I'm just diving in here, because this is important. I've seen a lot of nasty things said about adverbs, and even to writers who use them!

adjectives

verbs

another adverb

a clause (word group)

Place

Time

Manner

Degree/Circumstance

Certainty

Cause

No!

Using a lot of adverbs/using the wrong adverb is where things start to get noticeable, and any time it sounds like you're reading writing and not a story is where problems arise.

Not true.

There isn't an exact number adverbs-to-word-count ratio.

If it gets to the point where people are noticing that you use adverbs as opposed to noticing that you have a cool story-line, you might have too many adverbs.

It's also possible to have too many adverbs in chapter one, then be fine for the next five chapters, then have a big group of them again, etc. They're not always spaced evenly.

From what I've witnessed, it's generally because they've forgotten how to identify an adverb (and only remember the obvious -ly from school and writing rule blogs). When people are ranting about destroying adverbs, realize that they're probably just referencing -ly.

*Pay attention to who your advice is coming from. Some people know what they're talking about. A lot of people just think they do.

It's like grandma telling you not to eat chocolate, when what she really means is milk chocolate. Dark chocolate is totally cool, yo. Health benefits and all. Dr. Oz said so. Instead, she waggles her finger at you and grumbles on about chocolate and then your younger cousins start repeating that chocolate is bad for you because they heard it from a credible source (grandma).

I can't tell you how many times I've seen people circle/cross-out/slash every single -ly word they see in a chapter, while leaving every other adverb intact. They do this without mercy, and then tell the poor writer that adverbs are a sin and you should never ever use them and this is a rule and only the greats can break it. Which you aren't, sorry, so listen to them because this is how the world works.

Truth is, it's not. That misconception gets encouraged when you have agents and editors saying that if they see an adverb on page one, they automatically trash the manuscript, but when asked about Book A by an author they accepted, it's suddenly cool. Parts of speech matter, but how you use them does, too! That's why we want to be smart about them.

Even Stephen King (the road to hell is paved with adverbs) can be a good sport about them if they have purpose! Mark Twain, too.

, especially since a lot of the rules tell you no adverbs when they almost always mean no -ly adverbs. You may or may not want to google longer lists.

Examples:

I got here early enough to choose you, Pikachu.

You're too good of a writer for this guide.

Chameleons are quite interesting.

I'm going to the beach tomorrow.

The kitten is stuck down there in the well.

The zombie is falling behind!

There are a few places you can run your manuscript through to determine how many adverbs you used. Most of the counters I've seen aren't perfect, zeroing in on what everyone else does- words that end in -ly. This includes words such as "family" and "reply." Keep that in mind.

I tend to write in Microsoft Word. CTRL+F and a search for suffix ending in -ly gives me a quick estimate of what's lurking. [Again, this includes non-adverbs, so know your total is at least a little lower than it suggests. In Long Distance, (105k words) I used "family" 41 times and that was included in my 399 -ly total, as was every mention of a character named Holly.]

What can I do? Let's look at common adverb advice. Go through your adverbs and decide for each one (I've found that is the best method rather than mass deleting).

The presence of an adverb means a stronger word can be used.

The mall opened at 10 on Black Friday. I ran quickly to the toy aisle.

This is a great way to trim word count. Ran quickly? What else can we use? Dashed. Sprinted.

Does quickly add anything that 'ran' doesn't? Unless you're a Patriots fan who holds your breath every time Tom Brady runs, most people associate run with quickly. It's probably safe to cut this word or use a better one.

Say you didn't know a stronger word for ran. So you look one up and plug it in.

I scooted to the toy aisle. I galloped to the toy aisle.

See what I mean? You might find that the word+adverb you're using don't translate into a stronger word that's appropriate for what you're trying to say. Not every adverb is easily replaced.

If it's in a dialogue tag, you can probably choose a stronger word or cut it out.

I find this mostly true, and you don't even need your thesaurus to pull out "Tom extrapolated" or something! Most of the adverb attachments deal with the basics.

Softly, angrily, quietly, loudly, and variations.

Whispered, shouted, screeched, screamed, hissed, roared, guessed, advised, surmised, etc.

These are just really easy to eliminate if you have to, and you don't need to go crazy to find a stronger version! People tend to harp on dialogue tag adverbs because:

1. They're easy to spot. Unlike other adverbs, they aren't buried in the text, especially if it's just a single line of dialogue.

2. Because of context, you almost never need them. They're one of the easiest to cut if you're looking to cut some.

If you have an adverb, re-write until you don't.

This is a little harder, especially if you happen to like the way you phrased something. In places where word count or being concise matter, sometimes re-writing can be more trouble than it's worth, or can take away from the flow.

Sometimes in eliminating adverbs we can go about finding a longer way to say something. Sometimes we're in a situation where we need the text to read a certain way (such as fast, in a chase scene). Sometimes you just need to tell the reader this is how it went down.

