Friday, November 6, 2026

Transform your writing by mastering use of verbs


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There is a useful 2026 book by Sarah L. Kaufman titled Verb Your Enthusiasm: How to master the art of the verb and transform your writing. Google Books has a preview through page 14. On pages 6 and 7 she explains:

 

“The best verbs define intention and action, even subtle thinking action, with elegant simplicity. Let’s take a quick look at various kinds of verbs now, because understanding the difference among verbs will help you choose what’s best for what you mean to say. Making deliberate verb choices can sharpen your work. 

 

Think of three piles. The first contains ‘stative verbs,’ which are about a state of being rather than a dynamic action. They include to be and many other verbs – appear, believe, know, love, prefer, understand, and more – that describe a static situation such as existence, emotion, thought, or a condition.

 

The other piles comprise two different kinds of action verbs, which we’ll call ‘basic verbs’ and ‘verbs of manner.’ A basic verb is neutral, ordinary: The dog walks. Verbs of manner are the drama queens, descriptive and specific: The dog wiggles / waddles/ wanders. These verbs tell us the way in which an action happens, its speed, force, and feeling – its manner.

 

Verb-wise, if you write in English, guess what? It’s your birthday every day – with shopping sprees at FAO Schwarz – because English overflows with verbs of manner. It’s a special feature of the language. A secret superpower, in fact. Linguist Dan I. Slobin at the University of California, Berkeley, has studied the verbs of manner around the world, and he notes that, for example, French and Spanish each have a single verb for a jumping motion (bondir in French, saltar in Spanish). But English? It boasts at least half a dozen: jump as well as hop, leap, spring, bound, and bounce. You can probably think of more.

 

Slobin estimates that French, Spanish, Turkish, and Hebrew have just a few dozrn verbs of manner. English, however, has several hundred. (So do German, Dutch, Russian, and Hungarian.) Every language has unique features and advantages, and certainly English has its hitches (all those irregular verbs!). But with a great many verbs of manner at their fingertips, writers can express a specific action and energy with a single ford. For example, ‘The road zigzags up the mountain.’ Lively, efficient. You’d have to use a few more words in other languages: in Spanish, for instance: La carretera sube en zigz-zag por la montaña. (‘The road climbs in zigzags up the mountain.’)

 

Take advantage of this deep verb vocabulary to find the exact verb that is accurate and truthful for your purposes…”

 

And on page 89 she says to avoid ‘fancy’ verbs:

 

“STYLE TIP: Write to Shed Light in a Fresh, Direct Way

 

Do that by avoiding fancy verbs, unless you’re spoofing some pompous character or you plan a witty, ironic twist. Fancy verbs are easy to spot: they often stretch to several syllables. Replace them with clear, simple verbs. Examples of fancy verbs:

 

Ameliorate. Improve it with improve.

 

Conceptualize. This is a word turducken – a verb (conceive) stuffed in a noun (concept) further wedged into a bloated, boring verb. I railed against conceptualization in Chapter 2. Where will it all end – conceptualizationize? Better: imagine, picture, or see.

 

Elucidate. Explain says it all in half the syllables.

 

Emblazon. Blazon, without the em-, is wonderful on its own.

 

Entitle. As with blazon, adding an extra syllable – en – is unnecessary. Title suffices for the verb meaning to provide a title for, such as a book or movie. Use entitle to mean to give a legal right or claim to receive or do something.  

 

Importune. Beg or implore – yes. Importune if you find yourself dining with Lord Byron and he’s pushing his preference for vinegar and water upon you.

 

Opine. No one does this. People say, or, if they must, they state, argue, insist…

 

Utilize. Three syllables and all their attendant oxygen and time, instead of the simple, direct use – why on earth?”

 

But some women get a free pass.If your name is Amelia, you can use ameliorate. If your name is Cate (or Kate) you can use communicate. If your name is Lucie you can use elucidate. And if your name is Sue you can certainly use litigate.

