Category: Spoken English Vs Written English - words by kurt

Aspire to inspire

Tip #156: Don’t be an average writer

2/9/2017

Precision of language comprises a key difference between more effective writers and average ones. That’s why we’ve repeatedly addressed different specific instances of precision of language in this forum. Today we’re going to examine another such instance involving the word average.

An average is a quantity derived by dividing the sum of two or more individual quantities by the number of quantities. The word appears as a noun, a verb, and an adjective. Most of the confusion less effective writers have involves its use as a verb.

Consider the example sentence in the cropped graphic above. A more effective writer understands that an average by definition requires more than one unit or element. Furthermore, each individual steel bar has its own length, which may or may not be the average length. Thus, a more effective writer would employ precision of language to revise the example sentence.

The fifty steel bars in the lot average 205 cm in length.

Technically, the concept of average does not recommend using the word as a verb. Its now common use in spoken English has proliferated that application widely. However, as we’ve often seen in this forum, spoken English and written English are not the same animal.

Precision of language separates the more effective writers from the less effective average ones. So don’t be an average writer! Understand the proper use of average, and you can present your messages in writing more effectively. That in turn will improve the estimation your audience gives to both you and your brands.

Tip #151: Datum is a part of data

1/5/2017

One of my most frequently addressed topics in this forum is the difference between written and spoken English. That’s because understanding that difference can help you to write more precisely, and greater precision produces more effective technical writing. This week we’ll examine an example that comes to the English language from the Greek. I’m talking about the use of datum and data.

As our world becomes more and more driven by technology, the data underlying that technology becomes a more common part of our world, and hence the word used to describe it also becomes more common. With that ubiquity comes the natural evolution that all languages experience. In this case, the plural noun data has been increasing used as a singular noun. Aiding this evolution is the increasing disuse of the singular noun datum.

Some technical writing gurus may argue that following this evolution is fine, but I’m not one of them. Using data as a singular noun introduces an element of informality into technical writing, much the same way that transcribing spoken English does.

It’s very common in speech to employ informal constructs. But more effective technical writing demands that writers avoid informality. So if you want more effective technical writing, remember that datum is a part of data. More precise language means a better presentation of your message to your audience, and that will leave them with a better impression of both you and your brands.

Tip #129: Stay outside of outside of

7/21/2016

About a month ago I discussed the proper use of inside of to demonstrate how precision of language contributes to more effective technical writing. This week I’ll be examining a similar construction — outside of — to demonstrate a similar effect.

If you read that previous post about inside of, you’ll know the importance of distinguishing between spoken and written English. More effective writers understand and incorporate these differences into their writing. Because spoken English by convention is more lax, it carries an informality inconsistent with the tone which technical writing should often convey.

For instance, take the example sentence in the graphic above. The phrase outside of is colloquial and as such conveys that informality which more effective technical writing omits. A more effective writer will opt to replace the colloquial phrase with a more formal but equivalent meaning expression. Here are some examples:

The fracture initiated just outside the joint at the stress concentration point.

The fracture initiated near the joint at the stress concentration point.

Compare each of these sentences with the example sentence in the above graphic, and you should discern a difference in tone. More effective technical writing demonstrates a greater sensitivity for such differences.

The difference here is the word of. The word of is redundant and should be eliminated. It contributes no additional meaning and increases the informality of tone. More effective technical writing generally has a more formal tone, and all more effective writing eliminates redundancies of language.

Sometimes a writer will want to use outside of to mean aside from or except for. In these cases, the writer should employ the intended meaning and not outside of.

Aside from an occasional failure, the new unit performs reliably.

Except for an occasional failure, the new unit performs reliably.

The difference between these two sentences and one which would use outside of is precision of language. More effective technical writing tends to have more precise language.

Make sure you embrace greater precision of language and avoid redundancies in your technical writing. Stay outside of outside of. You will produce not only more effective technical writing but also more effective presentations of both you and your brands to your audience.

Tip #127: Bunches of things aren’t people

7/7/2016

Two weeks ago I used inside of to extol the need for more effective technical writing to avoid colloquialisms. Colloquialisms signal spoken English and its attendant lack of formality, which lack more effective technical writers aim to avoid.

Employing more formal language in technical writing is like matching the tool to the job. You could cut down a tree with the saw blade inside a pocketknife, but you would be better served using a chainsaw for that job.

Likewise, more effective technical writing has certain characteristics that make it more effective. One such characteristic is a tone with greater formality than we typically use when speaking. Hence the importance of understanding the differences between spoken and written English. More effective technical writers avoid colloquialisms.

