SEO adalah serangkaian kegiatan yang bertujuan untuk mencapai posisi tertinggi dalam hasil pencarian alami oleh situs web tertentu. Proses ini terdiri dari aktivitas “di halaman” seperti pengoptimalan situs web itu sendiri (tindakan ini dikenal sebagai SEO – Pengoptimalan Mesin Pencari), serta pekerjaan “di luar halaman” yang dilakukan di luar situs web itu sendiri. Salah satu faktor peringkat terpenting adalah konten unik.

Beberapa orang masih ingin konten mereka ditulis dengan tangan. Mereka digunakan untuk membuat kalimat demi kalimat dan menulis ulang artikel untuk memastikan kualitas konten. Meskipun ini adalah praktik yang paling sederhana, itu bisa memakan waktu berjam-jam atau berhari-hari untuk mencapainya.

Tetapi ada juga orang yang terlalu lesu untuk menulis ulang artikel mereka atau mengenali arti waktu dan karena itu mencari alat parafrase gratis. Jika Anda seperti kebanyakan orang yang mengetahui nilai waktu Anda, Anda telah datang ke tempat yang sempurna.

Paraphrase Online adalah penulis ulang artikel terbaik di web. Ini mengubah satu kata dan frasa dengan sangat cepat, dan yang paling penting – akurat. Singkatnya: Google suka ketika konten unik dan tidak suka ketika mereka direplikasi dalam bentuk yang sama di antara situs web yang berbeda. Ini masuk akal, karena untuk memberikan hasil pencarian kualitas terbaik kepada pengguna, informasi tidak dapat beredar di web dalam bentuk yang sama. Selalu ada kesempatan untuk menggambarkan sebuah pertanyaan dengan kata-kata lain dan melihatnya dari sudut yang berbeda. Oleh karena itu, keunikan tersebut dihargai. Jika Anda memiliki pengetahuan yang tepat untuk industri Anda dan Anda dilengkapi dengan perangkat lunak rewording gratis seperti Paraphrase Online, tidak ada yang akan menghalangi Anda!

Paraphrase

Paraphrase is a term in the field of literary theory and means: the free processing of a literary work, developing and modifying the content of the original; the preserved similarity of construction and style allows to recognize the paraphrased song.

Paraphrasing we also call the poetical translations of foreign-language poetry that are more loose than in a typical translation. I mean, for example, the poetic translations of the biblical Book of Psalms made by Jan Kochanowski and Czesław Miłosz, whose authors do not translate the source texts “word for word”, but approach this issue very freely. Paraphrasing we also call, for example, many of the Songs of Jan Kochanowski, which are sometimes very distant from the originals, not even translations, but the original works that keep the meaning of the original.

Compare, for example, the final two stanzas of Song II.24 by Jan Kochanowski:

     Moscow and Tatars will know about me,

     And various English inhabitants of the world;

     I am German and brave Spaniard, they will meet me,

     Which deep stream of Tybe drink.

     Let no grumbling at the funeral,

     No complaint or accusation:

     Candles and bells give up, and mar expensive,

     And with a voice of mourning altars singing!

with the same fragment of the Poet’s Song – Horace’s bird:

     I will be met by the Argonauts by Colchis,

     The Gauls country , Dak, which suppresses fear,

     and Gal from Rhone and from Ebro

     Spaniard drawing water

     I do not care about the funeral, the appearance of mourning,

     futile songs, complaints and grievances,

     Do not set fire to my pile

     in a shout for vain glory.

This is certainly not a translation, because at first glance, it can be seen that the paraphrases of Kochanowski differ too much from the original to be considered a translation. On the other hand, the preservation of the general sense of the original and some similarities in the structure allow to conclude that Kochanowski modeled on Horace. So it is not a translation, it is also not a completely independent text – it is simply a paraphrase.

It should be noticed in this place that sometimes it is difficult to say whether we are dealing with a poetic translation which, by its very nature, gives the author a certain, even substantial, freedom in the choice of linguistic means (a literary, philological translation of a poem would kill his poetic character) already with a paraphrase.

Periphrasis

Periphrasis, also called discussion include: the replacement of a word by a group of words which are descriptive or metaphorical equivalent of its meaning.

Speaking in a more understandable language, we could define periphery as saying something indirectly, but in a longer way.

Periphrasis character (because this is the adjective from the word periphse) also has many euphemisms, or expressions aimed at avoiding drastic or vulgar content. For example, the phrase “I will kick you where your back loses its noble name” or the saying of Winston Churchill, which instead of saying that someone is “a liar”, used to say that “he is economical in telling the truth”. Originally, the periphasis was a stylistic measure aimed at eliminating the vocabulary used in everyday life from poetry. Over time, it has also entered other areas of the language, and many of them have come into common use.

Why do we use borrowings that we can replace with a home synonym? Explanations come to mind without a second thought:
– they are fashionable,
– they sound attractive,
– they seem professional.

These intuitive answers, unfortunately, are quite superficial. I have serious doubts whether, for example, the optimal word, commonly used for years, can be considered fashionable. Does it sound attractive? This is a matter of taste, but I would say that it is rather a clamshell that usually does not attract attention.

The third argument is the hardest to refute, because we often succumb to the illusion that thanks to the complex vocabulary we give the impression of being professional and intelligent. These efforts, however, have the opposite effect. Research says that if we want to be perceived as intelligent people, we should be clear and simple. What you say or write will seem more sensible to others if they understand more.

So, since these three reasons can not withstand critical criticism, why do optimal or comprehensive words work well, and their native synonyms only sometimes take their place in a tentative way? What stands in the way? Wont? Ignorance? Obstinacy? Or maybe there is another reason why we choose these words?

