Five Principles of

Readability
Dr. David Blakesley
Professor of English, Purdue
Principle One

English is an S-V-O language,

so get with it!

Sentences that have a

subject – verb - object
order are more readable than
those that don’t.
Principle One Example

S
The American Concrete Institute
V O
recommends the technique.
Principle One Non-Example

O V
The technique is being recommended
S
by the ACI.
Principle Two

Get close to the action!

When possible, put the agent

(subject) and action (verb) close
together in the sentence.
Principle Two Example

Modified by a chemical process, the

agent action
S V O
ash strengthens the mixture.
Principle Two Non-Example

agent
S
The ash, modified by a chemical
action
O
V
process, strengthens the asphalt.
Principle Three

Get those modifiers up

close and personal!

Keep modifiers and the words they

modify close together in the sentence.
Principle Three Example

(modifying phrase)

Prone to non-linear fissures and

cracks, the asphalt is difficult to cut.
proximity (word modified)
Principle Three Non-Example

(modifying phrase)

Prone to non-linear fissures and

cracks, it was difficult to cut the
asphalt.
intervening text

(word modified)
Principle Four

People matter!

Whenever possible, put people in

the subject position in the
sentence.
Principle Four Example

agent = people
S V
Three teams of engineers tested the
slag.
O
Principle Four Non-Example

receiving
object action
The slag was tested with multiple
measures under laboratory
conditions.
Note that there is no
agent/subject in this
sentence!
You may have noticed…

…that many readability problems

stem from one type of sentence
construction…
…the passive voice

The passive voice reverses the agent

and the object.

Active
John laid the pavement.
s v o

Passive
The pavement was laid by John.
s v o
Principle Five

In with the old, out with the

new!

Start sentences with old

information, end them with new (or
important) information.
Which is easier to read?
Business school professors perennially debate over
whether maintaining an old employee is more costly
than hiring a new one. The issue has strong proponents on
each side. Human resource experts maintain that keeping
an old employee requires fewer man hours for training and
orientation. However, management gurus insist
that having the right person in the right position increases
the overall productivity of a team or workgroup. Between
these two groups are the economists who study new hiring
practices in a company-specific context.
Which is easier to read?
Business school professors perennially debate over
whether maintaining an old employee is more costly
than hiring a new one. Strong proponents are on each side
of the issue. An old employee requires fewer man hours
for training and orientation, human resource experts
maintain. However, having the right person in the
right position increases the overall productivity of a team or
workgroup, according to some management gurus.
Between these two groups are the economists who study
new hiring practices in a company-specific context.
Principle Five Example
Business school professors perennially debate over
whether maintaining an old employee is more costly
than hiring a new one. The issue has strong proponents on
each side. Human resource experts maintain that keeping
an old employee requires fewer man hours for training and
orientation. However, management gurus insist
that having the right person in the right position increases
the overall productivity of a team or workgroup. Between
these two arguments are the economists who study new
hiring practices in a company-specific context.

new information = red old information = blue

Principle Five Non-Example
Business school professors perennially debate over
whether maintaining an old employee is more costly
than hiring a new one. Strong proponents are on each side
of the issue. An old employee requires fewer man hours
for training and orientation, human resource experts
maintain. However, having the right person in the
right position increases the overall productivity of a team or
workgroup, according to some management gurus.
Between these two groups are the economists who study
new hiring practices in a company-specific context.

new information = red old information = blue

 The Five Principles Again …

1. English is an S-V-O language, so get

with it!
2. Get close to the action!
3. Get those modifiers up close and
personal!
4. People matter!
5. In with the old, out with the new!
Adapted by Joshua Prenosil and David Blakesley from
The Thomson Handbook by David Blakesley and
Jeffrey L. Hoogeveen
 For More Information

• Contact the Purdue Writing Lab:

– Drop In: Heavilon 226
– Call: 765-494-3723
– Email: owl@owl.english.purdue.edu
– On the web: http://owl.english.purdue.edu