Inside of, which I discussed two weeks ago, is one such colloquialism. Bunch is another colloquialism under certain circumstances. A bunch is literally a number of things growing or fastened together. Using bunch in reference to things (such as several plates welded together) is appropriate because that use is consistent with its formal definition.

However, bunch also has informal meanings, and when referenced these definitions makes its use colloquial. Using bunch to mean a group of people or a lot of something may find acceptance in speaking, but such informality produces less effective technical writing.

Consider the example sentence in the cropped graphic above. Exactly what does the writer mean to say? Is the intended message about the quantity of inspectors on site? Or is the intended message about the group nature of the inspectors? Whatever the answer, the writer should employ more precise language to convey the intended meaning.

At that point, seven inspectors appeared on site.

At that point, a group of inspectors appeared on site.

Bunches of things aren’t people. Using precise language produces better technical writing because it more effectively conveys the intended meaning of the writer. That better presentation not only communicates an intended message more effectively but also represents you and your brands in a more positive light to your audience.

Tip #115: Lay off the euphemisms

4/14/2016

Last week I discussed yet another instance of the differences between spoken English and written English, specifically the use of the suffix -wise. This week I’m going to examine another such instance — the use of euphemisms.

Euphemisms are words which substitute for other words which may have offensive or otherwise insensitive connotations. For instance, people will often say that someone passed away rather than that he or she died. We sometimes also say that someone was laid off rather than fired; even though a lay off is often temporary, many of them do become permanent, and using this term instead of the more blunt fired softens the blow of losing one’s employment. Used with prudence, euphemisms can provide a more sensitive presentation of an idea.

That doesn’t mean that all writers should embrace euphemisms. As a general rule, technical writers should avoid euphemisms. More effective technical writing often employs more directness than is usually conveyed with euphemisms. And more effective technical writers use the simplest word that best conveys the intended meaning.

Consider the example sentence in the cropped graphic above. By itself, the sentence seems completely acceptable. Yet consider the change produced when the writer replaces the euphemism previously owned with used.

Subsequently, production runs from the used equipment contained defective widgets, often in excess of company standards.

The writer has replaced one word with two while providing a more direct presentation of the intended meaning, none of which was lost. This revised sentence is, therefore, more effective.

So lay off the euphemisms. You’ll strengthen your technical writing, making it more effective. And more effective technical writing makes a more effective presentation of not only your message but also yourself and your brands.

Tip #114: Be wise about -wise

4/7/2016

Of the many themes I embrace regularly on this technical writing blog, perhaps the most frequently embraced is understanding the differences between spoken English and written English. That’s because this one theme strikes at the heart of so many obstacles to more effective technical writing.

While based in the same language, the two communication forms have different conventions. Spoken English tends to be more fluid and accepting of deviation, often because voice carries additional identifiers of meaning, such as intonation, for example. Written English, on the other hand, has simply the visual image of characters collected together, thus leading to more rigidity in its conventions.

Consider the suffix -wise for instance. Spoken English often accepts this suffix at the end of words to communicate a relationship with a given aspect — the noun to which the suffix is attached. Thus, we have words like lengthwise, a word which conveys a relationship with length. Words such as lengthwise have a long history of use and acceptance. Many other words with the -wise suffix do not. Although the conventions of spoken English may tolerate that, the conventions of written English do not. More effective technical writing requires more formality.

The example sentence in the cropped graphic above provides a good demonstration. It is perfectly acceptable in spoken English, but in written English it does not convey the formality that often attends more effective technical writing. The writer can correct that deficiency with a slight change to the end:

Their products rate high on efficiency.

Alternatively, the writer may opt for the slightly more wordy but no less grammatically correct

Their products have a high efficiency rating.

Either sentence is grammatically correct and much more effective than the original example sentence in the cropped graphic.

Be wise with -wise. The most effective technical writing is not simply transcribed speech. The most effective technical writing respects the difference between spoken English and written English to convey better the message intended for your audience. And that more effective presentation will represent you and your brands more effectively as well.

Tip # 112: You can and may use can or may

3/24/2016

Lately I’ve been addressing the need for more precision in technical writing. Last week I discussed the differences in using flammable, inflammable, and nonflammable. The previous week I highlighted the differences between adapt, adept, and adopt.

Greater precision in technical writing is a frequent topic on this blog for good reason. More precise language contributes to both clarity and conciseness, the two hallmarks of the most effective technical writing. Examining the differences between apparently similar but different words, therefore, can contribute to more effective technical writing.

Here’s another example of apparently similar but different words to consider. Less effective writers often confuse can and may. Can is an auxiliary verb communicating ability or capability. May is also an auxiliary verb, but it communicates possibility, permission, or a wish.

