Recent studies identify gendered differences in communication and collaboration styles which suggest consequences for professional writing classrooms. If, indeed, men tend to stereotype women as clerks, prefer hierarchical collaboration, and value product over process, and, too, if gendered differences tend to increase counterproductive dissent, then the gender balance of writing groups might affect their dominant styles in those respects. However, when I analyzed the behaviors of over sixty student groups in my professional writing classes, I did not find gender balancing to have such effects. Instead, however, I observed other gender-related effects on collaboration: tendencies to stereotype men as technical experts and to self-segregate into gendered working teams. These findings suggest new perspectives on the role of gender for collaborative groups in professional writing classrooms.

Participants in a qualitative case study of nonacademic R&D authors were uncomfortable with the idea of persuasion in their writing. The participants thought their reports were more informative than persuasive. Three definitions for “persuasion” emerged: discourse intended to push a reader toward an action; discourse written in a clear, compelling style; and shady, manipulative discourse. When asked whether they owed a greater debt to their audience or to their subject matter, most participants chose subject matter. However, some participants argued that my question posed a false dichotomy, in that serving subject matter was the best way to serve audience.

There is much debate and confusion about the use of the passive voice in texts in general, and in computer manuals in particular. For example, it is often stated that the passive should be avoided, but on the other hand, it may also have a clear function in a text. The aim of this article is to provide clarity by presenting a straightforward principle for the use of the passive voice in computer manuals. This “alternation principle,” in which active voice is used for user actions and the passive voice for automatic computer, is backed by results from recent functional and cognitive linguistic research. It is illustrated by means of fragments from several computer manuals, including some (apparent) counter-examples.

This article examines the frequency and discourse functions of 752 active transitive clauses in a 66,500-word corpus of sixteen research articles in the physical sciences. The overall rate of actives was only 34 percent; the rates were lowest in the Methods (12%) and Abstracts (27%), higher in Introductions (41%) and Results (40%), and highest in Discussions (44%) and Conclusions (52%). The active was often required because of the principle of end-weight. Throughout the research article actives with “real world” grammatical subjects were used to state “scientific truths.” The most prominent other functions tended to vary from section to section and to correlate somewhat with the semantic subcategory of the grammatical subject. Active clauses with human subjects were used to cite research and to introduce metadiscourse, while ones with discourse subjects were used to introduce graphics, and ones with research process subjects and research product subjects were used to make evidential statements about results.

In earlier centuries, authors of medical works intended for popular readers defended their use of the vernacular against potential criticism from their learned colleagues. Scholars have shown that by the sixteenth to seventeenth centuries such defence reflected rhetorical posturing more than political reality. This article examines self-help medical literature in 19th-century Canada, revealing that authors adopted a similar stance in writing for the public. Not only did this rhetorical convention continue, but it also did not assure adoption of the plain style advocated. Moreover, a comparison of their style with that of medical textbook authors reveals few real differences.

Complex noun phrases, although key elements in technical writing for linguistically mature readers, also present major comprehension difficulties for others. This article establishes many important ways of paraphrasing complex noun phrases into simpler structures, and identifies the differences in meaning, style, is tone, and emphasis created by the paraphrases. Whereas many complex noun phrases at the start of the sentence can be easily paraphrased, those at the end of the sentence or embedded within the sentence present greater challenges. Similarly restrictive post-modifiers are easier to paraphrase than those that define. The principles are applied to a short legal text.

This article discusses two conflicts occurring during the first decade of the Royal Society (1660–1670). One conflict concerned the proper method of scientific experimentation, the other the proper writing style for communicating scientific knowledge. Following the method proposed by taxonomists, language would be a vehicle for representing the order of reality in its undisturbed state. Following the method proposed by conjecturalists, language would be a means for constructing a theory and arguing for its validity. Members of the Society were divided over these crucial questions, as evident in scientific documents of the period as well as in Thomas Sprat's History of the Royal Society. Parallels to this division are present in contemporary issues in technical writing, and this article closes by discussing some implications for teaching, practice, and theory.

The roles of physicians and nurses working in trauma centers are mirrored in their writing. Physicians must focus intensely on patients' injuries if lives are to be saved. Their professional prose is correspondingly, and appropriately, focused, with attention given to injuries and their repair. The doctors' partners in the admitting area, trauma nurses, adopt a holistic view, caring for patients' physiologic and psychologic stability. Nurses tend to be more comprehensive in their writing, describing patients as individuals, the families involved, and the threatening and encouraging events that emerge during recovery. Although the distance and impersonal nature of medical writing, as a subset of technical writing, is criticized by technical writing scholars, published works by trauma surgeons may require exactly those characteristics. Perhaps a reflection of that disparity, medical publishers give mixed messages regarding style to physicians and nurses who choose to be authors.

