Re: Active versus passive (WAS Displays versus Appears-Which One? )

[Alan -dot- Miller -at- prometric -dot- com]

>From our esteemed colleague from "Down Under" I read:

[snip]
<So the problem is: must editors also be English teachers? Or
<have we the right to assume a basic understanding of the
<rudiments of grammar and syntax?

<Michael West
<Melbourne, Australia

To which I feel compelled to reply:

Does not an editor's job include a certain amount of pedagogy? How much
grammar and syntax did you learn at the knee (or other favorite joint) of
your first editor? I know, the curricula for today's schools (at least here
in the Colonies) contain less rules-based grammar instruction than they did
mumble, mumble years ago when I was incarcerated ... I mean, attending
school. So, I never presume anything with a new writer. I evaluate what
(s)he has written, and guide accordingly. Of necessity, this does entail
certain limits. If the writer's work is incomprehensible, ungrammatical,
unpunctuated, and unspelled (okay, it's *not* a word, but I'm on a roll
here), or some combination of those; I'll not waste our time. I'll suggest
that (s)he move on to something else. Such cases are rare. Even today's
schools produce graduates that can at least write a complete sentence. The
subject and predicate may not always agree, but I can work with that. I
rather enjoy editing a talented and eager new writer. (Ah, to crush the
young spirit and hear the cries of pain and despair! To grind them under
the heel of the editorial boot!):-{)

Sorry for the tangential stream. Back to the topic.

My earlier comment about the current school curricula notwithstanding, I
have not observed a significant degradation of basic grammar and syntax
among the current generation of writers. Whatever it is that compels one to
become a writer is independent of formal schooling and will rise to the top
no matter what. Good writers have a good ear for language. I suspect (I'm
not a linguist, just an interested bystander) this leads one to
instinctively write correctly (whatever that means) because it *sounds*
right. My job, when wearing my editorial hat, is not only to correct but to
instruct. That is, I want my writers to know BOTH what and why. Saves me
from having to correct the same misteaks:-{) again and again.

There, I feel much better now.

Regards to all,
Al Miller
Chief Documentation Curmudgeon
Prometric(r), Inc.


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Develop HTML-based Help with Macromedia Dreamweaver! (STC Discount.)
**NEW DATE/LOCATION!** January 16-17, 2001, New York, NY.
http://www.weisner.com/training/dreamweaver_help.htm or 800-646-9989.

Take XML and Tech Writing courses online!  Our instructor-led courses
(4-6 hrs/wk) give you "hands on" experience at your convenience. STC members
get 20% off!  http://www.online-learning.com/index.html.
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot-  Visit 
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.