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.
Subject:Re: Formal vs. informal style? From:Rowena Hart <rhart -at- XCERT -dot- COM> Date:Fri, 22 Jan 1999 11:54:21 -0800
>Michelle Vina-Baltsas has <<...noticed that my style of writing is
>fairly formal compared to many reference guides I'm reading these
>days: they seem to be more conversational. One thing I have
>specifically noticed is the use of contractions... [style guide:]
>"Contractions are often used in speech but should be used in
>discriminatingly in reports, formal letters, and most technical
>writers.>>
Writing style can be a bone of contention, especially when
two or more writers are working together in a team. I don't
know if you are in that situation. For example, I write with a
"journalistic" style (essentially, "keep it simple") but my co-
worker writes with what I'd call an "academic" style. Neither
style is right or wrong, they just sit at different points in the
writing spectrum.
If you want to simplify your writing style, I would suggest taking
a course such as "Introduction to Journalism" or "Introduction
to Non-fiction Writing" at a local college or university. This
would help you shake up your language usage, and help you
experiment/play with a different writing style. If you feel that
your writing style is too formal, choosing to use contractions
isn't going to loosen it up in any measurable way.
Geoff Hart wrote:>the skillful vs. sloppy use of the language,
>and that's more likely the source of the common aversion to informal
>style. "Informal" writing is often sloppy, overly colloquial,
>imprecise, and overly long. It's certainly a good idea to avoid that
>kind of informal language. But you can certainly write informally and
>still produce tight, clear, precise, concise writing; on that basis,
>there's nothing wrong with informality.
One of the easiest ways to check the clarity of your writing
is to read it aloud. Problems that your eyes skip over will
have your tongue tripping and hesitating. You'll quickly
notice redundancies, passive voice, logic errors, and poor
word choice. If you can read an entire document aloud
without difficulty, you're on your way to simple and elegant
language.
