Chapter 4 provides a good checklist for the document writer when making decisions that should keep the document clear and concise. Campbell offers a cookie-cutter approach with checklists (4-1), numbered lists (4-1 cont’d) and columns (4-11).
She introduces some basic rules and explains the differences between technical and narrative writing. The most important thing to remember as a technical writer is to keep the document concise and clear in order to develop a successful document. Campbell lays out the evolution of writing rules (from “fancy and bulky” to “simple is good.”) and recommends that technical writers cut out any unnecessary verbiage, whenever possible.
There are several things to consider when one is trying to cut down on superfluous words:
- Cut out any words that are redundant and be frugal and concise with word usage
- Avoid pompous, stuffy language
- Write as you would speak to the reader
- Use active voice and present tense.
However, don’t change the meaning of the sentence by taking out words. In order to replace long, redundant words with concise ones, the writer should have a good vocabulary and follow these guidelines (Campbell, p.90ff):
- Say what you mean and mean what you say
- Use specific language
- Be consistent
- Remain correct
- Consider the reader
o Don’t assume anything
o Look at the reader’s experience
o Use jargon carefully
o Distinguish between users and readers
o Calculate reading level (see how on p. 124)
o Word documents carefully.
Campbell suggests that the author use active voice and present tense; in addition, the voice and tense should remain consistent throughout the entire document to maintain clarity and conciseness. The author should avoid using vague terms such as sometimes or the overuse of empty phrases to fill the page.
The author should always remember to keep his/her audience in mind and write at the appropriate reading level. Also, when reading out loud, the document should sound just like spoken words. Campbell provides a list of wordy and redundant phrases (p.115f) and pairs them up with clear and precise alternatives.
One should develop a list of favorite transition phrases, but also be careful to not overuse the same ones. Some transition words are: “also, finally, but, still, as, since…” (p.117). Campbell also provides a list of common problem words that are used in a wrong context sometimes (p.118f).
A more serious and common issue is the misplacement of words within a sentence. Misplacement of words can alter the meaning of the entire sentence, which could be devastating in a procedure. The word “only” is extra tricky and has to be placed with caution at the desired location to highlight the proper word(s).
Campbell offers some practical solutions to alleviate the issue of misplaced words: the author should
- use the S-V-O structure
- break the sentences down into short sentences that begin with an action verb
- keep it simple by using short and easy words
- be very specific and “to the point”, avoiding redundancies or jargon as well as negative wording, “turn off” phrases or misplacement of words.
It’s also a good idea to start a sentence with an action verb and to use one action per step within a procedure. Next, the writer should assign the action to the doer (=subject) and structure the sentence in a way that the most important information is at the beginning and at the end of the sentence. Finally, the writer should choose the right format that is clear and concise.
10 comments:
Of the four chapters that we have read so far, this one has hit home for me. This is my writing technique for most of my papers, and for the thesis I am starting. I write so that anyone can pick up my paper and understand what the topic is about and not get flustered with the technical terms that could confuse them and cause them to put the paper down and not come back to it.
I write for the regular Joe. That is the type of writing I like to read, not that technical reading bores me, sometimes I don't have the dictionary with me to look up the technical words. There is nothing wrong with expanding a person's horizon.
For the most part, write for the average person, keep their attention, and make it interesting for them.
One comment about the old school of writing regarding the length of a paper. There are still professors that require specific amount of words and length of papers. I have one due right now. When you have written well about a topic it shouldn't matter the length, and it shouldn't have to be full of filler words to make it longer. So, the old school method is still going on, even in modern day college.
Well written summary Vanda! I love this book!
The tips in this chapter will be beneficial to use in our P&P projects. I think we're reading it at the perfect time to put these tips to use. The chapter will make a great reference tool for the assignments for this course.
I thoroughly enjoyed reading this chapter because of its practical advice. I agree with Robin about the arbitrary length requirements for papers; being so concerned with word and page length takes away from the content of a paper. I think a lot of people feel this way, but that perhaps instructors are looking for a consistent way to grade as well as providing structure for students.
I also thought that the resources provided at the end of the chapter were extremely helpful, particularly the lists of wordy phrases, redundancies, and problem words. I can see myself referring to these not just for this class or school in general, but for years to come.
There were a couple of things that stuck in my mind as I read this chapter: "Write for the user" and "Never sacrifice clarity for brevity."
The first reminds me not to write for casual readers, but for those who have to actually follow the instructions. The second reminds me to focus on the specific meaning I want to convey. It's easy to become overzealous when editing! A few well-placed adjectives can make all the difference in explanations.