 

The word cloud used  a selection of verbs ending in -ate from here at wordmom.

 

 

Thursday, November 5, 2026

Two articles about how to be a memorable panelist at a conference


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There is an article by Joel Schwartzberg in the November 2026 issue of the Toastmaster magazine on pages 25 to 27 titled How to Be a Memorable Conference Panelist. His thirteen paragraph headings are:

 

Prepare Points, Not Just Answers

Do Your Homework

Own Your Introduction

Lead With Your Answer

Tell Strategic Stories

Identify Pain Points

Interact Purposefully

Handle Confrontation Constructively

Always Be Polite

Stay Engaged the Whole Time

Leave Your Sales Hat at Home

Know When to Stop Talking

Be Remembered

 

And there is another, more detailed, six-page pdf article (with 22 references) by Maya S. Iyer et al. at Medical Education Online on February 16, 2024 titled “How to article:” guidelines for serving on an expert panel. Its abstract says:

 

“Academics in medicine are frequently asked to serve on panels to discuss their clinical, research, education, administrative or personal expertise. While panel discussions are often the highlight of a conference or event, in the medical literature, there is very little published on how an individual can effectively prepare and present as an expert panelist.

 

This paper offers guidelines that will enable academics to prepare, deliver, and engage in active dialogue during a panel discussion. Specific tactics include how to accept invitations to serve on a panel, conducting pre-panel conference meetings and background research, preparing concise opening statements and new insights, connecting with the audience, answering questions in a collaborative spirit, and debriefing after the panel.

 

These guidelines will be valuable to any individual invited to serve on a panel discussion and will promote future panelists in engaging in constructive and fulfilling dialogue, with the ultimate goal of leaving the audience with a greater understanding of the topic of discourse.”

 

The image of a panelist was cropped from one at Wikimedia Commons.

 

 

Tuesday, November 3, 2026

An interesting but incomplete 2026 book by Alex Davies titled Kobuk the Destroyer and other tales from the wild, unseen world of test engineering


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

There is an interesting but incomplete 2026 book by Alex Davies titled Kobuk the Destroyer and other tales from the wild, unseen world of test engineering. (Kobuk is a problem grizzly bear at the Grizzly & Wolf Discovery Center, who is an expert at defeating products that should be bear-resistant). Google Books has a preview from this book. Alex begins describing it on page 5:

 

“Implementing an idea hinges on, among other things, proving that whatever ends up in the consumer’s hands will actually work, reliably and safely. That the thing will hold its form and perform its function for years or decades. That when it breaks, it won’t send razor-edged shards flying. That it will blunt the consequences of the inevitable errors of the humans that use it, interact well with its environment, and work in a way that its users expect and desire. Doing all that requires the ability to foresee and forestall the novel modes of failure that arrive with every innovation. That work falls most often not to the inventor, but to the test engineer.

 

The test engineer gets little attention in a world that lionizes inventors, and that’s a shame – not just because their work involves chicken cannons, flamethrowers, and mischievous grizzly bears, and not just because they rely on the same ingenuity, foresight, and creativity that fits the inventor stereotype. It’s a shame because they are the ultimate fixers, the people who turn inventions into products by earning and rewarding the public’s trust.

 

This book is about their work as it plays out in myriad times and places, with manifold products and test regimes and industries. It’s about the people and the machines and the laboratories and the standards and the cultural mores, the measurement and mimicry of reality, the passing of judgment, and the occasional shrug of the shoulders in the face of unending complexity. It’s about approximating the inevitable and the near impossible: how pilots will mix up instrument controls and how turbulence might snap plane wings. It’s about avoiding not just the obvious disasters (the levee that crumbles) but the equally catastrophic and stupefying ones (the tsunami that overtops the dam). It’s about creating systems for doing that work – systems that, like the people who make them, are fallible but can deliver success despite their imperfections.

