A Typical Day? There is no such thing!
I have been tasked with writing a short article for a periodical. You know, a sort of “And finally…” article that you often get on the inside back cover. Entitled “A day in the life” it aims to show what happens to me professionally on a typical day.
The trouble is, what is typical? No two days are the same in the merry corporate world. One day could be a dream of peace and quiet. I start off with a list of things to do and by the end I’ve completed them and go home with a warm, satisfied glow. On another day I may not even get a chance to say “Hi” to my colleagues before being whisked away to a series of planned and impromptu meetings that take up most of the day.
A typical day? There is no such thing and long may it remain so!
When is a lie not a lie?
In the case of the UK Parliament the answer seems to be every time one of the government or opposition opens their mouth. The ongoing spat over the nation’s seemingly ever increasing slide to bankruptcy has seen one side accuse the other of “deliberate untruths” or of “deceit, dishonesty and deception.”
The problem here is that the rules of our Parliament forbid one elected representative of accusing another of telling a lie. Doing so brings their office into disrepute (even more so than the recent expenses scandal) and can bring a punishment of being suspended for a lengthy period. So our politicians have had to develop a way of saying they are lying without actually saying so! It reminds me of a refuge collector (a binman if you are in the UK) who appeared on a TV quiz show and when asked what he did said he was a “local refuge recycling operative”.
The use of such language is something that interests me as a Technical Writer and as someone who likes to keep an eye on the country’s political affairs. Of course modern day politicians will always want to put a positive spin of things and as such will use a particular form of words to do so. It frustrates the hell out of me that politicians never answer a question they don’t want asked. The real joy of this though is the political reporters of this world whose job it is to read between the lines of what is (or what is not) said to unravel what a politician really means.
When it comes to technical communication, use of such language would make most users click the close button straight away. It’s neither clever nor an effective form of communication. In our roles, our language has to be clear and precise in order to allow the user to continue what they were doing. There is no room for ambiguity.
All of this makes me want to scream even louder whenever a politician refuses to answer or evades a question. I guess they won’t change anytime soon. Even so, wouldn’t it be good if even occasionally a politician stood up and said, “Yes I screwed up.”
Love letters straight from the heart
Whilst getting ready to leave the house for work this morning, I was taken by a news item on BBC Radio 4. They took the revelation of love letters written by US politician Mark Sanford to his mistress as the premise to look at this somewhat overlooked communication medium.
Is there still a place in the modern world for love letters. The answer is definitely “No” if the standard of Mr Sanford’s efforts are anything to go by. He may be fighting for his political life right now but he’d almost certainly be fighting for an A grade in any English writing competition. The different forms of electronic communication have certainly changed the way we communicate with if we are not careful the words and grammar we use can reduce its quality.
Take text messages and Twitter as two examples. Twitter has its own unique space in the cyber world. It can be very useful, yet the 140 character message limit does encourage a certain level of language abuse. Likewise text speak can be useful but also incredibly confusing if used incorrectly. Use of abbreviations, incomplete sentences and bad grammar are all acceptable to a point in such media. This becomes a problem though where use of this language is transported into other more traditional media.
Would you use “GR8”, “ROTFL” or “LOL” in your documentation? Only if you wanted to get fired I guess. Likewise I wouldn’t use words like “Bowsie”, “Hockeyed” or “Nixer” unless my audience was a crowd that understood Irish slang. And there is the nub of the question. Is it acceptable to use cockney rhyming slang in your documentation? Yes, if your audience is a collection of Pearly King and Queens. Is it acceptable write really bad corny prose to your mistress? I guess so, if she sees something in you other than your ability to write English. Just don’t get caught.
Note:
Bowsie – A person (normally male) of a very disreputable character. For example, “Is there anyone in this Government who isn’t a complete Bowsie?”
Hockeyed – Heavilly defeated. For example, “Ireland hockeyed England six nil in the World Cup Final and then me missus woke me up.”
Nixer – Job done on the side for cash thereby avoiding paying tax. For example, “I tell you what Minister, I’ll write your next budget speech as a nixer.”
The joy of being a Technical Communicator
I often find myself in a unique position where I see the funny side of language use or where I am consulted on best use of language. Two recent examples spring to mind.
The first was a quote by a celebrity who having had a hit record in the 1980s considered himself “vaguely famous”. Now I would say that you can’t be vaugely famous. You’re either famous or your not. It’s not relative or subjective. If someone has heard of your name, you are famous whether it is 10 or 10,000,000 people. “Vaguely famous” = an oxymoron!
The second example occurred last Friday when a colleague came and asked whether “Dr.” should have a full stop after it. “Yes”, I replied, “It is an abbreviation for “Doctor” and as such should always have a full stop.” The answer went down like a lead balloon but it was the follow up question that really made me chuckle. “Do you have any standards that says that we have to have a full stop?” The documentation in question was for a marketing leaflet which has its own style guide for which I am not responsible. Unfortunately, the style guide didn’t cover such idiosyncrasies so they came to the oracle for a second opinion. The documentation team style guide didn’t cover this either (we don’t have much call for abbreviated titles) but I suggested they stick with my suggestion.
It transpired the reason why my answer was unacceptable was that it generated more work that would take an additional 30 minutes to put right. It was only when I reminded them that they had already wasted that time and more involving the whole of the marketing team and now me and one of the Technical Authors, that they went away with their tail between the legs.
Tish! Tish! One must have standards!
One Million and counting
News that the English language has grown to one million words has been greeted with a mixture of surprise from some quarters and skepticism from others. This milestone has been publicised by the Global Language Monitor who monitor the media for regularly used words and phrases. The problem is some of the “words” recognized by them aren’t really words at all and some will only be acknowledged for a limited time.
However the fact that we have anywhere hear one million is quite an achievement. It is said that the average person uses something like 2500 different words a day. This leaves quite a lot to get through. Scrabble connoisseurs will be happy at least.
