4 ms·
> I often write with some unusual but perfectly valid grammar constructions that are a result of being well read. That's lovely for you. It sounds like you're
by iak8god 5y ago
> I often write with some unusual but perfectly valid grammar constructions that are a result of being well read.
That's lovely for you. It sounds like you're very clever. However, most writing in the workplace is intended to communicate concrete ideas, and benefits more from clarity than cleverness.
- ubermonkey 5y agoThat doesn't have to mean, and in fact should NOT mean, bland.
- Traster 5y agoI think one of the important things you should be thinking about is whether (given your complexity is already tripping up automated tools) it will start tripping up your coworkers.
- iak8god 5y agoYes. Bland is better than "unusual but perfectly valid grammar" any day of the week.
- kevin_thibedeau 5y agoGrammar checkers flag more than "invalid" grammar. Historically lots of arbitrary rules have been improperly applied to English to make it seem like a classical language. I like to enable checks for passive voice but completely eliminating it creates a stilted result and isn't practical, especially in technical writing. These tools are guide. I am free to ignore its advice when I know better.
- lovemenot 5y ago... and yet you used an expression that seems unnecessarily idiomatic and parochial (British right?). I can easily imagine someone in Asia struggling to fit that literal expression to your intended meaning. >> any day of the week
- chiefalchemist 5y agoBland poetry is bad. Bland biz comms are not only acceptable but preferred.
- throwawaythekey 5y agoBland is forgettable. You don't want important biz comms to be forgotten. Bland doesn't spark thought in the reader. Clarity is achievable without being bland
- chiefalchemist 5y agoYou're talking about copy writing. That's different than peer to peer biz comms.
- alasdair_ 5y agoBland is boring and boring documents tend not to be read. Succinct writing with some humor or at least some character to it will actually get that functional spec read. Joe Spolsky wrote a good piece on this topic: https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/10/02/painless-functional-specifications-part-1-why-bother/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/10/02/painless-functiona...
- chiefalchemist 5y agoSense of humor? 1) humor? it's subjective 2) you better be spot on because humor can easily be misinterpreted. 3) along the same lines, it's likely not everyone reading will be of the same native language and/or culture. Humor will likely marginalize them. 4) Frank Luntz "Words That Work". Chapter 1 is comms evergreen gold. https://www.amazon.com/Words-That-Work-What-People/dp/1401309291 https://www.amazon.com/Words-That-Work-What-People/dp/140130...
- chiefalchemist 5y agoI hear clever and I think of the scene from Fight Club. Clever is not something good. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PXcEPSUl0uE https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PXcEPSUl0uE