The Doctor is IN!

Arguing in favor of the serial comma

November 27, 2011 By Leave a Comment

Yesterday, I finished editing a proposal using the client-mandated style guide that followed the Associated Press Stylebook’s requirement. My client’s style guide said: “Use commas to separate elements in a series, but do not put a comma before the conjunction in a simple series (no serial commas)… Use a comma before the conjunction in a complex series.” The style guide provided just a few samples of “simple series” and “complex series.”

OK, fine. Since the client can set the style, I tried to follow their prescription.

What a waste of time it was to have to stop my forward motion to analyze whether each series was “simple” or “complex,” given the limited examples offered by AP and my client. I had to decide whether to insert a serial comma or not in sentences like these:

  1. We define policies that include a delegation agreement, policies and procedures, file review if applicable for UM, credentialing/re-credentialing, and complex case management.
  2. This will achieve cost-effective, measurable and compliant outcomes.
  3. However, we have already made noticeable progress through streamlining workflows for information sharing, defining outcome determinations, and standardizing internal processes to ensure that we meet timeliness targets.*

Imagine 400 pages with about 8 series per page. When I automatically plunk a serial comma before every final conjunction, I move through each series in an average of 15 seconds. In this nightmare scenario, I had to assess each series for simplicity or complexity, and I estimate that this cerebral effort required an average of 45 seconds. At 30 seconds more per series, that’s 26 hours more over the entire 400 pages. (Feel free to check my math.)

Is it any wonder that ALL American style guides except for the Associated Press require writers to use the serial comma? Don’t you wish everyone did?

To read my newsletter article about the serial comma, visit my Constant Contact archive.

*Note: I followed the client’s rules here; I would have used the serial comma in sentence #2.

Filed Under: Grammar, Punctuation Tagged With: , ,

Why bother to field-test your documents?

October 16, 2011 By Leave a Comment

I recently taught a class in procedure writing. To engage learners, I usually have them build a product with folding rulers that I give them, and they write a procedure to instruct others to build their product. (A procedure is a series of numbered steps that someone must follow to produce a specified outcome.)

After each group finishes writing their steps, they field-test their procedures on potential end users (another group in the class). In most cases, those users can perform the procedures without a hitch. Sometimes, however, the procedure writers have forgotten to specify if the ruler is to be placed on the table with the numbers up or down; in other cases, they have completely left out a step.

Such omissions occur because when we write, we sometimes unconsciously leave things out that are perfectly obvious to us. When we actually see users engage with our documents, we realize that we need to add, subtract, substitute, or reorder our text.

Of course, field-testing a document takes time, but so does ineffective, confusing, poorly written communication that confuses readers!

All writers need to field-test their documents. Recently, my home-town newspaper reported on a local author, Nancy Mervar, who field-tested her first children’s book, Nana’s Silly Goats, on a third-grade class. “When I have kids do the editing and revisions with me, I can do the best job on the story,” she said. “It’s really coming from the kids rather than an adult’s viewpoint of what the kids want to hear about.” An added bonus of this experience is that the students learn more about the writing process, especially since Nancy will share her revisions with them.

Want your own folding ruler? Send me a story about your experience with field-testing your documents to improve them, and if I use it in a future column or blog,  I’ll send you a folding ruler; you can even pick your color!

Filed Under: Business writing, Technical Writing, Writing process Tagged With: ,

Sarcasm punctuation mark: A failsafe way to show your ironic intent

October 9, 2011 By Leave a Comment

A student in my Best Buy punctuation course last week sent me a link to an exciting new punctuation mark: the SarcMark. Designed to be used as you use an exclamation or question mark (at the end of a statement in English), the downloadable version is free at the present time. The new punctuation mark will allow you to make it clear that your statement in an e-mail or text message is ironic, avoiding smiley faces.