Speakers of English often use can to communicate permission. For example, Can we go now? is considered very appropriate. But as we’ve discussed many times, spoken English and written English don’t always follow the same conventions.

In technical writing, using can to communicate permission is not precise and leads to less effective writing. Can we go now? actually asks if we have the ability or capability to leave now, which is related to and yet different from asking if we have permission to leave. May we go now? is much more precise and therefore much more effective.

The above graphic summarizes the uses of can and may that contribute to more effective technical writing. You can and may use can or may, but they’re not interchangeable. Don’t use one when the other is more effective. More precision in language makes more effective technical writing. And more effective technical writing presents you and your brands more effectively to your audience.

Tip #110: Adapt to the differences in adapt, adept, and adopt

3/10/2016

Last week I discussed the use of also in producing more effective technical writing. Understanding the difference between spoken English and written English can make all the difference in your writing.

For example, understanding that difference can help you to choose the right word. In English, many words with similar pronunciations can have very different meanings. Take, for instance, adapt, adept, and adopt. To adapt is a verb which means to make suitable for a new use or purpose or to become adjusted to new conditions. Adept, however, is an adjective which means very skilled and proficient. And to adopt is a verb meaning to take and use or to follow as one’s own.

Three different words. Similar spellings. Similar pronunciations. Very different meanings. The example sentence in the cropped graphic above demonstrates the correct use of each of these words.

Don’t be fooled. Similar spellings and pronunciations do not always indicate similar definitions. Adapt to the differences in adapt, adept, and adopt. You’ll make your technical writing more effective. And more effective writing will present you and your brands more effectively to your audiences.

Tip #109: Also, don't begin with also

3/3/2016

A common theme in my technical writing blog is the need for writers to distinguish between spoken English and written English. Because the two forms follow different conventions, technical writers who write like they speak often produce less effective writing.

A good example involves the word also. Often in speaking we will begin with a transitional word or phrase to connect ideas together for our audience. We can and often do provide similar transitions in our writing. However, also provides a weak transition, suggesting an afterthought rather than an intentional idea.

Consider the example sentence in the cropped graphic above. The role played by corrosion in the material failure does not appear to be secondary or an afterthought. It played an important role in the chain of events leading to final fracture. Therefore, the more effective technical writer will rewrite this sentence. Here is one option:

In addition, the corrosive environment weakened the material, accelerating the time to failure.

Beginning the sentence with a stronger transition is not the only option. The writer could also change the position of also.

The corrosive environment also weakened the material, accelerating the time to failure.

By placing also after the subject of the sentence, the adverb now no longer communicates an afterthought but rather an additional, important thought. Compare each of these alternatives against the original example in the cropped graphic above. The impression created by the original is much weaker than either of the alternatives presented here.

Don’t settle for less effective writing by introducing sentences with weaker transitions. Also, don’t begin with also. Present your message coherently, clearly, and concisely. That makes for more effective writing. And more effective writing makes for more effective presentations of both you and your brands.

Tip #104: As such, you shouldn't use as such

1/28/2016

I’ve been discussing the importance of distinguishing written English from spoken English and how making that distinction can help writers produce more effective technical writing. Last week I encouraged writers to avoid using try and. This week I’m focusing on avoiding as such.

Sometimes writers like to employ expressions that make them sound sophisticated. Other writers want a transition element between sentences and simply use what sounds good. Still other writers just use expressions out of habit without really thinking about what they are doing. As such is one such example of all these instances.

Consider the example sentence in the cropped graphic above. Because of problems with welding the joint materials using gas tunsten arc welding, welders need to use a different weld technique. Using as such seems to provide a natural transition that connects that conclusion with the idea in the previous sentence.

However, as such itself has no concrete meaning. Its function then is solely to provide a buffer between the ideas of adjacent sentences. Although this function proves very useful in spoken English (because it gives time for the brain of the audience to catch up with the speaker’s mouth), it serves no useful function in written English. And using words that have no real utility produces less effective technical writing.

Technical writers who desire a transition between the ideas in adjacent sentences would be more effective to select a word that has no purpose other than serving as a transition. For example,

Therefore, use of GTAW for this joint should be discontinued.

Consequently, use of GTAW for this joint should be discontinued.

Other transitory words could also be acceptable. More effective technical writing is clear and concise. Every word writers select influences the clarity and conciseness of their documents. Words and phrases such as as such add nothing substantial or useful.

As such, you shouldn’t use as such — and yes, I deliberately used it here to make the point and a pun at the same time! More effective writers craft more effective presentations. And more effective presentations not only communicate more effectively but also represent the writers who craft them and their brands more effectively as well.