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.
Subject:Re: Do's or Dos From:Earl Morton <WorkgWords -at- AOL -dot- COM> Date:Mon, 30 Dec 1996 01:21:52 -0500
>>The bottom line is that English does not provide a "correct" way. Whatever
>>done must be a compromise chosen by what would hopefully cause the least
>>confusion. It's up to the discretion of the writer and editor. (I'd vote
>So far as I'm concerned, "correct" simply means a systems of conventions
>are useful because they promote clarity. For example, I'm not disturbed
>the change in the subjunctive from "were" to "was" because it's consistent
Basically true, but in our industry "correct" also has to do with
professional presentation by obeying those accepted conventions (which is why
we pick nits like this). When we break the rules, we (and our employers and
clients) look unprofessional. That's one of the compromises we deal with
every day: balancing accepted practice and clarity.
>I don't accept "do's" because using the apostrophe for two purposes
>causes confusion (for example, in the sentence "I can't see why you'd use
I do not suggest using the apostrophe in any expression other than the one in
question. This expression is widely known and used verbally, and I suspect
that THIS PARTICULAR EXPRESSION is less likely to be misunderstood when being
read if the apostrophe (or some other typographical tool, such as italics or
caps) is used to separate the root and the suffix.