---
title: "Sample Chapter from Word Up! How to Write Powerful Sentences and Paragraphs, by Marcia Riefer Johnston"
date: 2013-07-12
description: "$( document ).ready(function() { // Handler for .ready() called. $("
canonical_url: https://idratherbewriting.com/2013/07/12/word-up-how-to-write-powerful-sentences-and-paragraphs-marcia-johnston/
---
# Sample Chapter from Word Up! How to Write Powerful Sentences and Paragraphs, by Marcia Riefer Johnston
I gave a short quote in the "Advance Praise" section of the book, noting that *Word Up* is "Light, fun, and enjoyable to read. Marcia approaches grammar and style with a refreshing perspective. I wanted to make a checklist of principles to remember as I edit my own writing."

If you look at books on grammar, they're usually kind of dull and tedious. Not this one. Each chapter is funny, witty, and useful. Here's a sample chapter on eliminating "be" verbs (which Marcia allowed me to post).

## *To Be* or Not *To Be*

*A verb, Senator, we need a verb!*
— Doonesbury comic strip

[![word-up-marcia-riefer-johnston](https://s3.us-west-1.wasabisys.com/idbwmedia.com/images/word-up-marcia-johnston.jpg)](http://howtowriteeverything.com)Want one tip, a single bloat-busting strategy guaranteed to energize your sentences? Dump *to be*. Wherever you spy a weak, static, insubstantial *be*-verb—*be*, *being*, *been*, *am*, *are*, *is*, *was*, *were*, *have been*, *could be*, *will be*, *won't be*—think, *Opportunity*.

We can't call every *be*-verb weak. A *be*-verb works plenty hard when it acts as an auxiliary—especially when it works with the main verb to pack a wallop (*We are busting the habit of using weak be-verbs*) or to convey a colloquialism (*We be stylin'* or *I'll tell you what I'm up to if you tell me what you're on about, and then I must be off*1). A *be*-verb also pulls its weight when it points to existence itself (*We write, therefore we are*). Pow!

I'm not talking about strong *be*-verbs like those. I'm talking about “flabby *be*-verbs,”2 *be*-verbs lacking in muscle, *be*-verbs that powerful writers hunt down and expunge. Specifically, I'm talking about *be*-verbs that act as linking verbs (*The house is beige*), as expletive-supporting verbs (*It's a beige house*), or as passive-voice auxiliaries (*The house was painted beige*). Ho-hum. We'll get into fuller descriptions of these three types in a minute. First, so that you can see what I mean, let's look at some examples of sentences transformed by tossing the flaccid *be*-verbs.

*Before:* “Education's purpose is to replace an empty mind with an open one.” (Malcolm S. Forbes)

*After:* Education replaces an empty mind with an open one.

*Before:* “Nothing is more revealing than movement.” (Martha Graham)

*After:* Nothing reveals like movement.

*Before:* “A scheme of which every part promises delight can never be successful.” (Jane Austen)

*After: *A scheme of which every part promises delight can never succeed.

*Before:* “In all pointed sentences, some degree of accuracy must be sacrificed to conciseness.” (Samuel Johnson)

*After: *All pointed sentences must sacrifice some degree of accuracy to conciseness.

*Before:* Our product is better than your product. (any company)

*After:* Our product eats your product's lunch.

*Before:* “There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.” (attributed to a one-time US secretary of defense)

*After:* We don't know diddly—except to avoid *there are*.

The limitations of *be*‑verbs have intrigued people at least as far back as the 1930s, when Alfred Korzybski developed the discipline of “general semantics.” Among other things, Korzybski explored what he called the “structural limitations” of these verbs.3 His teachings inspired a student, D. David Bourland Jr., to develop E‑Prime (English-Prime, also denoted E´), a form of English that excludes *be*‑verbs. E-Prime rejects statements like *This painting is beautiful*, which presents judgment as fact, in favor of statements that “communicate the speaker's experience,” such as *I like this painting*.4

Okay, you get it. Weak *be*‑verbs: who needs them!

How do you spot a weak *be*‑verb? Let's get back to the three types: the linking verb, the expletive-supporting verb, and the passive-voice auxiliary.

A *be*‑verb that acts as a linking verb usually robs your sentence of power. A linking verb (usually but not always a *be*‑verb5) creates “an equivalency”6 between a subject and its complement7. It acts as a simple pass-through, an equal sign. Take the statement *Their faces are pale from all this grammar talk*. The *are* acts as an equal sign: *faces* = *pale*. This verb connects (links) the two words: end of story. With few exceptions, a linking-verb sentence benefits when you punch it up by replacing the weak verb with a speeding bullet of a verb: *Their faces blanch with all this grammar talk*. Your readers win.