Yes, there is, but about that in a moment.

First, however, I would like to draw attention to something that can easily escape because it seems obvious. Should language users be disciplined, or rather a clue to them? Is replacing a loan with a native synonym a good advice? This is certainly one of the ways that helps reduce these words in the text (yes, reduce, because I do not think that one should completely give up), but not the only one.

There are at least four of these ways. The editing of a text does not have to be limited to exchanging one word for another. It can be much more creative.

Delete the unnecessary word

This method, seemingly simple, requires looking at your own text from a distance. Let’s take the term integrated platform. Is it absolutely necessary to emphasize this integration? Or maybe it would only add the seriousness of the statement? If the word is an empty ornament, let’s deal with it bluntly. If, on the other hand, the platform has many functions, we should exchange them in the form of bullets.

Replace the word with a precise synonym

Let us assume that the comprehensive word is indispensable in our text. We refer to the dictionary in which we find the following synonyms: “comprehensive, general, cross-sectional, systemic, versatile, broad”. Seemingly, each of them is apt. The matter becomes more complicated when we try to place them in the text. We are overwhelmed by the unpleasant feeling that we did not want to express it. Why is this happening?

First, one should ask why, out of a whole lot of words that we could borrow from English, we choose just those, and not others. We return to the question I put at the beginning of the text. I then rejected three intuitive answers. She announced that there is also the fourth, the most rational one. Well, words borrowed very often contain some nuance, which is missing from their English counterparts.

So let’s not settle for the first of the synonyms. When in doubt, let’s get back to the original English-language definition, and then correctly match the equivalent. According to the Cambridge Dictionary, the word “complex” means “containing a lot of different but related parts.” Among the native synonyms: “comprehensive, general, cross-sectional, systemic, versatile, wide”, the most convenient, in my opinion, is the word “versatile.” Of course, its accuracy depends on the context.

Replace the general with a specific word

Let’s say we want to replace the word dedicated in the term dedicated training materials. Native synonyms intended for and specialized in, require additional definition and therefore do not concisely express the original meaning, which is “designed to be used for one specific purpose.” The English word thus contains a sense that we would have to express in a descriptive way.

But do we necessarily have to look for a synonym? After all, our text is not engraved in stone. Maybe it will be possible to replace a generic word dedicated to a precise term that says something more about materials, and additionally does not raise any doubts about correctness? For example, hand-drawn training materials or exercises based on the client’s texts. Yes, these terms are long, but they emphasize what distinguishes training materials, and this is what a dedicated word was supposed to serve.

Change the sentence structure

When we fail to find the right replacement, we can change the construction of the entire sentence. This method will work especially in the case of participles (eg realized), which can extend sentences to infinity. And so, instead of the investment implemented as part of the X project, we can write an investment that arises thanks to the X project. The implemented word has disappeared, and the sentence now rules in the verb.

It may also happen that none of the four ways will pass the exam in your text. Even if the borrowing is widely used in the industry and facilitates communication. This is the fifth, perhaps the most important reason for using it. Is it wrong that we decide on a word of marketing jargon or an official language? Not necessarily.

In his speech, Marek Walas asks the question: “What makes the word true?” According to the speaker, the author of the dictionaries does not decide about it. They have to pick up words that will survive, but they do not want to look like chasing after fashion. They make human decisions, and these are wrong.

In retrospect, some complaints about words seem ridiculous. For example, Benjamin Franklin stunned the word “colonize.“

Marek Walas notes that the same words appear in the plebiscites of forbidden words and contests for the word of the year, which means that both the first and second body notices words that take on significance but have a different attitude towards them.

And we can also choose one of these two attitudes. Do language changes interfere with us and raise our anxiety? Or maybe we treat them as a funny, interesting and worthy part of living language? “I will be honest. I do not like the word prominent, but it is irrelevant in the face of the growing popularity of the word in the general language and written prose – says Walas. – I want to say that you have to be more careful in deciding which change is bad. We need to be more cautious about imposing our beliefs about words on others. (…) If you use a word and know what it means – this is true. This word may belong to slang, it may be colloquial, you may think that the word is illogical or unnecessary, but the word used is true.”

Baker, however, cited several new, interesting facts, fighting against the stereotype that Google was a “blunt tool” displaying only those pages that contain the words we entered into the search engine. If that was the case, positioning would be very easy. Quoting the words of Matt Cutts: “The truth is that Google can do more than we can imagine.“

Synonym recognition by Google is becoming more and more common. It’s not just about identifying words that differ, for example, in the grammatical type or number. What is new is that Google already recognizes synonymous passwords coming from outside of one word formation group.

The better the search engine will recognize the semantic text layer, the more precise its search will be. Already today, thanks to the use of the little-known function “near the information” (Wonder Wheel), we can see that Google is great at finding related expressions. Although at first glance, the tool looks like a little useful gadget, it is really very interesting.

According to Steven Baker, out of 50 phrases, in which synonyms significantly improved the search results, only one was used improperly.

In the light of the above information, it can be concluded that a new era of SEO copywriting and positioning is coming. The intelligent search engine will combine the synonymous words into semantic groups, and thus the search will become even more precise.

The recognition of synonyms by Google also has a positive effect on the quality of the texts published in order, in general, positioning – that is, adjusting the page to Google’s effective indexing. Along with the increasingly expanded dictionary of the most popular search engine, it becomes possible to create texts saturated with key expressions and at the same time friendly to the reader.

By introducing such improvements, Google emphasizes the importance of one of the most important key factors in positioning, website optimization – good, unique and valuable content.