Blog Archives

Tip #93: Be consistent with your criterion for its plural

10/29/2015

I’ve posted before about how writers can weaken their writing by misunderstanding the proper use of words with Greek roots, using phenomenon and phenomena as an example. This week I’m examining criterion and criteria.

Criterion means a standard used for determination. Criterion is singular and has two plural forms: criteria and criterions. Both plural forms are acceptable, which can create some confusion. Most words do not have more than one plural form, and no clear criterion (pun intended) exists for determining when to use each or either one. The choice is simply left to the writer.

Consider the example sentences in the cropped graphic at left. The writer uses criteria and one of its plural forms correctly. Criteria, used in the first sentence, is the plural form more frequently used by writers. But that first sentence would be just as grammatically correct if it appeared like this:

The auditor considers hardness indentations that meet three criterions acceptable.

The writer can choose which plural form to use. But whatever choice is made, the writer should be consistent with that choice. If criterions is preferred, then criterions should always be used. If criteria is preferred, then criteria should always be used. As I said before, the majority of writers prefer criteria.

Whatever you choose, be consistent with your criterion for making its plural. (Yeah, I love puns. Could you tell?) More effective writing applies the criteria of good writing consistently. And more effective writing makes a better presentation of both you and the brands you represent.

1 Comment

Tip #92: Where sentences anticipate ideas, use that not where

10/22/2015

0 Comments

I’ve been posting lately about the importance of precise language in technical writing. Two weeks ago I described the proper use of credible and creditable. Last week I examined the use of intensifiers. The more I provide examples of how precise language improves technical writing, the more a certain theme seems common.

What is that theme? If you’ve been reading my writing tips regularly, you will likely guess I will say “the failure to distinguish between spoken English and written English.” And if there were your guess, you would be right!

Here’s another instance in which more precise language matters. Speakers of the English language can often use where to mean that. However, when a sentence contains an anticipation of an idea that appears later in the same sentence, that is always more appropriate than where.

Consider the example sentence in the cropped graphic above. The allusion references creates an anticipation for whatever was referenced, which appears after where. Because the sentence anticipates what it later reveals, that and not where is the appropriate word.

Replacing where with that yields

The allusion references an earlier report that the firm claimed an exhaustive investigation found no evidence of corrosion.

This sentence sounds awkward but can be corrected by omitting the firm.

The allusion references an earlier report that claimed an exhaustive investigation found no evidence of corrosion.

We have not only used the more appropriate that but also increased the power of the sentence by communicating the same message in fewer words!

Where sentences anticipate ideas, use that not where. More precise language makes more effective technical writing. And more effective writing both makes a more effective presentation and better represents you and your brands.

0 Comments

Tip #91: Intensify your vigilance towards intensifiers

10/15/2015

0 Comments

Last week I addressed the importance of precision in language using the case of credible and creditable as an example. Today I continue riding that precision train by looking at intensifiers.

Intensifiers are adverbs that emphasize degree. Some popular intensifiers are quite, rather, such, too, and very. Although quite common in spoken English, more effective technical writers know that written English is an entirely different animal! That doesn’t mean that intensifiers should never be used. That does mean that more effective writers use care when employing an intensifier.

For instance, consider the example sentences in the cropped graphic at left. A rather considerable modifies distance in a grammatically correct fashion, but those words do not sufficiently describe that distance to the reader. What exactly is “a rather considerable distance?” Such a construction might find acceptance in spoken English but not written English.

Likewise, the use of quite is both grammatically correct and common for some speakers. However, the word adds nothing to the essential meaning of the sentence. A more effective writer will remove it.

To write a more effective sentence, the writer can simply eliminate the adverbs modifying distance or replace the entire phrase with something more descriptive, such as a measurement for the actual distance. In any event, quite should be removed.

The crack extended a distance before being arrested at the weld.

The crack extended before being arrested at the weld.

The crack extended 5.67 mm before being arrested at the weld.

