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: Help my sentence... please From:Steve Wax <stevewx -at- ESKIMO -dot- COM> Date:Fri, 4 Aug 1995 20:13:18 -0700
Stacey writes:
>The user manual I'm editing has this sentence:
>In addition, the framis requires a thingy to have been developed, using the
>whatsis tool, that contains whoosies to be used in the whizbang.
>(It's the framis that contains the whoosies, and the whoosies that are being
>used in the whizbang.)
The framis has whoosies used in the whizbang. The framis also needs a
thingy, developed with a whatsis. Clear as mud so far. But what is the
connection, if any, between the thingy and the whoosies/whizbang?
Does the framis require the thingy for the whoosies to be used in the
whizbang? It's utterly unclear, even after your parenthetical clarification,
why a thingy would have to be developed for the framis. And why would a
user's (as opposed to a developer's) manual be concerned with development of
a thingy or anything else (that is, the framis may require the thingy, but
development is not the user's concern)? If you can get rid of development
("to have been developed"), then you can get rid of the whatsis tool, too.
But first things first. What is the purpose of this sentence?? The answer
will tell you how to construct it. Simply test each part of your revision
against its contribution to the purpose. Keep it real simple; take out all
phrases that are not critical to that purpose (e.g., nonrestrictive
phrases). Put them in a second sentence if you need to. This should at least
give you some clarity. If you're left with two short sentences that are
choppy but closely connected conceptually, you can look at weaving them
together.
So...
1. Establish what the author is trying to say.
2. Say it simply and clearly, in separate sentences if need be.
BTW, it would help if you gave us a clue as to what these items and their
relationships really are. I realize it's possible that proprietary
restrictions made you cast the sentence in generic nonsense. But next time
you do that, please bring along a whatsis--my framis cries out for a thingy
large enough to dredge up all the whoozies in my whizbang.
--
steve wax stevewx -at- eskimo -dot- com
-----------------------------------------------------------
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts.