I just loved this chapter. It's a combination of The Elements of Style, Modern American Usage and the Associated Press and Chicago Style Guides wrapped up into a single chapter. I learned to use these references as a young journalism/mass communications student and in my first jobs as a copywriter and communications manager.
I still have these mainstays on my desks at work and home. It's nice to see the essentials of good writing apply to the world of policies and procedures. First person, active voice and short punchy sentences void of geek talk and techno dribble!
Good summary, good book. Thanks, Vanda
When I was in high school I wrote a long, term paper that had a minimum word limit. When I finished, I was under the limit but exhausted and did not want to go back and expand on my ideas. Instead, I added articles and random adjectives here and there. I added a couple hundred words throughout the paper. Before, the paper was unacceptable; after, acceptable. There's something really wrong with an educational system where this is the case. Campbell makes some great points about being a word miser in this chapter. Teachers should value this kind of writing more.
Campbell also does a good job connecting the "word miser" ethos specifically to policy and procedure writing. This is a context in which brevity really does affect the comprehensibility of the final product. However, she also makes a good point that brevity plays second fiddle to communicating the necessary information.
On the whole, however, the points she makes in this chapter are identical to the plethora of "good writing" texts on the market (and available for free online, such as through Purdue's OWL website).
As many of you I liked this chapter a lot. There are a couple of suggestions that Campbell brought forward that were really useful for me as a future technical writer and specifically as a policy/procedure writer: use specific language, use action verbs, describe one action per step, and write for the user not the reader.
The old vs. new rules discussion was interesting to me as well. As I read this I thought about the way I write and I clearly tend to use “The Old Rule” style. I do agree however that in the technical communication genre of writing “The New Rule” style is more appropriate. Being precise, clear and keeping it short is a key in the policy/procedure writing.
In response to some of the comments about the requirements instructors may have for the length of papers and acceptance of simplistic writing, I can provide my own opinion as an instructor at a college level. As Campbell opens her chapter by defining deference between technical vs. narrative writing, she states: “The writing most of us learned in school is called narrative writing… It’s usually descriptive and lengthy, and it is often complicated. It uses complex grammatical structures to show the writer’s command of the language” (Campbell, 1998, p. 82). In my opinion the college expectations are just that and naturally grow from the freshman year to the senior year, and continue to increase in graduate education.
The expectations are certainly set by each instructor, the discipline, etc. but I think they should be viewed by students as positive sets of expectations and guidelines that help them be successful in whatever style of writing/genre they are set to master, and not as an exercise of “instructor wants 5 pages with 4 academic sources.” As Dianna mentioned, these expectations provide structure for students and often help students to understand what value the instructor places on the assignment. The expectations help elicit the learning outcomes set by the instructor and the value that the instructor places on the assignment.
Finally, different writing genres require different writing styles. Campbell discusses technical writing style and rightly points out that “pompous, stuffy language” does not fit well into the genre. Academic writing requires more cognitive complexity from writer and the reader (if the reader is to understand it) thus requiring higher linguistic complexity in writing. The writing genre, be it technical, legal, academic, creative writing influence the linguistic style.
Great responses by everyone. I, too, will be keeping this book close to my Chicago Manual of Style. While the technical aspects of CMS are missing in this text, the practical advice Campbell give us is very useful. I've already used some of the advice just this week. I edit a lot of work for our office, I caught a few of the words to avoid in a few pieces that crossed my desk recently. 4-12 - readability for procedure - was interesting. I do agree with the premise that good writing doesn't always fit in a box, but I do find every day that I am forced into boxes for the publications that I write for. So... maybe the specific word length assignments are preparing us for those articles that have to be a certain amount of words.
As I am taking more and more technical communication courses, I find that technical communication textbooks have some sort of chapter similar to Campbell's. I do enjoy it, because it agains reminds me of the writing I should strive for as a technical communicator (use active voice, avoid excessive jargon, etc.). I do find though that Campbell makes her chapter on "What's the best way to word this?" accessible and clear. I appreciate it. I think her "Wording Tip Sheet" is a useful tool for all writers at all levels.
Many of the concepts in Chapter 4 were discussed during the very first course I took in this program: ENG575 Editing Tech. Publications. Although I still have many improvements to make, I feel my writing style changed significantly after applying the techniques learned.
Campbell provided a great review of how to make documents as concise and clear as possible.
Post a Comment