Re: Need Your Opinions re Simplified English (Can I quote you?)

["Dick Margulis " <margulis -at- mail -dot- fiam -dot- net>]

I don't think Gary has it right, but I don't think John does, either. Each is taking, from my perspective, an extreme point of view.

I won't rehash the "language evolves" argument, which neatly refutes Gary's position, as that argument has been expressed eloquently on this list several times by various esteemed list members. On the other hand, I don't think the "whatever" position espoused by John has much validity, either.

Linguists recognize a concept called _diction._ Diction is the choice of forms that a speaker makes variously in varying circumstances. Types of diction include vulgar, slang, informal, standard, and formal.

I think that in most technical communication standard diction is appropriate, vulgar diction is inappropriate, and arguments can be made for and against the others.

The fact that we can usually make out what John means to say, even if he does not use standard diction, does not mean that he is communicating effectively or appropriately. (I'm also not suggesting that John is as careless in the documentation he writes as he is in his posts.)

I don't think that the fact users sometimes employ vulgar diction with their friends makes it appropriate to use it in technical communications, even if we know they'll understand it.

As to what is "correct" or "incorrect" in standard usage, yes, John, there really are rules. And those rules are dictated not by what some long-dead Grammarian set down in a book, but rather by the deep generative grammar that tells native speakers whether a sentence is well formed or not. (William Safire trots out his fictitious judge, Norma Loquendi--yes, that's a joke--to make the call.)

Norma tells us that "It's me" is correct in standard (but not formal) diction, for example. I'm fine with that. However, that doesn't mean that just anything goes because the writer says so.

Dick


John Posada <jposada01 -at- yahoo -dot- com>, with whom I often agree and just as often disagree, wrote:

>
>Sorry, Gary...but I agree with Eric. I write for my audience. I don't
>write for Mr. Webster and language will survive regardless of how I
>write in my tiny part of the documentation universe. I'm not paid to
>be "protector of the word". If I write contrary to what my uers
>understand or contrary to how they are comfortable, who am I
>benefiting besides those few anal writers who care if I use who or
>whom? They are not the ones paying me for my service.  
>

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Free copy of ARTS PDF Tools when you register for the PDF
Conference by May 15. Leading-Edge Practices for Enterprise
& Government, June 3-5, Bethesda,MD. www.PDFConference.com

Check out RoboDemo for tutorials! It makes creating full-motion software
demonstrations and other onscreen support materials easy and intuitive.
Need RoboHelp? Save $100 on RoboHelp Office in May with our mail-in rebate.
Go to http://www.ehelp.com/techwr-l
---
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.