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.
Here as with many other minutiae on this list, about which I normally keep
quiet, common sense should prevail. But today I haven't taken my
tranquilizers yet....
Rules are made by people. Grammar rules in English are under 2 centuries
old. English and its grammar are anyway used, written and spoken
differently in different places.
The following is not directed at any particular person, and holds for
myself as well as others: when we feel secure about what we're doing, we're
generally able to break rules for a good reason and not be bothered by more
rigid people who seek to call us to account. When we're less secure, we
tend to fixate on following "the rules" to protect ourselves from flak.
(Of course, the flak comes one way or another anyway....)
I posed this very question in grad school because I'd been taught the other
way round in grade school. Yeah: period inside quotes--in the US (and in
the humanities; I suspect some US disciplines prescribe otherwise), the
other way round in the UK. When I was a schoolkid long before grad school,
it was the UK way in the USA. Somewhere it changed. And when in Rome (or
grad school), etc.
In software instructions, it can be very confusing to follow a "rule." The
real rule should be: what will make life easiest for my audience. For ex,
it's bad enough having to distinguish between when quotation marks contain
an instruction and when they're part of the instruction. Let's not make it
worse by having to explain the same thing about the period (or the comma,
or whatever).
Make up your own rule when you need to. If anybody asks (and who knows
about these things anyway except other linguistic occultists like
ourselves), say somethiing like "This works better." If the person's
genuinely interested, sure, explain it. Otherwise: end of story. It ain't
worth writing messages like the one I'm writing about such things.
A rule of thumb: if you need to ask a question like this (and this is not
directed against the original inquirer, whose name I don't remember anyway,
but to all of us), take it as a sign that you've come up against a
situation that may need to bend/break a rule; and make up your own mind
what reads best for your targeted audience.
BTW: Unlike any other area in life, I tend to be conservative about
language matters--e.g. I set myself to never split infinitives in tech
writing because I figure it will only reinforce readers that it's generally
acceptable. But I don't kid myself--I know this is an arbitrary rule based
on Latin grammar.
_________________________________________________________
Richard Yanowitz, NYC mailto:ryanowitz -at- bigfoot -dot- com
Freelance writers (including tech writers): join the National Writers Union
for contract help, grievances, health benefits, lobbying, community....
TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot- Send commands
to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/ or search and
browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html