 

It's about failure and failure and failure and fleeting interregnums of success. It’s about how knowledge is formed, how rules are written and enforced, how good things are made and bad things made good. It’s about accepting – whether due to pain, disaster, or a honey-smeared bear snout – that our best efforts are not always good enough. It’s about how we adapt to that fact by balancing risk against reward, utility against safety, progress against hesitancy.

 

It's about how we construct our world, because testing forms the backstory and backbone of every thing in our lives.” 

 

And on page 15 he continues:

 

“THE BEST PATH TO SUCH AN ENLIGHTENMENT IS NOT TO STUDY one product after another – cars, planes, toys, and so on – but to break this work down by the kinds of failure that test engineers regularly confront and plan for. We’ll look at six different concepts, each of which encapsulates ways in which a product can boom or bust.

 

The first is limits, in which testing determines strength and durability – like whether a bridge can withstand being hit by a container ship, or whether your space bar will give out before your laptop does. The second is fool-proofing, which is about preventing user error, from kids getting into medicine bottles to lawn mowers lopping off toes. When failure does strike – when cars crash and fires start – disintegration testing ensures that the product in question minimizes the damage. Scale comes into play when the focus shifts from one product to many, where ground beef is scanned for disease and vaccines checked for impurities. Our penultimate chapter is about dynamics, which considers how a product will impact the world around it, and vice versa. This is where Formula I cars capture the wind and engineers redirect the Mississippi River to buoy the sinking Louisiana coastline. Finally, we’ll close with intention. This trickiest of all concepts asks not whether a product functions as it’s designed to, but whether it produces the desired result. As new technologies – artificial intelligence chief among them- push everyone into a new frontier, we’ll see how our pioneering test engineers keep up by combining old knowledge with new techniques.”

 

Chapter titles and their starting pages are:

 

Introduction – Bear Contact Time 1

Chapter 1 – Limits 17

Chapter 2 – Fool-Proofing 49

Chapter 3 – Disintegration 79

Chapter 4 – Scale 117

Chapter 5 – Dynamics 145

Chapter 6 – Intention 175

Conclusion – The Total Test Environment 197

 

What is missing from this book? Alex mentions some standards organizations – Underwriters Laboratory (UL), the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), the U. S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), and very briefly the Society of Automotive Engineers (now SAE International).

 

But he does not mention either what was the American Society for Testing and Materials (now ASTM International) or the International Standards Organization (ISO). Standards produced by these organizations define a wide variety of products. And typically, a product standard cross-references a constellation of other standards.

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

If you look for the strongest standard steel bolts or cap screws at stores like Home Depot or Lowes, you will find them in a drawer labeled Grade 8. As shown above, typically they will have a bronze color from zinc plating, and the head will have six lines in a hexagonal pattern to identify them, along with a manufacturer mark (in this case SJ). The standard for them is SAE J429: Mechanical and Material Requirements for Externally Threaded Fasteners (most recently dated 2014-05-06). You can read a pdf file of the 1999 version here. That standard defines a very specific recipe for making Grade 8 fasteners – their composition, processes and the resultant properties. The description summary says:

 

“This SAE Standard covers the mechanical and material requirements for inch-series steel bolts, screws, studs, screws for sems, and U-bolts in sizes to 1-1/2 in. inclusive.

 

The term ‘stud’ as referred to herein applies to a cylindrical rod of moderate length threaded on either one or both ends or throughout its entire length. It does not apply to headed, collared, or similar products which are more closely characterized by requirements shown herein for bolts.

 

The mechanical properties included in Table 1 were compiled at an ambient temperature of approximately 20 °C (68 °F). These properties are valid within a temperature range which depends upon the material grade used and thermal and mechanical processing. Other properties such as fatigue behavior, corrosion resistance, impact properties, etc., are beyond the scope of this document and responsibility for ensuring the acceptability of the product for applications where conditions warrant consideration of these other properties shall be borne by the end user.”

 

J429 cross references the following six other SAE standards:

 

SAE J403: Chemical Compositions of SAE Carbon Steels.

SAE J404: Chemical Composition of SAE Alloy Steels.

