What's the "made-up word limit"?

[Mindfire]

Does anyone know about how many invented words or names can you expect the audience to tolerate? I ask this because I find myself with an increasing number of invented words and names for people, places, creatures, items, concepts, etc. I try to avoid making up words wholesale unless its absolutely necessary, but even so my glossary list would be fairly long. Is this a problem?

 

[Ireth]

I don't think it would be a problem, as long as the text makes it clear what each made-up word refers to. If a story introduces me to a hergyl (something I invented off the top of my head just now), but doesn't explain what that is or at least looks like, then I'll be confused. But if I get a description of people hunting one for its thick bearlike pelt or ivory tusks, that would be much better.

 

[CupofJoe]

I don't think it would be a problem, as long as the text makes it clear what each made-up word refers to. If a story introduces me to a hergyl (something I invented off the top of my head just now), but doesn't explain what that is or at least looks like, then I'll be confused. But if I get a description of people hunting one for its thick bearlike pelt or ivory tusks, that would be much better.

I suppose the other half of this, is not using made-up words for things that are themselves mundane and well known just to make something seem fantastical... If we find out the a hergyl has ivory tusks, big ears and a long nose; and its huge and grey... oh, look its an elephant [sorry Ireth for co-opting you beast].
Personally I don't mind archaic or unusual words for mundane things such as "pachyderm".

 

[Steerpike]

Limit < X, where X is the number of made up words where the reader is bored or confused

In all honesty, my preference is for as few as possible, and I like to see them limited to things or concepts that don't have an adequate English word to identify them. Like Ireth says above, don't call a rabbit a smeerp.

 

[Ireth]

Limit < X, where X is the number of made up words where the reader is bored or confused

In all honesty, my preference is for as few as possible, and I like to see them limited to things or concepts that don't have an adequate English word to identify them. Like Ireth says above, don't call a rabbit a smeerp.

CupofJoe said that, not me. A hergyl =/= an elephant (or even a woolly mammoth), at least in my head. XD

 

[Steerpike]

CupofJoe said that, not me. A hergyl =/= an elephant (or even a woolly mammoth), at least in my head. XD

Oops...yes, you are correct. It's a good point

 

[BWFoster78]

I, too, have a low tolerance.

You're already probably using made up names for people, cities, regions, and kingdoms. Add to that concepts and creatures and things, and it all becomes unintelligible and distracting pretty fast.

I'd disagree somewhat with Ireth, though. As long as you don't have too many words or overuse the technique, I think it CAN be effective, if done correctly, to introduce a made up word with only the barest of contextual clues. You then build the picture over time. I'd prefer that to: The hergyl, a beast with tusks much like an elephant, lumbered through the forest.

 

[PaulineMRoss]

As long as you don't have too many words or overuse the technique, I think it CAN be effective, if done correctly, to introduce a made up word with only the barest of contextual clues. You then build the picture over time. I'd prefer that to: The hergyl, a beast with tusks much like an elephant, lumbered through the forest.

I agree with this. I like a sprinkling of invented terms in a book, if only to remind me that I'm reading about a world that is 'other', in some sense. It's possible to do it carefully, so that the reader can work out more or less what the word means.

So: 'There were apples, peaches and glokken in a bowl on the table' is fairly self-explanatory.

But: 'Look out, there's a druikstrum coming!' tells you nothing. Should the character duck, climb a tree, reach for garlic or pray?

 

[Ireth]

I agree with this. I like a sprinkling of invented terms in a book, if only to remind me that I'm reading about a world that is 'other', in some sense. It's possible to do it carefully, so that the reader can work out more or less what the word means.

So: 'There were apples, peaches and glokken in a bowl on the table' is fairly self-explanatory.

But: 'Look out, there's a druikstrum coming!' tells you nothing. Should the character duck, climb a tree, reach for garlic or pray?

Exactly this. I do much the same thing in my Faerie books, like this exchange:

Fiachra reached into the small leather pouch at his waist, hidden beneath his feathered cloak. Withdrawing his hand, he held up a tiny bottle of clear glass filled with a dark blue liquid, the color of his own blood. "A taste of this will subdue her quickly."

His father frowned. "Is that juice of fuilsocair?"

"It is. The berries were not fresh, but good enough."

 

[Androxine Vortex]

I wouldn't use too many in the beginning of your story; it might overwhelm your reader. As the story progresses and your reader becomes more familiar then try adding more. If you use too many before the reader has a chance to become familiar with what they mean, then they might start mixing up words and become confused. I read a book once and within the first fifteen pages all of these made up terms were being thrown at me and I had no idea what I was reading and I put it back on the shelf. Shame though, it seemed like a nice story.

 

[Zero Angel]

As a teacher of mathematics, which is its own language, I would warn that it is difficult for most readers to pick up new words--on the other hand, for a proficient reader, it is easy to understand context. You have to figure it out yourself. Even if you subscribe to the minimum amount of words theory, it's not a bad idea to have context when you bring back a word you haven't used in a while. Similarly when you are doing a sequel and "reminding" the reader about the events of the first.

An example of what not to do in regards to the reminding is the anime show Inu-yasha. You really don't need flashbacks to events that happened earlier in the episode. I think the principles are the same. You need to find the balance between their understanding versus "trusting" them to understand. If unsure, err on the side of trust.

As far as overloading, if you find that you feel the need to explain something frequently, then you should probably describe it differently or better or make it stick in their heads more the first time around (or whenever it becomes important).

