80 Wordy Phrases to Cut From Your Writing
4 min read
Short answer
Why this is worth doing
Wordiness is not a style preference. Every unnecessary word is a small tax on the reader’s attention, and the tax compounds: a document 20% longer than it needs to be is not 20% worse, it is the difference between being read and being skimmed.
It also disguises weak thinking. “It could be argued that there may be some benefit to considering a revision of the policy” is eleven words of hedging around “we should revise the policy” — and once it is written plainly, you can tell whether you believe it.
Pattern one: empty openers
Phrases that announce a sentence rather than starting it. Almost all are deletable outright.
| Delete | Words saved |
|---|---|
| It is important to note that | 6 |
| It should be pointed out that | 6 |
| It is interesting to observe that | 6 |
| What I am trying to say is | 7 |
| The fact of the matter is | 6 |
| For all intents and purposes | 5 |
| It goes without saying that | 5 |
| Needless to say | 3 |
| As a matter of fact | 5 |
| In my personal opinion | 4 (use “I think”, or nothing) |
Test: delete the phrase and read the sentence. If nothing was lost, it was an opener.
Pattern two: long prepositional phrases
Three or four words doing the job of one.
| Instead of | Use |
|---|---|
| in order to | to |
| due to the fact that | because |
| in spite of the fact that | although |
| in the event that | if |
| for the purpose of | to |
| with regard to / with respect to | about |
| in the near future | soon |
| at this point in time | now |
| on a regular basis | regularly |
| in the majority of cases | usually |
| a large number of | many |
| a small number of | a few |
| the vast majority of | most |
| in close proximity to | near |
| subsequent to | after |
| prior to | before |
| in excess of | over |
| in conjunction with | with |
| by means of | by |
| in the absence of | without |
| has the ability to | can |
| is able to | can |
| make a decision | decide |
| give consideration to | consider |
| take into account | consider |
| in terms of | (usually deletable) |
Twenty of these across a document is 50 to 80 words, and every replacement reads better than what it replaced.
Pattern three: nouns made from verbs
The heaviest pattern in business and academic writing. A verb gets turned into a noun, and then needs a weaker verb to carry it.
| Instead of | Use |
|---|---|
| conducted an investigation into | investigated |
| carried out an analysis of | analysed |
| provides an explanation of | explains |
| made an announcement | announced |
| reached a conclusion | concluded |
| performed an evaluation | evaluated |
| gave a presentation | presented |
| undertook a review of | reviewed |
| is in agreement with | agrees |
| made a recommendation | recommended |
| held a discussion about | discussed |
| carried out an assessment | assessed |
| put forward a proposal | proposed |
| took a decision | decided |
Spot them by looking for “-tion”, “-ment”, “-ance” and “-ing” nouns next to a colourless verb: conduct, perform, carry out, undertake, provide, make, give, take.
Pattern four: intensifiers and hedges
These do not add words so much as subtract conviction. Most can simply go.
Intensifiers: very, really, quite, extremely, incredibly, highly, particularly, rather, somewhat, fairly, pretty
“This is really important” and “this is important” mean the same thing, and the second sounds more certain.
Hedges: basically, essentially, arguably, generally, virtually, actually, simply, just, obviously, clearly, of course
Two specific offenders: “obviously” and “clearly” either insult a reader who did not find it obvious, or waste words on one who did. And “actually” is almost always a verbal tic in written form.
Redundant pairs: each and every, first and foremost, full and complete, hope and trust, null and void, various different, past history, end result, final outcome, free gift, advance planning, close proximity, unexpected surprise, added bonus, revert back, absolutely essential
Two things not to cut
Transitions that carry logic. “However”, “because”, “which means” and “by contrast” are doing structural work. Cutting them shortens the text and makes it harder to follow — the opposite of the goal.
Precision. “Approximately 40%” is not padding if the figure is an estimate; “40%” would be a false claim of accuracy. “May” is not a hedge if the thing genuinely may happen. Cut words that add nothing, not words that add qualification.
Working through a draft
- Search for the openers in pattern one and delete them.
- Find and replace the pattern-two phrases. The editor’s find and replace handles these in one pass.
- Read for the colourless verbs — conduct, perform, provide, make, give — and un-nominalise what follows.
- Delete the intensifiers. Then read the result: if a sentence now feels weak, the problem was never the intensifier.
- Check the readability score afterwards, and the repeated word checker for the ones you lean on hardest.
- Compare the two versions to confirm you only removed words, not meaning.
Expect to lose 10 to 15% of a first draft without touching a single idea.
Frequently asked questions
Is shorter always better? No. Shorter is better when the words removed were doing nothing. Cutting a clarifying example to save nine words is a bad trade.
Does this apply to fiction? The patterns do, but the judgement differs — a character can be wordy on purpose, and rhythm sometimes wants a word that adds nothing but a beat.
How do I find these in a long document? Paste it into the keyword density checker and look at the two- and three-word phrase view. Your own habits appear at the top of the list, and they are rarely the ones you expected.