----------------------------------------------------------------- THE BETTER WRITING SKILLS NEWSLETTER, September 2008 By Tim North of Scribe Consulting (http://www.scribe.com.au) http://www.BetterWritingSkills.com ----------------------------------------------------------------- Welcome to the September 2008 Better Writing Skills newsletter. IN THIS ISSUE 1. Should we "talk to the slides"? 2. How can I improve my writing? 3. Is Google a poor way to make decisions about English usage? 4. Just for fun Your comments and questions are always welcome. Just send e-mail to: info@BetterWritingSkills.com Cheers, Tim North Perth, Western Australia ----------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Should we "talk to the slides"? ----------------------------------------------------------------- My first correspondent this month, Rachel, wrote in with a question about corporate English: You might be able to enlighten me about the usage of the phrase "talk to the slides" vs "talk about the slides" (presentation). I was informed by a colleague that the new corporate language is to use "talk *to* the slides" when describing a speaker discussing/discoursing his/her presentation instead of the speaker "talking *about* the slides". I'd take this well intentioned advice with a grain of salt, Rachel. I'd always suggest favouring clarity of expression over fashionable buzzwords. To me, it seems to be common sense that we talk *about* the slides *to* the audience. (No self-respecting presenter would ever talk to the slides. You talk to the audience.) It seems natural that our wording should reflect this. Rachel ended by asking "Is this how we write now?" Well, it's certainly not how *I* write. :-) Hope this helps. -- (c) 2008 Tim North: http://www.BetterWritingSkills.com ----------------------------------------------------------------- 2. How can I improve my writing? ----------------------------------------------------------------- My next correspondent, Lisa, wrote in to say: I am hoping to get your advice on how I could improve my writing as a woman of 50 years of age. That's a big question, Lisa. Hmmm. Where to start? Well, as Lisa's e-mail identified her as someone working in a government department, I'd start by checking to see if your department has any writing courses for its staff. If so, enroll for any and all writing courses that are available to you. If you describe these to your manager as a way of improving your on-the-job performance, she or he should be likely to authorise the expense. Something that you can do on your own is to pick up a good style manual. For my Australian readers, try "The Style Manual for Authors, Editors and Printers" (6th edn, Wiley). The first five editions were published by the Federal Government, so it's the definitive writing guide for Australian Government. An equivalent title for users of US English is "The Chicago Manual of Style". A link to this latter title on Amazon.com follows: http://www.amazon.com/o/ASIN/0226104036 Hope this helps. -- (c) 2008 Tim North: http://www.BetterWritingSkills.com ----------------------------------------------------------------- Do you know someone who'd like this newsletter? ----------------------------------------------------------------- Do you have a friend or colleague who'd find the Better Writing Skills newsletter interesting? If so, please feel free to send a copy of this issue to them. Alternatively, please tell them they can browse back issues here: http://www.BetterWritingSkills.com/newsletter.html Thanks for helping to make this newsletter so successful! ----------------------------------------------------------------- 3. Is Google a poor way to make decisions about English usage? ----------------------------------------------------------------- My final correspondent this month, Bill, has gently taken me to task about my use of Google. Long-time readers will know that I frequently use Google to make (or justify) some of my choices regarding contemporary English usage. Bill writes: I fear I find the validation of a grammatical form by "googling" to be a weak form of analysis of the usage of the English language. Should Google be used to justify some of my language choices? Well, I think it comes down to the following philosophical question. In my role as a proofreader and advisor, should I: 1. require other people to conform to a strict (and perhaps old-fashioned sounding) version of standard English?, or 2. encourage contemporary forms that may be less correct to traditionalists? For example, a discussion about choosing between "a" or "an" that refers, as Bill's did [not included], to the French and Anglo- Saxon origins of words may be well researched and scholarly. On the other hand, it may also be largely irrelevant if most speakers neither know of these historical antecedents nor care about them. My own belief is that if everyone in a speech community adopts a certain usage then that usage becomes -- by definition -- correct usage for that community, regardless of its origins. Language is the ultimate democracy. Bill went on to say: We have many "hang-ons" from the past, and although we should expect the language to change over the years, I feel that when explaining the current usage it should be further developed than just taking on a popular vote, for I fear we are too often a persuaded to make decisions based on the opinions of the ignorant. I'm not sure that someone lacking a knowledge of the linguistic origins of their vocabulary can be called ignorant. This sort of information, while of undoubted scholarly interest, is not necessary to avoid being labelled ignorant. I think that may be a bit harsh. Bill continued as follows: Else to our greater shame we will succumb to a wholly US style of the English Language, predicated "Websterist" simplicity, in place of Oxford thoroughness Ah. Now that sounds almost like a religious debate. Using words like "shame" to describe US English isn't (to me) a rational analysis, but one that has become too wrapped up with emotion and dogma. Bill, once again, I thank you for your detailed and insightful views, not all of which were reproduced here. We may just have to agree to disagree on this one. -- (c) 2008 Tim North: http://www.BetterWritingSkills.com ----------------------------------------------------------------- 4. Just for fun ----------------------------------------------------------------- My definition of "fun" may is a bit stretched this month, I'm afraid. Those of you who have to write grant proposals, though, should find this link invaluable. This month have a look at "20 Free Grant Writing Resources for Non-Profits": http://tinyurl.com/5h9c9z Thanks to Sandra for letting me know about this list. Enjoy. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Would you like more help with your writing? ----------------------------------------------------------------- On my Better Writing Skills web site, you'll find my range of jargon-free, downloadable e-books that will help you to become a better writer. These e-books will help you with business proposals, report writing, term papers, technical writing, grant writing, creative writing and more: http://www.BetterWritingSkills.com/ebooks.html ----------------------------------------------------------------- REPRODUCING THIS MATERIAL You are welcome to reproduce the articles that are copyrighted by Tim North, but please don't modify or sell them. Also, please provide a clickable link back to: http://www.BetterWritingSkills.com Additional freely republishable articles can be found here: http://www.BetterWritingSkills.com/free-articles.html FUTURE MAILINGS You can prevent (or receive) future mailings by visiting this page: http://www.BetterWritingSkills.com/newsletter.html This is a GENUINE service, and you will not receive any unsolicited e-mail as a result. You have my word on it. -----------------------------------------------------------------