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.
> As we expect from a _North American_ writer. A broader perspective
As english language readers expect. The expectation criteria used for
understanding english writing is not determined by the writer...it is
determined by the english language reader. We're not instructed to
write documentation a certain way becuase that's the way writers want
us to...it is based on how well the reader comprehends what we wrote,
which is passed down through experienced writers.
If you saw anything even closely resembling the original post in a
document, you'd swear it was translated by software...old software.
> acknolwedge that writing styles are different from culture to
> culture. The
sure...but any culture must write in an understandable manner, and if
they are writing technical english, there are certain criteria they
must meet, including avoiding double negatives, parallel
construction, correct usage of the selected words, and an attempt to
use less words when more words are not called for. An english word,
as read by an english language reader means roughly the same thing
regardless of what the writer's original languge is.
> individual was also writing an e-mail not a manual. I teach many
I said it was SO far away from expected that I have to believe the
command of the language is poor regardless of the purpose.
> international students who must learn to write more tightly and
The poster wasn't writing as a student. The poster was writing as
someone with enough expereince to offer a commentary on the field.
>
> Sorry, guys...but I gotta side with Lou on this. The original post
> violates usage and structure to such an extreme degree that it is
> beyond consideration that the original poster posted that way but
> writes technical documentation clearly, as we expect from each
> other.
>
> > On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 07:57:28 -0500, nosnivel -at- netvision -dot- net -dot- il
> > <nosnivel -at- netvision -dot- net -dot- il> wrote:
> >
> > > > Pal, your writing sucks.
John Posada
Senior Technical Writer
?Never be afraid to try something new. Remember that a lone
amateur built the Ark. A large group of professionals built
the Titanic.? - Dave Barry
WEBWORKS FINALDRAFT - EDIT AND REVIEW, REDEFINED
Accelerate the document lifecycle with full online discussions and unique feedback-management capabilities. Unlimited, efficient reviews for Word
and FrameMaker authors. Live, online demo: http://www.webworks.com/techwr-l
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archiver -at- techwr-l -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Send administrative questions to lisa -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.techwr-l.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
