Which comes first: grammar, mechanics, or composition? Part 1

Woody Allen once said: I'm not afraid to die; I just don't want to be there when it happens.

Why instead didn't he say: I don't want to attend the death of myself, but that does not mean I am afraid of it?

Is it true that only one way exists to express any idea?

• Or, is it: There is only one way to express any idea?
• Or: To express any idea, there is only one way?
• Or: To express any idea, only one way exists?
• Or: To express any idea, one way exists only?

What is going on here? Given that each of the various ways to express an idea is grammatically correct, how do I know which way is the best? Let's say I have a problem I want to state well. After all, Charles Kettering once said: A problem well stated is a problem half solved. But Mr. Kettering makes no mention of a problem's greater context. From education and experience, I would venture to add: A problem well defined is a problem well stated. So, toward the perfect expression of a problem or any idea, before I overly concern myself with the grammar and mechanics of my sentences, I need to understand the relationship between the parts and the whole: my sentences and their context.

Let's take a closer look at the word, define. What may be a surprise to some is that the secondary meaning of DEFINE reveals the secret of stating a problem well: to mark out the boundaries or limits of something. So, before a problem can be well stated, the stater must have a very clear idea of the problem's scope. (How to have a very clear idea of the scope of a problem is beyond the scope of this article, but discussion of it can be found at a future link, here.)

The scope of some problems requires a good deal more than one isolated sentence. One obvious example is this article's central problem: Given that each of the various ways to express an idea is grammatically correct, how do I know which way is the best?

While seeking the words to address this problem, I needed to “write around” it for awhile. I drafted some sentences to lead up to it, and I drafted some sentences to follow it. I was brainstorming. I wasn't yet even aware of when I had arrived at the place where my central problem would be stated. As I brainstormed, I didn't make too much of a fuss about grammar and mechanics. Rather, I merely kept in mind that the structure of any sentence depends both on the relative importance of the details in it, and on the ideas expressed in the sentences that come before and after it. So, I wasn't ready to tweak my grammar and mechanics until I had adequately marked out the boundaries or limits of my problem. In other words, for larger works of exposition, in the composing and revising process, attention to organization of all ideas should precede attention to grammar and mechanics.

But first, for the sake of simplicity, let's talk about sentences that appear in isolation. These are rare, but they are iconically important. I am talking about proverbial sentences, known as maxims, aphorisms, or wise sayings. The structure of these sentences depends on the relative importance and function of the details inside them. Let's define our terms here. The term, structure, may bring to mind the order of the words. It may also bring to mind the choice of the words. But, perhaps more importantly, structure can be behind the music of a sentence, its melody and rhythm. And it can be behind the desired impact on the mind of the perceiver.

Let's look again at Mr. Allen's words of wisdom: I'm not afraid to die; I just don't want to be there when it happens. And, let's compare it to the alternative phrasing: I don't want to attend the death of myself, but that does not mean I am afraid of it. Even short constructions such as the ones above must bow to the authority of literary and rhetorical devices. Devices (more found at external link) relevant to Mr. Allen's quote are: 1) cadence, 2) irony or paradox, 3) suspense, 4) syntax, 5) tone, and 6) tragicomedy.

1. cadence: Mr. Allen's version makes use of two commonly heard expressions: afraid to die, and don't want to be there. Effectively, the timing for his delivery therefore can be quick and the impact percussive. The alternative version makes use of an awkwardly unusual phrase: attend the death of myself. This awkwardness causes the loss of the momentum that is needed for the audience to have the aha experience of the irony in the punchline.
2. irony or paradox: Mr. Allen sequences his details so that first his audience is set up to be knocked over by his punchline. His audience first visualizes his sudden death. Perhaps they see him splat onto a sidewalk from great heights, or in his deathbed exhaling his last breath. While the dying image is fresh in mind, Mr. Allen delivers the punchline image of the improbable, his becoming disembodied just in time to miss his own death. Perhaps the audience visualizes Mr. Allen's spirit springing from his body just in time. Simultaneously enough, his audience also has an aha experience of paradox. Mr. Allen forces the mind of his audience to reconcile the opposites of dying and not dying. Paradox can be funny that way.
3. suspense: By first mentioning the grave issue of death, Mr. Allen's version effectively triggers his audience to expect "the other shoe to drop" so to speak. The alternative version confuses the audience with the idea of not wanting to attend one's own funeral. This alternative could go in too many different directions. Maybe he doesn't want to hear the eulogy, or see certain people, or even hear the music chosen. The audience isn't given enough focus to have any expectations. They may be idly curious, but they are not effectively put in suspense.
4. syntax: Mr. Allen would have been grammatically correct in saying: Death doesn't scare me. But, his choice to end the first clause with TO DIE puts proper emphasis on his dying and not his being afraid. The punchline's success depends on the proper emphasis to set it up. The punchline works by suddenly swapping emphasis. At first, death seems to be the key detail. Then, just as the idea of fear begins to fade in the mind of the audience, suddenly it reveals itself to be the most important detail of all. Mr. Allen is so afraid that he can't even bear to watch.
5. tone: No humor is inherent in the alternative version. It states a personal truth in a matter of fact manner. No irony is set up. No rugs are being pulled out from under the audience. In contrast, Mr. Allen's version results in the aim to make his audience laugh. Mr. Allen is a master of irony, correspondingly even in his tone. So many other ways exist to express a fear of death. Mr. Allen chooses understatement. He speaks of his own death as if it were no more serious than his wife being served their divorce papers. What we fear most we speak of in the vaguest terms or not at all. The more understated Mr. Allen can be about his own death, we know the more afraid of it he really is.
6. tragicomedy: No tragedy or comedy is the driving force behind the alternative version. Some would say that its effect is anti-climactic, first the person dies and then the person worries about it. In contrast, Mr. Allen's version functions according to the principles of tragicomedy: an unexpected happy ending to what might have been a terrible catastrophe. One possible expectation resulting from being informed that someone is not afraid to die is that someone might have just been handed a death sentence, a fatal prognosis. Rather, how delightful to fall victim to Mr. Allen's joke.

So, have I killed the frog yet? For as E. B. White once said: Explaining a joke is like dissecting a frog. You understand it better but the frog dies in the process.

Now that I have demonstrated how the structure of sentences that appear in isolation depends on the relative importance and function of the details inside them, I will move on to sentences that appear in the context of greater works, in Part 2 of this article.

As a mental note to both my readers and myself, I will make my transition from single sentence to greater unit of sentences by remarking on the non-verbalized greater context of Mr. Allen's "ironicisms".