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: Don't "Should" on Me! From:BurkBrick -at- AOL -dot- COM Date:Thu, 2 Jun 1994 21:02:53 EDT
>What think you about the use of "should," "have to," "must,"
>"need to," and (sometimes) "WILL" in the instructions that
>you read and write?
I'm with you - I avoid them as much as possible. I also watch "will" because
it's often used because we believe that, in the future, this product *will*
do what we says it does. However, by the time the customer gets the product,
it *does* do what we say it does (or at least we hope it does). To my ear, it
sounds more confident.
As a side note, I worked with a writer for a while that changed all my
"wills" to "shalls," which I think is the absolute in condescension. As a
contractor, there wasn't much I could do about it - he had final say - but I
got out of the contract as soon as possible!
>I call the "should/must/need to" constructions parental language,
>because parents often use them in talking with their children.
>Because I don't like reading them, I avoid writing them. I write
>direct requests instead.
Actually, this isn't the rationale I use - the imperative is just as didactic
and parental as the other forms. For example: "Make your bed!" "Take out the
garbage." However, I think there are lots of other good reasons to use it.