Re: in defense of passive voice

Subject: Re: in defense of passive voice
From: Chris Hamilton <caxdj -at- earthlink -dot- net>
To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 13:35:37 -0500

Coupla points:

-- Sometimes the action is considerably more important than the person
who
performs the action. In this case, passive voice could be a better
choice.

-- More importantly, in the real world, politics (office or otherwise)
are a
powerful player when you're trying to figure out how to word something.
There
are times in any communication when politically, it's appropriate and
desirable
to de-emphasize the player. For instance, if there's a deficiency in the

software, you want to let the user know about it, but you don't want to
write
that your company's product doesn't handle it. Instead of saying "Our
low-flow
toilet sometimes clogs after usage." you could write "Clogging sometimes
occurs
after usage." You're telling people what they need to know without
raising a
flag and saying "Hey, we blew it."

Chris Hamilton
Technical Writer
Tampa, FL





Previous by Author: Link testing methodology
Next by Author: Re: On-the-spot writing test during a job interview?
Previous by Thread: Re: In Defense Of Passive Voice
Next by Thread: Color Background In PDF?


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads