Most amateurs and at least some pros are willing to ascribe the unethical intentions of individuals to linguistic forms. (See my post on passive voice.) No where is this more obvious than in the case of “persuasive” language. Yes. Workplace writers can use language to market unhealthy food to the children of their customers convince government regulators…
Yesterday I made the point that workplace readers don’t read minds. It’s the writer’s job to give them the information they need to get the writer’s message. So what do pros do when they aren’t sure what their readers need to know? The smartest way to proceed is to interact with the readers BEFORE sending…
I can think of few reasons why anyone would read a document in the workplace if they already knew what was in it. Sadly, workplace rookies have little experience writing for an audience who knows less than they do. (Remember they’ve created documents exclusively for teachers since they learned to write.) That means their documents…
About the grammar quiz in the WSJ article
A less-than-polite response to the Wall Street Journal’s grammar quiz from the linguist behind Real Grammar.
It’s the usual mish-mash of zombie rules, shibboleths and prejudices. Half of the questions are not about grammar at all, but about spelling and punctuation. Two fail to acknowledge a difference between British and American English usage. Three are based on false ideas about which words can introduce relative clauses. And, inevitably, there are the misguided questions about between versus among, less versus fewer and I in object position or following a preposition.
Folks who rail against passive voice usually cite an unethical writer (or speaker) who is trying to avoid responsibility. Passive voice is certainly one linguistic tool for unethical behavior. But active voice can be used unethically, too. Compare the two lies: My homework was eaten. (passive) The dog ate my homework. (active) I see confusion here between the tool and the…
“Passive voice is bad,” cry self-proclaimed (but undereducated) writing experts. I’ve known lots of these folks who can’t accurately identify a passive. And very few folks who can accurately define it. And even fewer who can provide amateur writers with more useful advice than this platitude. (In fact, I can’t accurately call it a platitude since…
Yesterday’s post argued that sentence variety is the enemy of efficiency. Efficient sentence organization is dependent on cohesion: the links between ideas that hold sentences together. My experience teaching professionals to write is that most are able to create cohesive prose without explicit instruction. But, for those without this ability, the problem is critical. Their readers struggle…
Which fork would you prefer to talk about at a party? Is it the same fork you would want to use when you’re in a hurry to eat your lunch? I hope you agree with me that the fork on the left is more interesting–hence a better candidate for conversation in a social setting–and the fork on the…
I don’t know people who read at work for fun. They read because they need help doing their jobs. That means they’re looking for documents they can USE. Few things make a document more usable than format. (I’m talking about white space, typography, etc.) Revising Professional Writing devotes a chapter to this topic. I’ve been using short…
I am working on a brief video tutorial on format for tomorrow’s post based on a chapter in Revising Professional Writing. Each of my tutorials refers to a one-page workplace document (or an excerpt from a longer document). Because video degrades the quality of the print in those document pages, my plan is to post them here…