SAE J409: Product Analysis – Permissible Variations from Specified Chemical Analysis of a Heat or Cast of Steel.

SAE J123: Surface Discontinuities on Bolts, Screws, and Studs.

SAE J417: Hardness Tests and Hardness Number Conversions.

SAE J121: Decarburization in Hardened and Tempered Unified Threaded Fasteners.

 

J429 defines a very specific recipe for making Grade 8 bolts. The chemical composition should allow heat treatment by quenching to produce a minimum of ninety percent martensite (monitored via the as-quenched hardness). Then the fasteners are tempered at a minimum of 800 oF. Threads are formed by rolling.

 

Grade 8 has a minimum yield strength of 130,000 psi, and a minimum tensile strength of 150,000 psi. Elongation is a minimum of 12%, and reduction in area is a minimum of 35%. And the Rockwell hardness range is 33 HRC to 39 HRC. (39 HRC converts to a maximum tensile strength of 177,000 psi).

 

The next lower bolt grade (also quenched and tempered) is Grade 5, which is denoted by a head with three lines in a triangular pattern. Grade 5 has a minimum yield strength of 92,000 psi, and a minimum tensile strength of 120,000 psi. Elongation is a minimum of 14%, and reduction in area is a minimum of 35%. Rockwell hardness range is 25 HRC to 34 HRC. (34 HRC converts to a maximum tensile strength of 152,000 psi).

 

Back on November 4, 2017 I blogged about Ten years of experience, or one year’s experience ten times? In that post I discussed SAE Standard J1401 – Road Vehicle – Hydraulic Brake Hose Assembles for Use with Nonpetroleum-Base Hydraulic Fluids. It included incorporating marker yarns (to identify the hose manufacturer) along with the reinforcing braid. And using marker yarns was spread to other types of hoses.  

 

The grizzly bear image came from Wikimedia Commons.

 

 

Monday, November 2, 2026

In the twelfth Chapman Survey of American Fears for 2026 public speaking was feared by just 28.9% of adults and ranked #51 out of 79 fears



On October 20, 2026 there is a press release by by Robert Hitchcock at Chapman News titled AI Enters Americans’ Top 10 Fears in Chapman’s 2026 Survey. Artificial Intelligence (AI) Harming the Political Process was feared by 51.9% and ranked at #3, while Artificial Intelligence (AI) Hurting the economy was feared by 49.7% and ranked at #7. My bar chart with the 25 Most Common Fears is shown above. It doesn’t include public speaking.  

 

The twelfth survey in this series was conducted by Chapman’s Wilkinson College of Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences. NORC at the University of Chicago, a nonpartisan research organization, surveyed a random national sample with 1,221 adults online from April 7 to April 21, 2026, using its probability-based AmeriSpeak panel. They asked about 79 different fears. The margin of error is plus or minus 3.8 percentage points. Their 23-page pdf Project Methods and Transparency Report is here. But it is much less transparent than the Methodology Reports from previous years, and does not list all of the detailed percentages from the questions.

 


 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There is a ten-page pdf article describing the key findings from the survey. It includes a list of the Top 10 Fears Of 2026. As usual, the top fear was Corrupt Government Officials – 61.1%. And a three-page pdf article has The Complete List of Fears 2026 ranked by the percentages afraid or very afraid. This article has typographical errors #34 and #35 are listed twice, and #77 is omitted. My bar charts for the Next 25 Fears and the Last 29 Fears are shown above. Note that Public Speaking was feared by just 28.9% and only ranked at #51.  

 

Another three-page pdf article has The Complete List of Fears 2026 (Alphabetical Order). And yet another six-page pdf article is titled The Chapman University Survey of American Fears Wave 11 (2025) and Wave 12 (2026) Compared.

