Part 2--Simple, Simple, Simple

The introduction to Part 2 of “Strategies for Business and Technical Writing” outlines some guidelines for writers to use when writing technical documents. With the specific audience in mind, one must be as clear, straightforward, and simple as possible. The essays included in this section all speak to these principles.

Gobbledygook—Stuart Chase
The word gobbledygook originated when Congressman Maury Maverick became fed up with the jargon and extra words used in government. It’s a long word that describes the USE of long words and too many words in writing. Chase addresses legal talk and academic talk, citing the reasons why professionals use gobbledygook in their fields. In the legal world, jargon is hard to translate, even for lawyers. Although some legal terms are absolutely necessary, a lot of the language is just “excess baggage.” Chase also says that academics are naturally inclined to use flowery words to defend their learning. He introduces the survey completed by the FSA and the conclusions they drew: technical writing (office memos, official reports, and communication with clients) needs clarity, brevity, and common humanity. The FSA survey also instructs writers to consider a speaker and a listener in all communication. I found the last point interesting and useful because if you step back from what you are writing and consider an actual human reading it, you might revise what you said in the first place.

Writing in Your Job—William Zinsser
Zissner asserts that writing, even for an institution, must include humanity. Since so many people have jobs at banks, government offices, financial corporations, academic institutions, and various other businesses, a lack of humanity in everyday writing translates into a lack of humanity for the company. He uses the example of school principals who recognized that they were losing something in their communication. After analyzing their samples and conducting a workshop, he instilled his four tenants: clarity, simplicity, brevity, and humanity. I though the principal example was really interesting because the school administrators realized that they couldn’t blame poor writing and communication skills on the younger generations when they had problems themselves.

The Plain English Revolution—Alan Siegel
Basically, the Plain English Revolution is an organized approach to making technical documents more readable and functional. Although I agreed with the overall point of the article, I think most of the argument is made in the title.

A Critic of Plain Language Misses the Mark—Mark Mathewson
After reading a few essays extolling the virtues of simplicity in writing, I really enjoyed reading this counter-argument on a perceived differing opinion. He addresses a critic of plain language by completing breaking down his points and concluding that a) laypeople are not supposed to understand legal writing and b) lawyers are definitely not expected to write like novelists. While he admits that an average person will not understand the legal terms in technical writing, he says, the difficulty should arise from substance, not syntax. Also, arguing the “lawyers as novelists” point, he points out that no lawyer is expected to entertain and novelists are not plain language writers at all. I found the essay humorous in its argument and well-placed in this section of the book.

**A Guide to Nonsexist Language—language should be unbiased, be careful with pronouns
**International Communication and Language—the same cultural barriers and issues that occur in social settings also occur in business and writing instances. Important to recognize cultural differences without being offensive.