Advice for writers of business communication implies that certain stylistic conventions will contribute to the effectiveness of that communication. The case for improved readability and comprehension which arose from high-impact style is well made; however, a comprehensive review of the literature reveals little consideration as to the impact of the effect of writing style on behavior. To test the effect of writing style on compliance with instructions, the authors operationalized effectiveness as compliance with written instructions and conducted a field test involving 129 military officers. Instructions inviting subjects to obtain certain study materials were prepared in accordance with high-impact, low-impact, and high-impact with bottom line last prescriptions, and were provided to each of three randomly formed groups. Subjects in the group who received high-impact instructions complied with those instructions at a significantly higher rate than the group which received instructions in the low-impact style. Compliance data collected in the study also indicates that high-impact style elicits more timely compliance with instructions and that bottom-line first instructions may be more effective than other styles. The study generally validates the presumption that high-impact writing style is positively correlated with effectiveness in eliciting a desired behavioral response.

This article quantifies specific elements of technical writing style in five award winning technical manuals where combined averages for the style elements are calculated. When these results are compared to what is generally regarded as good technical writing, the results show that the elements of style vary widely between the individual manuals examined. While attempting to define a good technical writing style, the value of such studies must be commented on.

Prescriptions for scientific writing about jargon and the passive voice are based on principles of writing presumed to be universal. They do not take into account that language varies with rhetorical setting, that scientists report their research to peer scientists, and that simplification of scientific language is more often translation than synonymy. Jargon, i.e., scientific terminology, is essential for designating new entities for which the language has no name. It makes for economy and for the accuracy and precision required in scientific research. The passive voice is unavoidable because scientists focus on the subject of their research as objects. The proscription of the passive voice and scientific jargon is rooted in the expectation that scientists write so as to be understood by the general reader.

This article contains results from a literary analysis of fifty scientific papers selected from the top 100 most-cited papers appearing in the Science Citation Index for the period 1945–1988. Most papers are from the field of biochemistry and became citation superstars because their authors discovered a method or material that numerous others could use in their own research. The typical paper has two authors, two tables, six figures, and twenty-two references. It adheres to the conventional topical organization, with the topics distributed as follows: 2 percent abstract, 5 percent introduction, 25 percent methods and materials, 50 percent results, 10 percent discussion, 4 percent conclusion, and 4 percent reference list. Tables and figures occupy about 30 percent of the article. With respect to the writing style, the average sentence is somewhat long (24 words) but not unreasonably so, and the sentence structure is simple greater than half the time. Moreover, sentences tend to rely heavily on to be verbs (about 80% of sentences have at least one) and abstract nouns (0.66 per sentence). Explanations for the typical form and writing style in these papers are provided.

As analysts of scientific writing begin to modify their stance against the passive voice and explore the complexities of its use, more research is needed on the rhetorical functions it serves in scientific writing. An analysis of twelve articles reporting experimental studies in speech-language pathology revealed consistently higher percentages of passive structures in the Method and Results sections, with relatively lower percentages in the Introduction and Discussion sections. These findings suggest that passive structures are more appropriate for expository purposes, in those sections where the author's rhetorical role is to describe procedures and present data. In contrast, active structures are more appropriate for argumentative purposes, in those sections where the author is criticizing previous research or advocating a new thesis.

One of the most effective communication links between corporate management and investors is the annual report. The letter to the shareholders in the report exemplifies the one-on-one communication attempt by chief executive officers and other high level executives with owners. This article examines thirty shareholder letters written by executives who are classified as highly successful based on their own annual salaries and/or the return to shareholders or company performance. The researchers found the letters written by these successful executives to fall within accepted readability levels. The letter writers adhere to convention in the use of numbers and the use of compound adjective. Section headings are not frequently used. The tone of the opening paragraph is usually equivocal or positive even though the first sentences frequently reflect a lack of “you attitude.” In general, the reports written by these successful executives conform to modern-day standards.

This article surveys and critiques the literature on using style checkers and the text-editing capabilities of the computer to assist in revising technical writing. The literature on text-editing capabilities is inconclusive because it is largely anecdotal and methodologically flawed. The literature on style checkers is similarly inconclusive. To better assess the value of the computer, we need to examine the basic premise of the research on revising and word processing: that more revising leads to higher-quality writing. We need to be sure that our evaluative techniques for measuring writing improvement are valid; to focus our attention not only on computer novices but also on computer-experienced writers; to examine other factors that affect how writers use word processing and that in turn might affect writing quality; and to examine more carefully the differences among word processors and among the different style checkers to determine their effects on writing behavior and writing quality.