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In the 2026 survey there were eight questions about fears involving Artificial Intelligence, one of which was Artificial Intelligence (AI) Replacing People in the Workplace (feared by 42% and ranked at #23). That question also was asked in 2024 where it was feared by 46.7%, and in 2025 where it was feared by 49.1%. And, way back in the 2015 survey they asked about People Trusting Artificial Intelligence to Do Work – 24.9% and Artificial Intelligence – 21.4%. All those fears are shown above in a bar chart.

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three different questions have been asked about Fear of Replacing People in the Chapman surveys. As shown above in a bar chart, in 2015 it was by Robots, on 2016 to 2023 it was by Computers, and in 2024 through 2026 it was by Artificial Intelligence (AI).   

 

 

Sunday, November 1, 2026

A very useful article describing ten simple rules for preparing and delivering effective funding pitches in competitive grant applications


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There is a very useful article by Andy Göbel and Tilman D. Rachner at PLoS Computational Biology on October 7, 2026 which is titled Ten simple rules for preparing and delivering effective funding pitches in competitive grant applications.

 

Those rules are to:

 

 1]  Analyze the review panel

 2]  Define your key messages

 3]  Describe the scientific problem & present the solution

 4]  Collect convincing arguments

 5]  Make use of a compelling structure

 6]  Craft your visual presentation

 7]  Get ready for a productive discussion

 8]  Practice, rehearse, and get feedback

 9]  Prepare yourself

10] Deliver an effective pitch

 

That article contains the following seven figures:

 

Figure 1. Features and goals of scientific funding pitches.

Figure 2. Defining the scientific problem.

Figure 3. The FINER Criteria [Feasible, Interesting, Novel, Ethical, Relevant]

Figure 4. The Speech Structure Building.

Figure 5. Options on how to open and close your funding pitch.

Figure 6. How to craft effective presentation slides.

Figure 7. Ten simple rules for effective funding pitches.

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unfortunately, when you click on a figure to “Open in a new tab,” you get directed through a browser check like “Select all squares with bicycles.” So, I have shown Figure 7 above. It succinctly summarizes the entire article. Click on it to see a larger version.

 

On September 7, 2025 I blogged about Ten simple rules for improving communication among scientists.

    

An image of Reggie Jackson pitching came from Wikimedia Commons.

 

 

Saturday, October 31, 2026

On October 29, 2026 there were 83,780 page views at this blog.


 

 

 

 

 

The chart shown above has daily page views at this blog for the past three months. On October 29, 2026 there was a new all-time record of 83,780 page views.

 

Friday, October 30, 2026

Two excellent articles about speechwriting by Colin Raunig


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There are two excellent articles about writing speeches for other people by Colin Raunig at his Substack. Both are organized into ten chapters. One on October 4, 2026 is just titled The Speechwriter, and the other on October 17, 2026 is titled The Craft of Speechwriting. Chapter titles and links are as follows:

 

The Speechwriter

Chapter 1: Humility

Chapter 2: Curiosity/Asking Good Questions  

Chapter 3: Listening

Chapter 4: Being a Good Teammate

Chapter 5: Adaptability

Chapter 6: Working with Senior Leaders

Chapter 7: Learning Quickly

Chapter 8: Empathy

Chapter 9: Judgement

Chapter 10: Service

 

The Craft of Speechwriting

Chapter 1: Purpose Before Prose

Chapter 2: Know the Audience

Chapter 3: Getting Smart Fast

Chapter 4: What Makes a Good Question

Chapter 5: Finding the Argument

Chapter 6: Building the Structure

Chapter 7: The First and Last Words

Chapter 8: Writing for the Ear

Chapter 9: Writing in Someone Else’s Voice

Chapter 10: The Speech Isn’t Finished When You Hit Send

 

Colin has a web site and a LinkedIn page. He graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy with a BS in Engineering. Then he earned his wings and served on an E-6B Mercury (a nuclear command-and-control aircraft) as a Naval Fight Officer. Also, he learned Japanese and spent two years at the Japanese Naval Academy as a liaison and teacher.  And he has an MFA in Literature-Creative Writing earned at Colorado State University.

 

The woman typing was cropped from this image at the Library of Congress.