TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eddie Hollon [mailto:eddiehollon -at- yahoo -dot- com]
> Sent: Monday, July 09, 2007 7:53 PM
> To: Lauren; Techwr-L List
> Subject: RE: Grammar Question
>
> I don't think anyone would argue that the average
> native-English speaker would have no trouble with it.
> To wit, I stated that very fact myself. I don't see
> any value in spending time trying to "prove" things
> that aren't being disputed.
However, you have no difficulty discussing subjects that are not relevant to
the current thread, like translations into English. If you are having
difficulty understanding how to write for a general and broad audience that
includes non-native English speakers, then post a question about the
subject.
> Still, your assertion about reading ease doesn't touch
> on translation, which was one of the reasons I stated
> that audience is king.
The original poster did not mention any translation issues. In fact, you
are the only one, it seems, concerned with translations of the sentence
provided in the example.
> What happens if a translator
> doesn't get the verb tenses correct?
The example sentence had correct verb tense. If a translation is wrong,
then it should be corrected before the technical writer or editor receives
the passage.
> Is there a
> possibility for misunderstanding?
Translation and readability are not the same thing. A non-English passage
would require correct translation before it is composed for readability in a
document.
> What if one verb was
> translated in the future tense and one was translated
> in the present tense?
This is an irrelevant question. If a passage is translated wrong, then it
is unreadable because it is wrong, but the subject of translation is not a
subject of readable composition.
> In that case, because the verbs
> don't agree, the reader could mistakenly interpret the
> directions to imply that one action must take place
> before the other (e.g., write first, draw second).
> Most likely, this is not a problem for signing your
> name on a picture, but it has the potential to be a
> problem for more critical processes.
No matter how well-written a passage may be, an incorrect translation will
likely, except by luck, produce an incorrect passage. For your segue of the
order of operations, the passage should be translated correctly and written
as, "He will draw a picture, and then write his name on it." Notice the
addition of "and then" to indicate sequence. Without that indication, order
is not an issue, although with the picture preceding writing "his name,"
there is no "it," so order is a non-sequiter in this case because the second
operation cannot occur without the first.
As I said in my original response that you question, a more complex process
may require more detail. One answer in a post will not answer every
possible question for every variation of complexity of the given passage.
Universal answers do not always apply to technical communication. I offered
my opinion on the example sentence given.
> In any event, the assertion that a passage is "good
> enough," because it works for a native English speaker
> is both ethnocentric and short-sighted.
The passage as written, in English, was properly written and direct, so it
is good enough. Ethnicity did not come into play and I am quite confused by
your issue of ethnicity in this passage.
> As
> professional communicators in , our words have the
> potential to be translated into any language and
> distributed across the globe--whether that is your
> intent or not.
How bold of you to say so. But the fact remains that adding more words to
the sentence would increase the chances of making that particular passage
confusing and subsequently less appropriate for translations "across the
globe."
> Although you may not be writing for an
> international audience, making faulty assumptions or
> generalizations about the language you use opens the
> door to all kinds of problems.
I have generally written for audiences of various ethnicities and audiences
from various non-native English speaking backgrounds. I have rarely written
for a strictly, native English-speaking audience. As a result, I keep my
documentation very concise, neutral, and direct with appropriate detail as
necessary.
The example passage did not require more detail than what was given to be
understandable. If the sentence given was an example of a grammar question,
but really applied to a different sentence that had translation issues, then
the other sentence should have been provided because a different sentence
may require more detail.
> Therefore, writing with
> your audience's needs and limitations in mind is the
> only logical advice to give, which was my original
> point.
Regardless of the specific audience in the case of the example sentence
given, my suggestions were appropriate for a broad and general audience. If
the audience was a non-native English speaking audience, then my suggestions
would be more appropriate then unessarily lengthening the sentence by adding
another "will" or qualifying "it," which could be necessitated by adding
another "will." If the audience had issues with basic, second-grade
sentences, then the original poster should have mentioned those issues.
Your act of raising issues that were not naturally raised by the original
question or even realistically a part of the issue of grammar for the
example sentence given seems like an odd waste of time, but I am optimistic
that you might value the discussion and that you are not intentionally
wasting time with your odd segue into translations. But please, if you
really have a concern about translations, then present a question or concern
about the subject, rather than try to inject the subject of translation into
the subject of grammar about a simple sentence.
Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or
printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007
Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more. http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-
