Re: Clarity (was re: overused phrases/words)

[Barb Philbrick <caslonsvcs -at- IBM -dot- NET>]

>"To keep this discussion from turning into a dump for pet peeves, what
>are some of the best methods you (techwhirlers) use to keep your
>writing tight and concise?"
Pretend like you have to fit four pages onto one. I used to have to do
this in real life ---- everything had to fit in a 4, 8, or 16 page
layout. I learned a lot about what had to be said and what could
safely be left out. I also found that I used a lot of phrases that
didn't really add anything --- things like "this feature is used to .
. ." and "this feature is designed to . . . "  can usually be turned
to "this feature does."

I don't recommend this as an actual practice --- one of these 16 page
layouts turned into a 60-page document that was much more readable
(larger type, more graphics, and white space) and offered theory
information that users appreciated --- but it does teach you to
tighten your text to the essentials.

> "Do you ever read it aloud?"
Occasional sentences, but not whole documents.

>"And does anyone find that technical writing makes his/her other
>writing better? worse? more difficult?"
I haven't really tried my hand at creative writing in a while, and
sometimes I'm afraid I've lost my touch for purple prose. I do think
technical writing has taught me discipline when writing, realistic
ideas about the amount of time something will take to write, and
sharpened my grammar skills.

Barb

Barbara Philbrick, Caslon Services Inc.
Technical Writing. caslonsvcs -at- ibm -dot- net
Cleveland, OH


 From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000