This paper is based on an argument proposed by Salant (1969), who complained that on many occasions he found the writing of his colleagues “nearly incomprehensible,” and made suggestions to improve economists’ writing skills. Among other...
moreThis paper is based on an argument proposed by Salant (1969), who complained that on many occasions he found the writing of his colleagues “nearly incomprehensible,” and made suggestions to improve economists’ writing skills. Among other things, he argued that a “simple way of avoiding clumsiness is to prefer the short word to the long one and to avoid the unfamiliar word if a familiar one can be found that is equally correct, specific, and concrete” (p. 556). We call this “the Salant hypothesis,” and use ANOVA to test this hypothesis by comparing the average length of words used by Nobel laureates in their banquet speeches. We find that Literature laureates tend to use shorter words than laureates in other disciplines, and the difference is statistically significant. These results confirm Salant’s idea that words are a scarce resource and should be used efficiently. This includes using short words instead of longer ones whenever possible. In short, good writing is also “economical writing.”
