's arguments without even paying attention to what they are. Take for example these two (hypothetical) statements:
"teh simpsons r teh best shoe on tv simpsons r rulez!"
"'The Simpsons' is a TV show that has absolutely no merit whatsoever and should be removed from the airwaves."
Now, because of the childish and poorly written nature of the first statement, one might be inclined to disassociate oneself from the writer to the point of disagreeing with the content. Even though the writer's point is made and is (mostly) coherent, the obvious lack of attention paid to the form of the message is sure to turn many a reader off.
Real problems (beyond the reaction of your readers) arise when statements become so confusing that a reader can't tease even the slightest bit of meaning out of the content. It is possible to write in such a convoluted and confusing manner that a reader is just left shaking his head, wondering what the writer had in mind. It is sometimes amazing that an intelligent and capable person who speaks the same language as his readers could create something that is so incoherent that no message is relayed at all. Much of this could be avoided if the writer would just take a minute to reread what he's written and ask himself, "Does this make sense? Is this how I would have spoken this argument?" Reading the work out loud can also help. Best of all, having someone else read the content will go a long way towards ensuring that everything that the writer intends will come through clearly and without any confusion.
- "The shift from incoherence to coherence can bring dramatic effects." -- William Tiller
- “These conflicting messages reflect a lack of clarity and coherence." -- Michael Shifter
1 comment:
Well said. I've seen too many constructive, useful points undermined by incoherent presentations.
Post a Comment