It gives you an idea of how sophisticated your reading audience has to be to understand you, based on things like complexity of sentence structure, number of words per sentence, number of syllables per word, things like that. The higher the number, the more sophisticated/educated the audience member has to be. The high numbers can be good (and usually produce more ego strokes with geeks), but can also be a bad thing, as the lower your number is, the more easily you will be understood by a wider audience.
From what I understand this has nothing to do with structural complexity or any other "things like that", just a simple words per sentence/syllables per word ratio, as described below. You could enter nonsense entries made up of nothing but long "sentences" of strung-together thesuarus fodder and get a high grade.
Agreed; but I was referring to the actual test, not to the lj quiz related to it. =) Sorry about that, chief.
I crave your pardon for the use of "things like that", but I have massively injured my knee this evening and am less than lucid. Where is my codeine...
Right. I think you misjudged my intent. "Things like that" wasn't in quotes to attempt to needle at it/you, I just figured if I'm going to use the same words as you I may as well quote it. (Honestly, I'd have to delete half my entries if I was going to get snarky about .. erm.. things like that.)
The output of the Flesch Reading Ease formula is a number from 0 to 100, with a higher score indicating easier reading. The average document has a Flesch Reading Ease score between 6-70. The formula reads as follows:
206.835 – (1.015 x ASL) – (84.6 x ASW)
where:
ASL = average sentence length (the number of words divided by the number of sentences)
ASW = average number of syllables per word (the number of syllables divided by the number of words)
Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level
The more common Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level formula converts the Reading Ease Score to a U.S. grade-school level.
(.39 x ASL) + (11.8 x ASW) – 15.59
where:
ASL = average sentence length (the number of words divided by the number of sentences)
ASW = average number of syllables per word (the number of syllables divided by the number of words
Of course, there is the matter of text comprehension. I mean "wheelbarrow" has three syllables, but most people know what one is. Yet in the past I've been pulled up by people for using words like "polemic".
I've had the same problem myself. I tend to use a more British vocabulary, I guess, and it leads to confusion with some people. Oh well. CANADIAN AND PROUD TO STILL BE PART OF THE COMMONWEALTH/DEARTH! (sings rule brittania, sinks under waves)
I've always liked the term "commonwealth". It sums up what I think should be done with those economic goods "provided by Providence" (you know, land, air, minerals etc) rather than individual labour.
When Australia was voting to become a Republic the term commonwealth was going to remain (The Commonwealth Republic of Australia).
If you want to really cheeky you can also refer to your US friends as being citizens of the "Commonwealth of New England" as it was called for a while in the 17th century ;-)
Over 18 words per sentence and 1.49 syllables per word. You need to be in grade 9!
I recall my English teacher at school telling me the local broadsheet was written for 13 year old (8th grade?) readers and the tabloid was for 9 year olds. So at least my journal readers can also read a broadsheet newspaper (I doubt that I'd go as far as calling it a 'quality' paper!)
The problem with broadsheets (in particular the Fairfax papers) these days is that the concentrate on 'lifestyle' issues. International and local affairs is evidently getting too 'highbrow' for them.
Strangely enough the newspaper of "serious capitalism", the Australian Financial Review, is probably the best thing available in the Oz market.
For anything else, I prefer Le Monde Diplomatique, The International Herald Tribune and the usenet group, misc.activism.progressive.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2003-10-28 11:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-10-29 12:11 am (UTC)(Not to dispute what the purpose is, just how it arrives at the result.)
Date: 2003-10-29 09:55 am (UTC)Re: (Not to dispute what the purpose is, just how it arrives at the result.)
Date: 2003-10-29 10:49 am (UTC)I crave your pardon for the use of "things like that", but I have massively injured my knee this evening and am less than lucid. Where is my codeine...
Re: (Not to dispute what the purpose is, just how it arrives at the result.)
Date: 2003-10-29 02:36 pm (UTC)"I crave your pardon"
Right. I think you misjudged my intent. "Things like that" wasn't in quotes to attempt to needle at it/you, I just figured if I'm going to use the same words as you I may as well quote it. (Honestly, I'd have to delete half my entries if I was going to get snarky about .. erm.. things like that.)
I tried this...
Date: 2003-10-29 12:07 am (UTC)Re: I tried this...
Date: 2003-10-29 12:54 am (UTC)Hmmmm.. That is a problem.
Ahh, just found the right link...
Flesch reading Ease
The output of the Flesch Reading Ease formula is a number from 0 to 100, with a higher score indicating easier reading. The average document has a Flesch Reading Ease score between 6-70. The formula reads as follows:
206.835 – (1.015 x ASL) – (84.6 x ASW)
where:
ASL = average sentence length (the number of words divided by the number of sentences)
ASW = average number of syllables per word (the number of syllables divided by the number of words)
Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level
The more common Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level formula converts the Reading Ease Score to a U.S. grade-school level.
(.39 x ASL) + (11.8 x ASW) – 15.59
where:
ASL = average sentence length (the number of words divided by the number of sentences)
ASW = average number of syllables per word (the number of syllables divided by the number of words
Of course, there is the matter of text comprehension. I mean "wheelbarrow" has three syllables, but most people know what one is. Yet in the past I've been pulled up by people for using words like "polemic".
Re: I tried this...
Date: 2003-10-29 01:00 am (UTC)Re: I tried this...
Date: 2003-10-29 01:21 am (UTC)I've always liked the term "commonwealth". It sums up what I think should be done with those economic goods "provided by Providence" (you know, land, air, minerals etc) rather than individual labour.
When Australia was voting to become a Republic the term commonwealth was going to remain (The Commonwealth Republic of Australia).
If you want to really cheeky you can also refer to your US friends as being citizens of the "Commonwealth of New England" as it was called for a while in the 17th century ;-)
"I'm losing my perspicacity!"
Date: 2003-10-29 10:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-10-29 12:43 pm (UTC)I recall my English teacher at school telling me the local broadsheet was written for 13 year old (8th grade?) readers and the tabloid was for 9 year olds. So at least my journal readers can also read a broadsheet newspaper (I doubt that I'd go as far as calling it a 'quality' paper!)
no subject
Date: 2003-10-30 11:38 pm (UTC)The problem with broadsheets (in particular the Fairfax papers) these days is that the concentrate on 'lifestyle' issues. International and local affairs is evidently getting too 'highbrow' for them.
Strangely enough the newspaper of "serious capitalism", the Australian Financial Review, is probably the best thing available in the Oz market.
For anything else, I prefer Le Monde Diplomatique, The International Herald Tribune and the usenet group, misc.activism.progressive.
no subject
Date: 2003-10-30 11:59 pm (UTC)Take care!
XOXO
no subject
Date: 2003-11-06 10:46 pm (UTC)Hey, thanks for the kind words... Stay in touch!