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.
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 10:31 AM, David Hailey <david -dot- hailey -at- usu -dot- edu> wrote:
> You cannot evaluate the quality of writing without knowing the genre. You do not use the same evaluative filters on a scholarly manuscript that you use on a NSF proposal. They have completely different grammars and completely different style guides describing those grammars.
I would completely disagree with the statement that each genre has a
different style and grammar. I use essentially the same guidelines of
good grammar, style, and puctuation whether I'm writing tech docs at
work, writing e-mail, IM, or blogging. Some people might not, but I
try to be consistant. All that switching gears could lead to
> 4. This is the point I have made again and again in this forum: Grammar is in a constant state of evolution, and with the advent of digital media it is evolving at a rate never seen before in history.
I've been a member of this list since 2005, and a search through my
G-mail mailbox reveals a grand total of 42 posts with your name on
them. I consider myself a very low-volume poster to this list, and I
found that I'd posted 72 times in the same time period. So while you
imply that you've made your point repeatedly, the statistics don't
quite back you up.
> 5. I believe as professional writers we need to realize that grammar is not a bunch of rules we learned in high school (and later in composition classes in college), but something that is much larger and much more complicated.
What point would that serve? Why would *anyone* want a grammar that
is MORE complicated? That's crazy talk. I say simplify, simplify.
ComponentOne Doc-To-Help 2009 is your all-in-one authoring and publishing
solution. Author in Doc-To-Help's XML-based editor, Microsoft Word or
HTML and publish to the Web, Help systems or printed manuals. http://www.doctohelp.com
Help & Manual 5: The complete help authoring tool for individual
authors and teams. Professional power, intuitive interface. Write
once, publish to 8 formats. Multi-user authoring and version control! http://www.helpandmanual.com/
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-