From Matthew Moore’s blog post in The Telegraph:

“The symbol – a dot inside a single spiral line – can be installed onto any PC running Windows 7, XP or Vista, as well as Macs and Blackberry mobile devices. It can then be used in Word documents, instant instant messenger conversations, Outlook email and other programmes, just by pressing Ctrl and the full stop button.”

Filed Under: Business writing, Grammar, Punctuation, Technology for writing Tagged With: , ,

Oral questioning skills for the technical communicator

September 8, 2011 By Leave a Comment

The WritersUA (User Assistance) website will soon publish my STC conference proceeding (Oral questioning skills for the technical communicator). This site is visited by approximately 20,000 users each month. When it is published, I’ll send a link.

I love thinking about questioning skills. I realize that whenever things go wrong, it’s usually because I didn’t ask the right questions before moving ahead.

I’m offering a webinar today on oral questioning skills for STC (the Society for Technical Communication) and will soon offer my readers a webinar on this important topic, too.

Filed Under: Business speaking, Business survival, Business writing, Communication, Personal observations, Presentations, Public speaking, Technical Writing, Uncategorized Tagged With: , ,

Sartalics (I couldn’t make this up)

August 29, 2011 By 1 Comment

I’ll bet you have you have used sarcasm already today–a bitter, caustic, or ironic statement sometimes meant to hurt. The word comes from the Greek root “to tear [flesh].”

In spoken language, it’s usually possible to indicate sarcasm by body language or intonation. For example, here are two statements (the second would be verbalized as sarcasm): “They say sarcasm is the lowest form of wit. Yeah, right.” Read The Rules of Sarcasm on the BBC News.

However, written language is stripped of verbal or oral cues, and it’s hard to indicate that your words are deliberately sarcastic. Many people indicate their written sarcasm by using quotation marks or smiley faces. Good news! Some clever souls have invented Sartalics (reverse italics) to indicate sarcasm while tweeting, e-mailing, or updating social media sites. There’s a move afoot to get Microsoft to include Sartalics in Office, too. Read more at the Huffington Post and Mediapost. Vote for Sartalics, too!

Filed Under: Grammar, Punctuation Tagged With: , , ,

Webinars are a fine platform to teach technical writing

August 12, 2011 By Leave a Comment

I’m teaching a technical writing class by webinar on the GoToWebinar platform, and it’s going really well, thanks to the outstanding learners in the class. Having been a stand-up trainer for 21 years, I was more than a little skeptical about my ability to interact with learners virtually for two-hour webinars spread over three weeks.

It turns out that I have the same if not better interactions with the learners. I certainly get more questions from them than I do in a live class, perhaps because the question function is anonymous (shy engineers, eh?) And the benefit of spreading the class over three weeks is that I have time to research questions that I can’t answer on the spot; I then highlight these questions and answers at the beginning of the next webinar.

Another benefit is being able to poll the learners; I use the poll as a quiz. Answers are anonymous, but if answers are wrong, I can gently correct them without someone in the class having embarrassed themselves.

It helps that I can use my technical writing text Writing that Works and create slides from it, but for longer discussions, I can refer learners to certain pages in the text.

The responses from learners are positive, too. No one has complained about my condensing an 8-hour class into three 2-hour segments. As part of the class, I am holding one-on-one coaching sessions with each learner, too, and recording the sessions for their future reference.

In many respects, this webinar experience feels more user-driver than a stand-up class. I never would have guessed how positive the webinars can be (some of the participants are joking with me online as much as participants do in live presentations).

I’m having a blast and I don’t even have to go through x-rays at the airport.

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Got writer’s block?

July 3, 2011 By Leave a Comment
How to write a lot cover

Cover for How to Write a Lot

How to Write a Lot by Paul J. Silvia, PhD

Don’t let the stated purpose of this book scare you off: Although it’s “A Practical Guide to Productive Academic Writing,” all writers, including you, need to follow his advice, especially to schedule writing time and be very disciplined about writing during that time.

