Readable prose standard

Problem this solves: the claim is sound and the data are correct, but readers cannot move through the paragraph. This standard governs breath and citation layout in body prose. Use it with book-standard.md (structural acceptance) and chapter-template.md (one-pager).

1. When it applies #

Applies to reader-facing body prose: preface, chapter sections, and judgment-boundary narration. Does not apply to status lines, acceptance checklists, or internal editorial notes.

The acceptance target is fluency: the reader is carried through a passage without decoding the author's scaffolding.

2. Four prohibitions #

Against the median craft of strong long-form prose (show change before conclusion; vary rhythm; minimize self-reference), body drafts must not do the following:

1. Open like a bulletin
   Do not start a paragraph by reading a chart aloud ("The inference cost to reach the same capability level was…"). Begin with what changed in time; the number is the result, not the grammatical subject of the first sentence.

2. Stack slogans at one volume
   Do not fire same-intensity pull quotes in a row ("not tech news," "collective dive," "floor/ceiling," "the unbroken line"). Long sentences carry; short ones land. A paragraph usually needs only one line the reader must keep.

3. Replace story with inventory
   Do not argue by roll call ("code, design, reports, email, translation, editing…"). Bring on one motion or class that stands for the set (e.g. "everything once bought by the hour"); if needed, one concrete scene beats more rhetoric.

4. Point at the bookshelf mid-argument
   Do not pause the argument to explain the title, part name, cover, or table of contents ("also the name of Part II," "on the cover, Rewrite the DNA names the action"). Keep the reader inside the matter; packaging belongs in the reading map or chapter interfaces.

3. Asides and forced metaphor #

• Asides: cut tour-guide lines ("first, a number," "I named it in this preface's title"), self-commentary, and lectern tone. The author may be present only while advancing a judgment—not while narrating the act of writing.
• Forced metaphor: a metaphor must earn its keep. If deleting it clarifies the argument, delete it (e.g. an awkward "price list"). One clear opposition per stretch is enough; do not run floor, ceiling, hanging line, and unbroken line at once.

4. Data and citation layout #

Cite external figures with mainstream author–year parentheses, matching existing book practice (e.g. Jones & Nisbett, 1972):

• Preferred: …about one two-hundred-and-eightieth of the prior level (Stanford HAI, 2025).
• Forbidden: a standalone "Source: …" line (news/white-paper layout); forbidden: methodological asides inside the cite ("every number in this book will be sourced this way").
• On first deep treatment in a dedicated chapter, the full institution and report title may expand (see Chapter 1 on Stanford HAI's AI Index); preface or short allusions use author–year only.
• Report medians, not means; when evidence quality is thin, qualify in-sentence—do not open a separate disclaimer aside.

5. Actions (self-check after a draft paragraph) #

1. Does the first sentence show a change, a scene, or a judgment—not a metric definition?
2. Is there more than one "poster line" in the paragraph?
3. Can any inventory, aside, or title/cover self-reference be cut?
4. Is the citation a parenthetical at sentence end that does not break breath?
5. Read aloud: is there any place the reader must stop to translate the author's intent?

6. Acceptance #

A finished prose passage must satisfy all of the following:

1. It can be read straight through without looking back to decode structural packaging.
2. The core claim remains restatable in one sentence; data remain checkable and sources locatable.
3. No violation of the four prohibitions or the aside/metaphor rules; citations follow Section 4.

7. Boundaries #

• Quotable-candidate lists, acceptance self-checks, and status lines may keep work language and are not polished under this standard.
• Framework captions and Monday action lists may enumerate; enumeration is the job of a checklist, not the argument mode of a narrative paragraph.
• Do not trade falsifiability for "literary" effect: fluency serves the claim; it does not replace it.

8. Revision triggers #

Revise this standard when any of the following appears:

1. Reader feedback across two or more chapters says the prose is unreadable / speech-like / press-release-like, and the failure mode is a new hard join not covered here.
2. Citation layout systematically conflicts with publication needs or on-site evidence labels.
3. Fluency edits dilute claim sharpness or evidence quality (tighten Boundaries; do not abandon fluency).