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.
Subject:Re: Grammar and usage From:Beverly Parks <bparks -at- HUACHUCA-EMH1 -dot- ARMY -dot- MIL> Date:Wed, 21 Dec 1994 07:57:10 MST
> Speaking of grammatical usage, I'd like to raise another issue. It is my
> belief that grammar has always ultimately been defined by usage, although it
> often takes many years for a particular usage to be considered acceptable.
> Now, we are seeing a strange anomaly: grammatical usage of registered (and
> unregistered) trademarks is dictated by law. Although I completely understand
> the intentions behind this, I find the restrictions being put on writers by
> lawyers to be ludicrous. I can't write, "He wiped his nose with a Kleenex,"
> but must instead say "He wiped his nose with a Kleenex tissue," or worse, "He
> wiped his nose with a Kleenex (TM) tissue." (It may be Kleenex (R) tissue in
> this case: I don't remember.) Some companies have gone further, using
> corporate standards and guidelines to discourage use of their trademarks and
> service marks in specific grammatical constructions (such as in the
> possessive case).
> Comments?
> PJ Rose
> Technical Writing Consultant
So what's wrong with simply "He wiped his nose with a tissue"?
(Okay, so maybe I'm avoiding the point).
Beverly Parks
bparks -at- huachuca-emh1 -dot- army -dot- mil