 

[BWFoster78]

Similarly when you are doing a sequel and "reminding" the reader about the events of the first.

I'm of two minds on this one. When I'm reading a new book and it's been two years since reading the previous novel in the series, a little reminder is probably good. When I'm rereading the series, I absolutely hate it.

I think I'm going to do a quick chapter at the beginning of my sequels entitled "What Has Gone Before" or something.

 

[PaulineMRoss]

I think I'm going to do a quick chapter at the beginning of my sequels entitled "What Has Gone Before" or something.

YES! If only everyone would do this. If a reader needs reminding, the information is there, if they don't, they can dive straight in. The idea was good enough for Tolkien, after all.

 

[Devor]

I'm of the same problem, Mindfire. Not only do I have exotic names and made-up beasts and concepts which need similarly exotic names, but I'm writing in a setting where many of the real world concepts are going to be foreign to readers and have foreign names as well. Do I use broadsword and scimitar or jian and dao? How about Pachinko or Pinball? For the most part, I've decided to avoid foreign words for every day items as much as possible, but something about these examples in particular makes me want to make exceptions. Should I?

I've also been looking closer at the appropriate fashion styles lately, and I've been trying to figure out how much is too much. I think Kimono sounds familiar enough to many people, but then will people relate their wearers too much to Japan? Would I also have to use words like Deel and Hanbok to describe other fashions? I'm not particularly thrilled about describing clothes, and I keep thinking that some of these words would help readers to fill in the imagination - if I can figure out where to draw the line. Which is, where?

I was intending to start a thread on this when I saw Mindfire's.

 

[Mindfire]

I completely understand, Devor. I've just encountered another problem: tomahawks. Now, tomahawks are awesome. But I worry that if I depict my forest-dwelling Mako warriors as carrying "tomahawks", people will cry racism, stereotype, or culture theft. But I have this indelible image of the Mako in my head as tomahawk-carriers. (To make matters worse, they use bows and and have what could be crudely described as "nature magic".) It's a dilemma.

 

[Steerpike]

But I worry that if I depict my forest-dwelling Mako warriors as carrying "tomahawks", people will cry racism, stereotype, or culture theft.

Why? Are you going to look at every single object that appears in your story, determine the cultural origin of it, and make sure you aren't using something of one culture with another culture? As for stereotype, tomahawks were used by both native Americans and by European settlers. The tool/weapon isn't a stereotype in and of itself. If the rest of the depiction of your character is a caricature, then it might add to it but barring that I think you're fine. Racist? How, exactly?

 

[Mindfire]

Why? Are you going to look at every single object that appears in your story, determine the cultural origin of it, and make sure you aren't using something of one culture with another culture? As for stereotype, tomahawks were used by both native Americans and by European settlers. The tool/weapon isn't a stereotype in and of itself. If the rest of the depiction of your character is a caricature, then it might add to it but barring that I think you're fine. Racist? How, exactly?

Because they might think I'm perpetuating the stereotype of Native Americans being forest-dwelling warriors in tune with the natural world? Idk, I tend to err on the side of caution. Perhaps I'm just getting paranoid.

 

[Devor]

"Tomahawk" would be enough, for some people, to connect your nation to the corresponding Native American groups, which encourages people to see any shortcomings or stereotypes seen in these people as applying to the real-life equivalents, which . . . is stupid, and not worth worrying about. However, if you have knowledge that readers are actually offended by something you write, take a second look, because I think there's a good chance it's badly written.

And I say that from more perspectives than one - I've been told not to see certain movies or read certain books because of political or religious messages that I would hate, and half the time I don't even see them, let alone care about them.

 

[Zero Angel]

I'm of two minds on this one. When I'm reading a new book and it's been two years since reading the previous novel in the series, a little reminder is probably good. When I'm rereading the series, I absolutely hate it.

I think I'm going to do a quick chapter at the beginning of my sequels entitled "What Has Gone Before" or something.

I definitely err on the side of not reminding. It was very frustrating to me though to get beta readers of Book 2 coming back with their first impression and saying, "Oh I had completely forgotten that guy was that guy. Maybe you should remind us of that?"

Another issue with the "what has come before" chapter though is what is important to include? If you only include things that are relevant to the new book, then they will be a GIGANTIC spoiler for people that read it in the sense that they can extrapolate why you included such and such minor detail. This happened to me while watching the television program Castle the other day. They only have a recap at the beginning of the episode when it is a "sequel episode" (whether it is the follow-up to the previous episode or the last season's or two years ago or whatever), and then they include information in it that are relevant to the new episode.

Still, in principle, I very much like this idea. One of my favorite TV shows, Supernatural, started every episode with "The Road Thus Far" recap (which thankfully became able to be turned off in later seasons). (Aside: Is that show still on the air???)

One other strategy I use is my website. I have the WotA Wiki (which is sparse still) as well as my author website and a gigantic pile of information that anyone that wants can read through. I try to avoid spoilers though.

Manga does the "story so far" bit regularly in their graphic novel versions, and they also include character profiles. How do people feel about that? ("that" being character profiles at the beginning of sequels or at the end of the story?).

 

[BWFoster78]

Another issue with the "what has come before" chapter though is what is important to include?

I would include a two to three page summary of the entire book. I can summarize a chapter in a sentence if I need to. Really, you're stripping out all the characterization and emotion and relating just the facts. That doesn't take a lot of space.