THOSE
TROUBLESOME DIGITS
Figures seem simple to write, but if they've
proved a "hazard" to your speed, too, you'll welcome this
practice plan.
By Charles Lee Swem
Former Official Shorthand Reporter, New York Supreme Court
One of the most perplexing problems
of fast shorthand writing is not a shorthand problem at all. It
has to do with those truly remarkable but troublesome inventions
of the Arabs called digits—0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. The
writing of them is not a shorthand problem because we do not usually
translate them into shorthand. They are of themselves as brief as
any shorthand character that can be devised for them and, besides,
they are highly distinctive and therefore meet two of the three
vitally important shorthand requirements. The third requirement
which they do not meet is the element of phrasing, and it is because
of that lack that they are the troublemakers that they are.
To overcome this lack to some extent, we do
translate them into shorthand in all instances where by so doing
we can secure a brief, distinctive phrase. Thus, instead of employing
the digits, we use the brief and distinctive shorthand outlines
for one or two, two or three, three or four, four or five, nine
or ten, and the fractional phrases of one-half, two-thirds,
and three-quarters, as well as the more commonly used combinations
of figures that lend themselves to that most important of all speed
expedients—phrasing.
Any sequence of short outlines that must be
written separately, without the saving relief of phrasing, becomes
both a mental and a manual hazard requiring the highest possible
skill to overcome. The shorter the individual outlines, the greater
the hazard. This hazard is tremendously enhanced when figures are
involved, since figures have no context and slide off the mind into
forgetfulness if they are not caught and fixed instantly. Most expert
writers can permit themselves to get from fifteen to twenty words
behind a speaker and yet not lose a single word, but it is only
by the rarest concentration that a writer can suffer himself to
lag even three or four digits behind a speaker, without transposing
or entirely forgetting some of them.
I do not think there is anything more difficult
to report than the cross examination of a real estate expert in
what is generally termed a tax appeal case, where the witness and
the cross-examiner may delve into building values, rent rolls, reproduction
costs, operating expenses, and the complicated details of the mathematical
formulae that are used to determine units of value—all, indeed,
the most routine stuff, and because it is routine it should be simple
and easy. But because it deals largely with figures it becomes less
a matter of shorthand than of sheer concentration and the ability
to write the 1, 2, 3, 4's that we learned before we ever dreamed
of writing shorthand.
The skill necessary to do this type of reporting
and to do it well does not come front ordinary shorthand practice.
The figure content of most material on which the reporter usually
writes, consisting of dates, casual amounts, and costs of commodities,
does not fit him to write for pages at a time fast testimony in
which figures predominate. Most reporters, I fear, have never made
any special effort to become the expert in writing figures that
they have in writing shorthand. Most of us have depended solely
upon experience for this type of skill, feeling that figures, after
all, are figures; that we have been writing them much longer than
we have been writing shorthand, and therefore know them better than
we do our shorthand. It is a common complaint among writers that
figures are hard to get when they are spoken fast, because once
the writer gets behind the speaker it is impossible to catch up
again—there is no context to help keep figures impressed on
the mind.
This is quite true. One cannot get more than
a very few digits behind and be certain that he makes an accurate
report The way one can report figures accurately is always to keep
up with the speaker and never get behind more than two or three
digits. That, I suspect, sounds like an over-simplification of the
problem, and yet I believe it is a very simple solution, possible
to any writer. For, be it realized, I am not now speaking of shorthand
speed; I am speaking only of writing the Arabic numerals that we
have all been writing since our kindergarten days.
The writing of figures, after all, calls for
but two simple fundamental skills— the manual ability to form
the digits fast enough, and the other, concentration— both
of them abilities found to a high degree in many people who are
not shorthand writers and who may not possess the other qualities
requisite to shorthand skill The point I make is that if this skill
is not to be found in the average competent reporter it is because
he has never bethought himself of the necessity of practicing on
ordinary, everyday figures.
I believe I can best illustrate what can be
done in the writing of figures by reciting a personal experience.
Once upon a time, I could write 280 words a minute. Indeed, not
to be too modest about it, I quite early found no great difficulty
in Writing at that speed, so long as the speaker confined himself
to words. But when at high speed he wandered off the beaten track
and got into figures, I would invariably experience that most annoying
shorthand malady of not being able to keep up. Surely, I thought,
I should be able to write figures as well as shorthand, for weren't
figures just as brief as shorthand, and I had certainly written
enough of them to be able to write them as fast and fluently as
any shorthand character I knew?
The fact turned out to be that I had not actually
written them as much as I had written shorthand, and that was why
I could not write them as rapidly as I could write shorthand. On
an inspiration, I got out the stop watch and, writing nothing but
figures, repeating from 1 to 0 over and over again for a full minute,
I discovered that, although I could write 280 words a minute in
shorthand, the best I could do on figures was 220 words a minute.
Recovering from my surprise, I recast my shorthand practice program
and began from that moment to spend a large part of my daily practice
effort on figure penmanship. The time came when I boosted that 220
to 240 words a minute, and there I remained for quite a long period.
Partly because it was one of those natural speed
“ruts” that all writers get into, I remained at that
speed, but partly, also, I discovered, it was because there was
a mental hazard in the writing of figures which has its counterpart
sometimes in the writing of shorthand. This hazard had to do with
the figure 5. I found I had great trouble at high speed in getting
past the figure 5 in any sequence in which it occurred: All the
other digits, with the exception of the figure 4, were written with
one continuous stroke of the pen, but that totally irrelevant tick
that was needed to complete the 5 was a source of confusion that
disrupted all my efforts to increase my manual speed.
Writing as I was at the highest speed of which
I was capable, completely automatically, that extra tick for the
5, so totally out of character with the rest of the digits, very
often sufficed in my subconscious mind for the figure following
it, with the result that I would omit the 6. This was had enough
from the standpoint of accuracy, but the fact that the 6 was omitted
would register somewhere in my mental machinery. Immediately an
attempt would be made to correct the error by inserting the 6 somewhere
else, the whole process throwing me into a mental tailspin and hopeless
confusion.
This mental hazard I eventually eliminated
by adopting a character for 5 which omits the tick, and writing
the figure more like a shallow capital S. This character I found
to be both facile and distinctive. The immediate result was to increase
my writing speed of the digits about five words a minute; but, more
important still, there was no more mental or coördinating hazard
left, and with further practice I eventually succeeded in raising
my writing speed on digits to 280 words a minute.
I must confess that I did not reach this speed
immediately but, by continuing to practice figures for the next
several months, I overcame both the manual and the psychological
hazard involved.
The writing of figures must be learned as shorthand
is learned, by systematic repetitive practice. Because they are
not a shorthand problem, figures are too often forgotten by the
average writer. Writing them, over and over again as shorthand is
practiced, should be part of the practice program of every writer
who hopes to become a competent, all-round reporter.
From The Gregg Writer, December, 1944; pp.
202-204
|