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.
Wow...that is an amazingly overheated response.
"Injecting translation," as you call it, was merely an
example for the real issue, which was that the
audience should be considered as the context for
whether or not the sentence was appropriate.
The rest of this diatribe is unproductive, so I leave
you to continue the downward spiral on your own, if
you wish.
--- Lauren <lt34 -at- csus -dot- edu> wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Eddie Hollon [mailto:eddiehollon -at- yahoo -dot- com]
> > Sent: Monday, July 09, 2007 7:53 PM
> > To: Lauren; Techwr-L List
> > Subject: RE: Grammar Question
> >
> > I don't think anyone would argue that the average
> > native-English speaker would have no trouble with
> it.
> > To wit, I stated that very fact myself. I don't
> see
> > any value in spending time trying to "prove"
> things
> > that aren't being disputed.
>
> However, you have no difficulty discussing subjects
> that are not relevant to
> the current thread, like translations into English.
> If you are having
> difficulty understanding how to write for a general
> and broad audience that
> includes non-native English speakers, then post a
> question about the
> subject.
>
> > Still, your assertion about reading ease doesn't
> touch
> > on translation, which was one of the reasons I
> stated
> > that audience is king.
>
> The original poster did not mention any translation
> issues. In fact, you
> are the only one, it seems, concerned with
> translations of the sentence
> provided in the example.
>
> > What happens if a translator
> > doesn't get the verb tenses correct?
>
> The example sentence had correct verb tense. If a
> translation is wrong,
> then it should be corrected before the technical
> writer or editor receives
> the passage.
>
> > Is there a
> > possibility for misunderstanding?
>
> Translation and readability are not the same thing.
> A non-English passage
> would require correct translation before it is
> composed for readability in a
> document.
>
> > What if one verb was
> > translated in the future tense and one was
> translated
> > in the present tense?
>
> This is an irrelevant question. If a passage is
> translated wrong, then it
> is unreadable because it is wrong, but the subject
> of translation is not a
> subject of readable composition.
>
> > In that case, because the verbs
> > don't agree, the reader could mistakenly interpret
> the
> > directions to imply that one action must take
> place
> > before the other (e.g., write first, draw second).
> > Most likely, this is not a problem for signing
> your
> > name on a picture, but it has the potential to be
> a
> > problem for more critical processes.
>
> No matter how well-written a passage may be, an
> incorrect translation will
> likely, except by luck, produce an incorrect
> passage. For your segue of the
> order of operations, the passage should be
> translated correctly and written
> as, "He will draw a picture, and then write his name
> on it." Notice the
> addition of "and then" to indicate sequence.
> Without that indication, order
> is not an issue, although with the picture preceding
> writing "his name,"
> there is no "it," so order is a non-sequiter in this
> case because the second
> operation cannot occur without the first.
>
> As I said in my original response that you question,
> a more complex process
> may require more detail. One answer in a post will
> not answer every
> possible question for every variation of complexity
> of the given passage.
> Universal answers do not always apply to technical
> communication. I offered
> my opinion on the example sentence given.
>
> > In any event, the assertion that a passage is
> "good
> > enough," because it works for a native English
> speaker
> > is both ethnocentric and short-sighted.
>
> The passage as written, in English, was properly
> written and direct, so it
> is good enough. Ethnicity did not come into play
> and I am quite confused by
> your issue of ethnicity in this passage.
>
> > As
> > professional communicators in , our words have the
> > potential to be translated into any language and
> > distributed across the globe--whether that is your
> > intent or not.
>
> How bold of you to say so. But the fact remains
> that adding more words to
> the sentence would increase the chances of making
> that particular passage
> confusing and subsequently less appropriate for
> translations "across the
> globe."
>
> > Although you may not be writing for an
> > international audience, making faulty assumptions
> or
> > generalizations about the language you use opens
> the
> > door to all kinds of problems.
>
> I have generally written for audiences of various
> ethnicities and audiences
> from various non-native English speaking
> backgrounds. I have rarely written
> for a strictly, native English-speaking audience.
> As a result, I keep my
> documentation very concise, neutral, and direct with
> appropriate detail as
> necessary.
>
> The example passage did not require more detail than
> what was given to be
> understandable. If the sentence given was an
> example of a grammar question,
> but really applied to a different sentence that had
> translation issues, then
> the other sentence should have been provided because
> a different sentence
> may require more detail.
>
> > Therefore, writing with
> > your audience's needs and limitations in mind is
> the
> > only logical advice to give, which was my original
> > point.
>
> Regardless of the specific audience in the case of
> the example sentence
> given, my suggestions were appropriate for a broad
> and general audience. If
> the audience was a non-native English speaking
> audience, then my suggestions
> would be more appropriate then unessarily
> lengthening the sentence by adding
> another "will" or qualifying "it," which could be
> necessitated by adding
> another "will." If the audience had issues with
> basic, second-grade
> sentences, then the original poster should have
> mentioned those issues.
>
> Your act of raising issues that were not naturally
> raised by the original
> question or even realistically a part of the issue
> of grammar for the
> example sentence given seems like an odd waste of
> time, but I am optimistic
> that you might value the discussion and that you are
> not intentionally
> wasting time with your odd segue into translations.
> But please, if you
> really have a concern about translations, then
> present a question or concern
> about the subject, rather than try to inject the
> subject of translation into
> the subject of grammar about a simple sentence.
>
> Lauren
>
>
>
Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or
printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007
Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more. http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-