Silvia suggests that you don’t need to unleash your “inner writer”; instead, “Writing productively is about actions that you aren’t doing but could easily do: making a schedule, setting clear goals, keeping track of your work, rewarding yourself, and building good habits. Productive writers don’t have special gifts or special traits–they just spend more time writing and use this time more efficiently” (pp. 3-4).

Chapter 2 debunks “Specious Barriers to Writing a Lot.” I’ve summarized these self-defeating excuses here, and I’m sure that you, like I, recognize myself in these excuses:

  1. I can’t find time to write.
  2. I need to do some more analysis first.
  3. I need a new computer (laser printer, nice chair, better desk).
  4. I write best when I’m inspired to write.

Silvia offers tools to overcome any writers’ barriers: set goals, set priorities, track progress, and form an “agraphia group” (agraphia means loss of the ability to write). This sounds a lot like the writing process that I promote in my writing classes.

All these suggestions for academic writing can help corporate and organizational writers: “Serious writers write, inspired or not. Over time they discover that routine is a better friend to them than inspiration” (p. 27).

I hope Silvia’s ideas help you convert your writer’s block into writer’s cramp.

Filed Under: Writer's block, Writing process Tagged With: ,

Don’t kill the Oxford (serial) comma

June 30, 2011 By Leave a Comment

The arguments never stop: Those who have no brains are trying to kill the Oxford (serial) comma.

[NOTE: The "frickin" in the second paragraph is no relative of mine.]

Filed Under: Grammar, Style manuals Tagged With: ,

Navy Seals, please take out the Associated Press Stylebook next!

May 20, 2011 By 2 Comments

I just finished editing a 500-page proposal for a company who follows the journalists’ style manual, the Associated Press Stylebook (AP). AP stresses that writers should NOT use a comma before the conjunction in a series (known widely as a serial comma). For example, in this sentence, the final comma is a serial comma: “The end result was a premier golf course community on 225 acres of oak groves, open prairie, and marshlands.”

To be fair, AP does allow the serial comma for a “complex series.”

Here are the three main complaints that I have about the AP position on the serial comma:

  1. Of all the most popular style manuals, AP is the only one who does not require the serial comma.
  2. AP requires the author or editor to stop and make a decision about the complexity of a series of items. All the other style manuals allow authors and editors to just use the comma and save time and brain cells for more important issues in writing.
  3. A series without a serial comma may be confusing to the reader: “I ordered a hamburger, fries, cookies and ice cream.” [Is cookies and ice cream one product or two?] The serial comma would clarify that.

So, please, Navy Seals, can you just delete this provision from the AP Stylebook? It may not be as dramatic as recent successes, but it will save a lot of comma terror in America.

A rapid uncontrolled and disorganized rhythm.
Filed Under: Grammar, Style manuals Tagged With: ,

Writing skills lacking in business school graduates

March 10, 2011 By Leave a Comment

I have always felt insecure about my mathematical abilities, so I understand why engineers and technical employees may feel linguistically insecure: It seems that most of us operate better either in technology or in language.

I was glad to see an article in The Wall Street Journal titled “Students Struggle for Words: Business Schools Put More Emphasis on Writing Amid Employer Complaints.”

Here are a few representative quotes from the article:

  • While MBA students’ quantitative skills are prized by employers, their writing and presentation skills have been a perennial complaint.
  • MBA students often have to unlearn bad behavior, such as using complicated words over simple ones…”edifice” instead of “building,” for example.
  • At Morgan Stanley, managers look over new hires’ emails before they’re sent out to clients…

And from the 163 responses to the article to date: ““ Most writing is taught by English departments, who require a certain number of words, have all writing assignments about novels, and reward flowery prose. Business writing has to be completely different; very direct and to the point. So even those people with ‘good writing skills’ in high school and college will have to unlearn their style when they move into the business world.”

I couldn’t have said it better!

My thanks to Liz Willis, my esteemed editor, for sending me this article!

Filed Under: Grammar Tagged With: , , , ,
« Older Posts
Newer Posts »