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.
David Downing wondered: <<Is in truly possible to remove yourself
completely from what you write. Even when it's completely cut and dry
on the surface, and you've deliberately tried to make it so, is it
still going to have SOME trace of your character, personality, etc.
in it?>>
The answer isn't at all cut and dried. At one extreme ("Open the File
menu and select Print"), the answer is obvious: there is no
personality whatsoever in such statements, and it's hard to imagine
how even a forensic linguist <g> could tell whether you or I wrote
the sentence. At the other extreme (descriptions of user-interface
metaphors, providing overall context for procedures, deciding on a
density for index terms and cross-references), there is clearly
considerable personality that remains in the writing, in terms of
overall approach, sentence-level style, and content choices.
This is even more dramatic when we go beyond software documentation.
For example, I work primarily as an editor for non-English authors
who are writing in their second language or a different dialect of
that language so they can publish in English journals. Despite the
rigid (one might even say "anal-retentive") style imposed on science
journal articles, there are clear rhetorical differences between
cultures (e.g., Chinese vs. Japanese vs. Indian), and distinct
differences between authors even within a culture. For example, I can
recognize the distinctive styles of some of my more frequent authors
in a "blind taste test" <g>, with their names stripped from the
manuscript.
So your answer is "maybe": The more scope the author has to diverge
from a rigid and stereotyped description, the more personality
remains in the writing. That's a good thing, imho, so long as the
essential content is provided.
----------------------------------------------------
-- Geoff Hart
ghart -at- videotron -dot- ca / geoffhart -at- mac -dot- com
www.geoff-hart.com
--------------------------------------------------
***Now available*** _Effective onscreen editing_
(http://www.geoff-hart.com/books/eoe/onscreen-book.htm)
ComponentOne Doc-To-Help 2009 is your all-in-one authoring and publishing
solution. Author in Doc-To-Help's XML-based editor, Microsoft Word or
HTML and publish to the Web, Help systems or printed manuals. http://www.doctohelp.com
Help & Manual 5: The complete help authoring tool for individual
authors and teams. Professional power, intuitive interface. Write
once, publish to 8 formats. Multi-user authoring and version control! http://www.helpandmanual.com/
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-