看到一本书的题目：When You Catch an Adjective, Kill It: The Parts of Speech, forBetter And/Or Worse，於我心有戚戚焉。我也是——至少在科研论文里——反对用形容词的。形容词如果不是假大空的就是朦胧美的，不适合用来描述科学事实。事实只需要简单的数据就够了。这几天听地震的新闻发布会，废话连篇，记者都听腻了，就是形容功能的零碎儿太多。语言污染比环境污染还可恶。

题目是借了马克吐温的句子。老马1880年春给D W Bowser写信说，你的语言直白简单，小词小句子，是写作的正道，要坚持。别让废话和花里胡哨的东西溜进来。如果感染了形容词，就把它灭了……人如果染上了爱形容的毛病，就像N11H13一样很难克服了。

I notice that you use plain, simple language, short words and brief sentences.That is the way to write English -- it is the modern way and the best way.Stick to it; don't let fluff and flowers and verbosity creep in. When you catch an adjective, kill it. No, Idon't mean utterly, but kill most of them -- then the rest will be valuable.They weaken when they are close together. They give strength when they are wideapart. An adjective habit, or a wordy, diffuse, flowery habit, once fastened upon a person, is as hard to get rid of as any other vice.

过去常说文如其人，如今文字的个性少了，共性多了——甚至有时还“共形”（这倒顺应了数学物理的潮流）——分不清不同的风格流派，只能分空话和废话多的和少的。空话多的是领导还没做到家的，废话多的则是科学家做过了头的。