The Whodunit Rule?

People who sign up for my writing classes often expect English Composition. But my classes (except those with Grammar in their titles) present principles that come from modern linguistic research. One such principle (the DAD Rule) will remain in my repertoire, but with a slight tweak that arises from a 2008 study at the University of Chicago.

If you have taken my class titled The Clear Sentence, you know that humans best understand sentences (out of context) when the sentences present a Doer before its Action, and then, if applicable, a Done-To. (I replace "Assessments were done" with "Dr. Jones assessed the patient.") However, a study will soon appear in the journal of the National Academy of Sciences and suggest that, while people preferred Doers first, most of them chose the Done-To next, and then the Action.  They chose this information order to arrange situations whether they believed their arrangement would affect the final presentation order or not. 

The researchers, a team that involves veteran psycholinguist Susan Goldin-Meadow, wanted to see whether the word order in the participant's native language governed the participant's preference for arranging concepts. So their study included participants from English and Chinese, languages that arrange words usually in SVO or subject, verb, and object order.  But the study also included native speakers of Turkish, which follows an SOV order.  

I have long taught this principle of sentence clarity as the DAD Rule: Doer, Action, Done-To. What stands the test of research is this principle: 

When you seek clarity within a sentence, name the Doer in the grammatical subject.  And do so often.   

Perhaps I should call it the Whodunit Rule.