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: USAGE: "Therefore" and "thus" From:Stephen Forrest <techwriter -at- IBM -dot- NET> Date:Mon, 27 Oct 1997 19:46:52 GMT
At 05:39 PM 10/27/97 GMT, Len Olszewski wrote:
>In article <8525653D -dot- 005E0C54 -dot- 00 -at- web_srv -dot- coreco -dot- com>, Emru Townsend
><emru -at- CORECO -dot- COM> writes:
>|>... my question: in many of the documents, I see gleeful overuse of
>|> "therefore" and "thus."
>|>
>|> I'm currently looking for
>|> ways around these terms, but most of the time, I'm stumped. The words
>|> accurately convey the intended meaning, but they just seem wrong.
>
>Picking the right alternatives depends a lot on what your audience
>expects. However, in the past, I have had luck using rhetoric which
>discusses the importance or the implications of a fact rather than
>simply exposing causality. A lot of times, the "thus" or the "therefore"
>is part of an awkward, wordy, passive, or incomplete construction. In
>cases like that, you have to rewrite.
>
>For example, the passage:
>
>"Objects you write cannot be instantiated or executed without CREATE and
>RUN methods. Therefore, CREATE and RUN methods providing the correct
>functionality must be developed."
>
>..is a candidate for rewriting, and here's one possible solution:
>
>"When you write your own object, your CREATE method must create the
>record and catalog entry neccessary to define an application. Your RUN
>method must recognize and correctly interpret the values of instance
>variables it finds in the catalog entry for your application."
>
>The second passage eliminates the "therefore", and provides information
>the reader might find useful. The causality is still apparent, but the
>second passage gives the reader an augmented version with facts the
>documentation should be revealing.
Sorry, but I think the first paragraph is much better. The second makes my
eyes glaze over.