Writers who fail to distinguish the spoken and written forms of English cane easily misuse intensifiers. Once they recognize that distinction, more effective writers will ensure their use of an intensifier adds something substantial to the meaning communicated. If it doesn’t, they will either remove the intensifier or replace t with something more precise or descriptive.

Intensify your vigilance towards intensifiers. Greater precision makes for more effective writing. And more effective writing represents you and your brands more effectively.

0 Comments

Tip #90: Make your use of credible creditable

10/8/2015

0 Comments

More effective technical writers understand the importance of precision in their writing. I posted previously on the importance of precision in technical writing when I described the difference between allude, elude, and refer. Today I’m going to tackle the difference between credible and creditable.

I imagine the confusion stems from the similar appearance and sound of each of these adjectives combined with a failure to distinguish written English from spoken English. Whatever the cause, the words have related but clearly different meanings. Credible means believable. Creditable means worthy of credit or praise.

Consider the example sentences in the cropped graphic above. The writer has misused the word credible. The correction here requires a replacement.

When speaking of someone’s performance in the context of professional employment, one would not describe that performance as believable. Perhaps if the performance were outrageous or outside the bounds of typical expectations, one might describe the behavior as unbelievable. But believable simply doesn’t work, and so credible (which means believable) doesn’t either.

Extra work may make a report more commendable, and as such a more effective writer could employ creditable to describe that report. In the example shown above, the writer uses credible to describe the report, indicating that management believed the report more because of the statistical analysis it contained. Because this is the message the writer intended to send, credible is an appropriate word in this instance.

Thus, a more effective presentation would replace credible in the first sentence but not the second.

We find the intern’s performance creditable. She displayed more initiative in solving the packaging problem than many direct hires show in their regular work, and her statistical analysis made her final report to management more credible.

More effective technical writing follows from more effective use of language, and that demands precision. So make your use of credible creditable. Understand the differences between apparently similar words, and you will present your message more effectively. And that will represent you and your brands more effectively, which is what every serious technical writer wants.

0 Comments

Tip #89: Recognize quid pro quo with your audience

10/1/2015

0 Comments

The first rule of effective writing is to mind your audience. That means respecting the conventions of your particular field. If you violate the expectations of your audience, your presentation will not be as effective as if you honored those expectations.

Some writers think that using elevating-sounding language makes a better presentation. But that approach won’t work if the language used violates the expectations of the audience. Communication is actually a two-person process. If the sender provides a message outside the conventions accepted by the receiver, then the receiver will not entirely understand the message, resulting in less effective communication. Only when the sender respects the conventions of the receiver when sending a message is that message effectively communicated.

Latin phrases provide lots of good examples of this effect. Perhaps the most common Latin phrase in technical writing is quid pro quo, which literally means one thing for another. It connotes a cooperative arrangement between two parties who provide equivalent services or items to each other.

While it sounds elevated (after all, it’s in the language of a civilization that lasted for about 1000 years), using quid pro quo when your audience does not understand the meaning provides less effective communication. More effective communication, not less effective, leads to more effective writing.

Quid pro quo finds common usage in the legal community as well as many business sectors. Outside of these contexts, more effective technical writers will avoid phrases like quid pro quo. And because the phrase is part of a foreign language, more effective technical writers will use italic typeface to write quid pro quo.

So recognize quid pro quo with your audience. If they expect to receive a message according to certain conventions, then ensure your message respects those same conventions. More effective communication makes for a more effective presentation, and that will reflect favorably on both you and your brands.

0 Comments

Tip #93: Be consistent with your criterion for its plural

Tip #92: Where sentences anticipate ideas, use that not where

Tip #91: Intensify your vigilance towards intensifiers

Tip #90: Make your use of credible creditable

Tip #89: Recognize quid pro quo with your audience

Author

Archives

Categories

We Would Love to Help You Become a Better Writer!

Tech Writing

Nonfiction

Family History

Consulting