Diction Template 1
Word-level analysis: The choice of “[word]” rather than “[neutral alternative]” suggests [connotation/register].
Start with structure, then replace every placeholder with information that is true, relevant, and natural for your context. These templates are intentionally skeletal so your final writing does not sound mass-produced.
Strong diction analysis names actual word choices and explains how their denotations, connotations, register, or pattern shape tone, characterization, imagery, or argument; it does not treat “diction” as a synonym for all writing style.
Word-level analysis: The choice of “[word]” rather than “[neutral alternative]” suggests [connotation/register].
Pattern analysis: Repeated [semantic field] diction frames [subject] as [interpretation].
Character diction: [Character] tends to use [type of vocabulary], revealing [background/attitude].
Revision: Replace vague “[word]” with [more precise word] when the intended meaning is [specific distinction].
Claim/source status audit: Item [claim/source/example] | Status [active / review due / stale / corrected / retracted / superseded] | Controlling source/version [x] | Last verified [date/version] | Stale trigger [x] | Correction severity [0–3] | Reader disclosure [none / note / correction / withdrawal] | Changelog entry [what changed + why].
Dependency and propagation audit: Claim / example / recommendation [x] | Controlling source / project record [x] | Dependency strength [direct / shared / advisory / independent] | Review trigger / reason code [x] | Needs-review scope [local / direct dependents / cluster] | Replacement source requirements [x] | Carry-forward decision [x] | Propagation targets [x] | Reader disclosure / changelog action [x].
Persistent editorial registry audit: Topic slug → [ ]; claim UID/key → [ ]; source UID/key → [ ]; dependency UID + strength → [ ]; source status/version → [ ]; open review UID/reason/priority → [ ]; replacement source if any → [ ]; reviewer + resolution → [ ].