TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Janice Gelb recast Geoff Hart's excerpt...
> <snip>
> if the writer is blaming Word, sit down with them and watch them
> write--assuming they'll let you do this. Maybe they're simply
> using the software the wrong way, and observing them will reveal
> this so you can explain the problem and help them to solve it.
> </snip>
....this way:
> "You may want to sit down and watch how a writer blaming Word
> is using the product -- assuming that's acceptable. Perhaps
> the software is being used incorrectly and you can explain the
> the problem and help solve it."
I know this thread's starting to bug people, but at the risk of nitpicking,
I want to point out some of the costs of that rewrite.
"If the writer is blaming Word, sit down with them" becomes "You may want
to sit down and watch how a writer blaming Word is using the product." The
rewrite changes the order of the concepts. Geoff's original sentence starts
with the writer blaming Word and then gives an imperative. In the rewrite,
you're trying to avoid repeating "the writer," but the cost is that the
more natural "if the writer is blaming Word" gives way to the compressed "a
writer blaming Word" (which takes longer to comprehend if you're diving
into this paragraph without preparation) and gets buried halfway through
the sentence.
"Assuming they'll let you do this" specifies the actors involved. "Assuming
that's acceptable" is more vague.
"Maybe they're simply using the software the wrong way" becomes "Perhaps
the software is being used incorrectly." If you were speaking, which of
these two versions would you be more likely to say? And the rewrite
introduces the passive voice in a context where you really don't want
passive voice. The focus is on the writer who blames Word. Passive voice
erases that writer.
My overall objection to the rewrite is this: it blurs the picture.
The original paragraph is about coaching a frustrated writer. The original
keeps that writer in your mind's eye, mentioning (___insert pronoun of
choice here___) seven times. The rewrite virtually erases the writer from
the picture, takes the concepts out of logical order, introduces vagueness
and passive voice, all to avoid using the singular "they." In my opinion,
this is not an improvement.
I'm not trying to cast aspersions on Janice's writing. I think at least
some of these pitfalls are unavoidable if you recast this paragraph to
avoid the singular "they." I seriously doubt that I could do any better. In
previous posts I advocated recasting sentences to avoid the pronoun, but in
this case, the writing suffers for it. IMO, the singular "they" is a small
price to pay for the clarity and directness of Geoff's original paragraph.
*** Deva(tm) Tools for Dreamweaver and Deva(tm) Search ***
Build Contents, Indexes, and Search for Web Sites and Help Systems
Available 4/30/01 at http://www.devahelp.com or info -at- devahelp -dot- com
Sponsored by DigiPub Solutions Corp, producers of PDF 2001 Conference East,
June 4-6, Baltimore, MD. Now covering Acrobat 5. Early registration deadline
April 27. http://www.pdfconference.com.
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