Other times, you really should try and rewrite. You might find you like it better! If you're on the fence about an adverb, try this technique.

This applies to editing your own writing and other people's!

In general, an adverb can be left when it adds something to the story that isn't there when you take it away. That doesn't mean you can't get rid of it, but it does justify its existence over an adverb that doesn't have a purpose.

THIS IS NOT WHERE'S WALDO. The goal is not to stare at the page until you find one, then circle/delete it.

Use your context, people!

Read the entire sentence it's been used in. Maybe the entire paragraph if it's jammed into a description or something. Does it make sense? Does it add something to the sentence that isn't there if you took it out?

Does the sentence flow?

This question usually detects when the wrong word is used. For example:

Jack chased the duck through the reeds. The bird quacked tempestuously and took flight. Jack watched helplessly.

Regardless of whether or not that's how you would write it, "Jack watched helplessly" is smooth. It flows. It rolls off the page. 99% of readers aren't going to stop and re-read the sentence.

"Tempestuously" on the other hand, that gives most people pause. That inner writer alarm sounds and our gut tells us this word stands out. It's not wrong, it's just...there. Instead of reading about Jack we're noticing this word.

So we must ask:

Is this a bad adverb because it breaks the flow?

or

Is this a bad adverb because I don't know the meaning of this word?

I'll say this in other chapters, but I see it all the time with critters and editors who aren't professional. It also happens a lot when the person is criting/editing something not in their native language.

A word might fit fine, but they haven't come across it before so it sticks out to them or they don't understand it. So they mark the adverb and tell the writer they shouldn't use this word because it's confusing.

If you come across a word you feel might fit fine, you just don't understand it, feel free to flag it for the writer, but tell them why. It's okay to be like: Hey, this word stands out to me, but English isn't my first language and I'd prefer something simpler.

If it breaks the flow, feel free to tel them as much. "I get what you're trying to say, but this word sounds disruptive. I think there might be a better one out there."

Writer repeat themselves a lot. It's one thing to really drive home a concept (my what big teeth, eyes, legs you have, Grandma...!), but you don't want to say the same thing over and over again.

Most cases of adverbs being deleted fall into this category, especially if attached to dialogue.

Check to see that you haven't already expressed what you need to. If you have, the adverb is unnecessary.

If you haven't, it may be that you didn't express yourself strong enough.

Example:

Dobson is angry with Elway about what kind of pizza to order.

"Pepperoni," Dobson said through clenched teeth.

"I want sausage," Elway said angrily.

"Hey, morons." Cat sprawled across the sofa, green eyes bright. "Dad ordered cheese like ten minutes ago."

Now, let's take the adverb from Elway.

"I want sausage," Elway said.

Does anything in that indicate that Elway is angry?

If the adverb brings something new to the table, then you are not repeating yourself. Think the Big Bad Wolf. Teeth and eyes and ears are all different. Red isn't repeating herself. She's making new observations.

This is where comes in. If Dobson and Elway were arguing before this excerpt, and Dobson just dodged the tv remote Elway threw at him, you already showed us the anger. Saying he's speaking angrily isn't necessary.

Say you didn't, though. What could we do to show he's angry without saying angrily?

1. Change the action or dialogue tag.

Instead of "said" we use shouted.

Instead of a dialogue tag, we give an action. "Elway slammed his fist on the coffee table."

2. Change the dialogue.

"I want pepperoni" doesn't sound particularly angry without context, does it? A spoiled brat could say that; so could your grandma or Prince Charming. .

If Elway was angry, maybe like Dobson he's beyond sentences and just says "Sausage."

3. Do both.

"Sausage." Elway's fist slammed the coffee table.

Sometimes we want to keep a story moving- and keep what's important in the focus.

Not every adverb is easily wiped from a manuscript. Advice I often see is to re-write the sentence by deleting the adverb. This usually requires expanding in some form.

For example:

"Back!" I shouted angrily.

The tree's tinsel glistened softly in the moonlight.

Some well-meaning (and some rampaging) critters and editors will tell you to change to "screamed" or to cut "softly" or to show us *how* it softly glistened and how we were angry.

I shouted angrily ---> My face reddened and I crossed my arms. "Back!" I screamed.

glistened softly---> The tree's tinsel glistened with the delicacy of a thousand melting icicles.

This is where word count can become a concern. Not everything can just be expressed in the exact same concise manner.

Sometimes we need to just cut the word. Sometimes we need to expand. Other times we just want to be simple and concise.

FOOD FOR THOUGHT:

"He presently got safely beyond the reach of capture and punishment...."

Mr. Twain told us what we needed to know and moved on.

You post this sentence on a site like Scribophile or even in many critique groups, and I can guarantee you at least one person is going to take issue with it.

As a writer and editor, please consider whether or not you're advising someone to remove an adverb because it's an adverb, or because it doesn't serve a purpose in the story!