Re: Yahoo has no staff tech writers

[Kevin McLauchlan <kmclauchlan -at- chrysalis-its -dot- com>]

.On Friday 11 October 2002 13:49, Bruce Byfield wrote:
> .Kevin McLauchlan wrote:
> > .We can be leaders in setting -- and insisting upon --
> >. good examples of the written and spoken word.
>
> Good luck. Do you really think that anyone is looking to
> us to lead, or will follow if we claim linguistic
> leadership?

Er... no.  But then, only the less-desirable sort of folk 
are amenable to "leadership-by-assertion".  I had in 
mind something more profound and effective:

Leading by quiet, competent, *consistent* example.

> I try to be conscientious in my paid work, so that I can
> represent myself and my clients well. I avoid phrases or
> words that seem inappropriate for the context of my
> writing, and I won't use turns of phrase that strike me
> as ugly or unclear. But I refuse to inflate my work into
> an example for the ages.
>
> > Or,
> > we can let it slide and follow the language down
> > the tubes, defending every abberation as we defend
> > every opinion, as being equally valid and valuable.

> The trouble with this view is that it is completely
> static. It refuses to accept the undeniable fact that
> language changes or that "abberations" are one of the
> mechanisms for change. For me,this refusal means getting
> caught up in an imaginary situation that has little
> relation to reality.

Not every abberation sticks. I'm not saying I support 
a cast-in-resin, line-in-the-sand approach. I'm saying 
that we should be thoughtful about this stuff, and pick 
our battles.  In many cases, nothing is lost and something 
is gained when we modify how we use a word.

But, in other cases, information or utility is lost, and it 
is worth attempting to stave off such losses.

> Prescriptive grammarians have seen every change for
> centuries as a degeneration of the language. Yet,
> somehow, English survives and thrives,and great writing
> continues to be produced in the language. But, if your
> view is accurate, then everything's been down hill since
> "Hwaet, we gar-Dena..."

When the onlookers are inattentive, or dull, it can be 
an effective arguing tactic to paint the other person's 
position as extreme and unyeilding.

But then, I could come back and suggest that you 
would have no problem with the recent epidemic of 
"grammar overcorrection", where easily-led people are so 
fearful of INcorrectly saying "Johnny and me will do it.", 
that they say things like "The teacher invited John and 
I to stay after the speech."  I'm hearing that kind of 
nonsense from TV anchors.... Canadian TV, fergawdsake!
A clue is desperately in need of a home.

/k



^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Buy ComponentOne Doc-To-Help 6.0, the most powerful SINGLE SOURCE HELP
AUTHORING TOOL for MS Word. SAVE $100 on the full version and $50 on the
upgrade.  Offer ends 10/31/2002 (code: DTH102250).
http://www.componentone.com/d2hlist1002

All-new RoboHelp X3 is now shipping! Get single sourcing, print-quality
documentation, conditional text and much more, in the most monumental
release ever. Save $100! Order online at http://www.ehelp.com/techwr-l

---
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.