Creative Writing and Number

¶ … Legal Writing Conventions

Dear Jane,

I am no longer willing to continue in a relationship with you. I have tried very hard over the past several months to be patient with you. However, I simply cannot tolerate your behavior any longer. In fact, I am convinced there is something very wrong with you. It is simply unacceptable for you to hang up the phone on me, repeatedly, in the middle of our conversations. I can't think of anything more rude in a long distance relationship when two people spend so much time on the phone. I don't understand how you can profess to care for me and then behave in such a pathological manner. Perhaps that pathology is why you run out of restaurants when we're together. You don't seem to realize that crawling on the floor to get out of a booth is unacceptable behavior, and indicative of some deep rooted problem on your end. The same sentiment applies to the multiple times you have gotten in my face waving your hands like you're going to strike me. For me to stay with you I would have to devalue myself as much as you do, which is why I'm much better off without you.

2. In the aforementioned scenario, B is liable for a number of criminal actions. In fact, B is solely liable for all criminality discussed within this particular case study. He is liable for theft of A's credit card number -- which is not the same as being held liable for stealing the card. What he stole was the number which he used for legal purposes (to access pornography). Additionally, B is also liable for damaging A's property by cracking A's safe. B is responsible for whatever damage was done to the safe to get the credit card information inside. Thus, B is primarily liable for inflicting property damage and stealing A's credit card number.

3. The most distinguishable difference between the two types of writing evinced in this document is that the letter is much more colloquial and informal than the analysis of the liability in the second response. In terms of diction, the latter utilizes more polysyllabic words such as additionally and criminality. The diction in the letter is characterized by words people use when they speak, as opposed to write. Examples of these words include multiple uses of the word very, which is not very descriptive or academic. This difference is also characterized by the style of each response. The letter utilizes informal contractions, whereas the analysis invokes more sophisticated sentence structuring. The usage of the 'm-dash"' is a good example of this fact. On the whole, the second response is much more analytical than the first. The first relies on unprofessional emotional appeals to get its point across. The second is based in logic and a refined expression of language bereft of the first response. Abstract words and phrases are less defined than concrete words and phrases, which are explicit and readily identifiable for their association with designated meaning. The more effectual words and phrases are the concrete ones. They conjure much less ambiguity than abstract phrases do. Conversely, they imbue writing with a lucidity which is richly appreciated, and largely the point of all writing. Writing seeks to convey a point. Concrete words and phrases hone in on that point and expressly denote it. Abstract words and phrases simply skirt around the point and are useful in creative writing, such as poetry.