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: Typeface/Let's Make it Clear (?) From:kendal stitzel <kensti -at- KENSTI -dot- AUTO-TROL -dot- COM> Date:Tue, 30 Nov 1993 12:13:45 MST
Maybe I don't speak academic, but doesn't "Let's Make it Clear!"
(by Paul Trummel and recently posted by Nancy Burns (nburns -at- noao -dot- edu))
seem a contradiction?
It makes me cringe to see phrases like, "Legible typographic design
comprises a codirectional concatenation governed by a reader profile that
relates to style or visible rhetoric...." and "Grapholectic: Written
vernacularisation of transdialectal language."
I'd lose my job if I wrote like that! Does this seem an unjustifiably
gross difference between theory and practice to anybody else?
Or am I just so far removed from the groves of academe that this style
of writing shouldn't surprise me if I just knew better?
(Please note: this is not to imply criticism of Nancy's kindly intent in
posting the article!)
kensti -at- Auto-trol -dot- com
(yeah, me again)
"Great Scott! That's rhetoric he's throwing! Anything but rhetoric!"
--villanous character in a comic book