Defending the single-sentence question presented
I can't.
I teach my students to use multiple sentences and construct the question as a type of syllogism, and I've been doing it for 10 years.
If you teach or use the single-sentence question presented, what are its strengths? Let me cut off two before you reply.
1. Brevity
Some say the multiple-sentence question is too long and single-sentence question is shorter. Not in my view. I limit my multiple-sentence questions to 75 or 80 words, and I routinely see single-sentence questions of 80, 90, or 100 words. In a single sentence.
2. Tradition
I don't think writing a question in a single sentence is worth doing if the only reason is that it's a tradition. There better be other reasons. Good ones.
So . . . ?
2 Comments:
OK, I'll bite.
Focus is my #1 reason: Limiting the Question Presented to one sentence forces the writer to focus on the overall issue that is addressed in the memorandum and the key facts that determine its outcome.
Brevity is my #2 reason; 75 words is still way too long, be they contained in one sentence or more than one. About 30 to 40 words ought to suffice.
Finally, reason #3: Drafting an effective Question Presented is a useful exercise in legal analysis, apart from its usefulness with a memo. (My take on the Question Presented is here.)
- David Sorkin
Well said. The single-sentence question presented usually has as many commas in it as each sentence should have words!
My disagreement with Professor Sorkin (and I confess I have not read the memo he linked to) is that a long, rambling single-sentence question presented causes the reader to lose focus. I'm sure Professor Sorkin would reply that this can be avoided with a well-crafted single sentence, but even the best writing skills can run into a complex, fact-sepcific scenario that cannot be so reduced.
I do agree with Professor Sorkin that distilling an issue to a single sentence is a great exercise. But that doesn't mean it should go into the brief that way.
In short, I think Professor Sorkin describes the ideal -- which isn't to say it cannot be achieved with enough effort -- while your post deals with the reality of limited time and money.
Post a Comment
<< Home