Choosing the right word: Guidelines for our global audience? (take II)

[Geoff Hart]

Kate Wilcox noted: <<That's good advice for projects that are  
localized. However, we have only one version of English manuals. We  
don't currently localize for the UK, India, and the US, and it's not  
clear which is the larger audience.>>

If you're not localizing, then you should instead by taking steps to  
minimize the misunderstandings. The examples you provided in your  
previous message all show situations in which at least one  
representative member of your Indian audience considers the wording  
rude. Personally, that's not a situation I'd be willing to risk were  
I selling a product into a potentially huge market, so it's worth  
reconsidering whether you should be localizing for the Indian market.  
If so, hire an Indian localization group to do the job for you.

You may not have to make this effort for the UK market, since the UK  
is more accustomed to US cultural imperialism <grin> and since the  
cultural differences are smaller than those with India. Our British  
colleagues are accustomed to these differences, but being unwilling  
to make the extra effort for a large market is still not the optimal  
business strategy. A reasonable compromise to full localization in  
this case might be to hire a local editor and give them a single  
task: don't edit anything except US idiom that will be misleading to  
a UK audience. Your example of team is/are is a classic example: both  
are correct (see: "notional accord"), though I can never remember  
which form the UK prefers. I'd guess "team are", but wait for  
confirmation.

<<Since writers in India and the US often have different opinions  
when it comes to choosing the right word, how do you determine which  
words are right?>>

The same way you do when you're writing only within a single market:  
hire an editor or a writer who plays one on TV <grin>. Really.  
Correct word choice isn't a matter of opinion: you need to rely on  
someone who knows word usage well and can defend that usage.

<<As a manager, how would you decide and how would you explain that  
decision to writers whose opinions differ?>>

In some cases, it's simply a matter of pointing them to a dictionary.  
Google, if you understand how to constrain a search properly and  
evaluate the quality of your sources (e.g., an international  
standards body is more credible than a Usenet newsgroup about boy  
bands), can also provide good insights into usage. Referring to  
credible published materials also demonstrates usage authoritatively.  
Where there's a risk of serious consequences if the meaning is  
misunderstood, both words are the wrong choice; choose a word that  
doesn't carry that risk.

And sometimes you'll find that two writers disagree, and both have  
strong support for their opinion. This happens sometimes, witness the  
way Microsoft's style guide contradicts the dictionary and common  
usage in many cases; both are right for different contexts (e.g.,  
speak Microsoft if you work for Microsoft). In that case, you do what  
you're hired to do as a manager: choose the one you feel is right,  
make that choice your corporate standard (add it to the style guide  
and teach your editors to look for misuse of the other word), and  
move on to bigger challenges. Any writer who gets bent out of shape  
over a simple word choice and can't convince anyone else they're  
right needs to learn to cope.

Note, however, that if you're referring to the specific situation in  
which the Indian writer considers the wording rude and your American  
colleagues don't. When writing for the Indian market, the Indian  
writer's experience trumps that of the American writers ***for that  
market***.


----------------------------------------------------
-- Geoff Hart
ghart at videotron.ca / geoffhart at mac.com
www.geoff-hart.com
--------------------------------------------------
***Now available***  _Effective onscreen editing_
(http://www.geoff-hart.com/home/onscreen-book.htm)