This article cautions technical writers to be aware of assumptions in their research and writing and suggests a pragmatic incentive for being aware of assumptions. Asserting that our weaknesses are merely our strengths turned inside out by altered circumstances, it compares the power of properly used assumptions with their weakness when improperly used. Its narrative style emphasizes its point with an extended dance metaphor and illustrative examples. “Inspired by the new assumptions, both parties join into a dance of every shifting awareness. Partners in this dance cue each other by tuning in on and accepting the other's assumptions. When the dance starts, communication flows and assumptions begin again. …”

Le style des publications scientifiques et techniques reflete la priorite accordee a la valeur scientifique sur la capacite de communication. Une enquete a ete realisee aupres de redacteurs en chef de periodiques techniques en agriculture et sciences biologiques pour analyser leurs demarches d'edition et leurs suggestions pour l'amelioration du style. Puis une analyse stylistiques des periodiques a ete effectuee

This article discusses the impact of possible sex-based differences in communication styles on the technical writer's job. Linguistic research proposes a male and female style of communication. While it is helpful to acknowledge possible differences in communication styles, technical writers must be concerned with the moral and legal implications of sex stereotyping. To explore these issues, the article discusses what it is technical writers do, and who they interact with on a daily basis. It then reviews linguistic research, and linguistic folklore. Finally, the article determines that technical writers can choose to use both male and female traits to acknowledge multiple audiences, and improve the quality of their documents.

Because of the recent emphasis on rhetorical context in business and technical writing (BTW) instruction, the problem-solving case has become a staple in BTW classrooms. However, a number of critics have voiced concerns about the use of the rhetorical case. These concerns recall an ancient debate among Roman rhetoricians over an early case-study method called declamation. For contemporary theorists, the debate over case study revolves around its value as a stimulant to problem-solving skills, its ability to imitate the realistic circumstances of professional BTW, and its emphasis on persona and audience along with its deemphasis of the teacher. A full spectrum of arguments on these and other issues in the case-study debate indicates that the discipline is entering a new phase in its deliberations over the role of problem-solving and pragmatics in the BTW classroom.

Computer programs for analyzing writing style have grown in number and sophistication over the past decade, and the coming decade will see more and more of them. In order to know the capabilities and limitations of such programs and to decide if any of them are right for you, it is important to understand how they work. In this article, the author draws on his background in computational linguistics to explain how computerized style analyzers accomplish the things that they do.

Modern professionals commonly write documents to be signed by superiors, but are seldom taught how to do this. If students are successfully to fulfill everyday organizational writing tasks, they must learn to master skills of impersonating viewpoint, style and even personality. To teach such skills, we can adapt the ancient exercise of prosopopoeia or impersonation, either by varying the personas of standard textbook exercises, or by making use of the technical writing case study, or by having students impersonate professionals who were involved in famous (or infamous) current events.

Early American science writers used the Puritan plain style sermon as a readily available prose model. From the sermon they derived an organization divided into doctrine and uses, a format using sectional divisions and heads, the use of simple language, and a concern for the needs of their audiences. Essays on comets by two early American scientists, Samuel Danforth and John Winthrop, illustrate the sermon's influence. The doctrine and uses organization employed in these essays may be seen as analogous, in some senses, to the Results and Discussion organization of the modern research report.

Technical writers need a historical perspective in order to distinguish between enduring and transitory writing standards, to understand the variety of past styles in building future styles, and to give the profession a better sense of self-identity. To overcome the problems in developing a historical perspective, such as a dearth of artifacts to examine and the peculiarities in rhetorical time and place which undercut attempts to generalize on historical information, the 200 year-old federal collection of patents is offered as a solution. This collection of patents is also very often the only remaining written work of the ordinary mechanic of the nineteenth century, and this collection truly reflects technical not legal, business, or science writing.

One lesson to be learned from the fatal decision to launch Challenger is that effective technical and group communication requires more than the fidelious exchange of information. This article examines testimony gathered by the Presidential Commission on the Challenger Accident and reveals communication failures in four dimensions of group differentiation—clarity, interrelatedness, centrality, and openness. The article illustrates all four dimensions with excerpts from the Commission Hearings and identifies communication problems peculiar to highly technical groups.

This article is concerned with reviews, surveys, tests, and other formal procedures used in writing for the computer industry that are designed to provide authors and publications managers with information about the quality and nature of documentation. The literature in this area reveals a number of problems with feedback in hightech writing, including the lack of a consistent definition of feedback processes. The article investigates various types of reviews, theoretical aspects of feedback, and elements of feedback specific to hightech writing. This investigation yields three consistent perspectives on feedback: management, style and rhetoric, and research.

We evaluated scientists' abilities to process two writing styles, active and nominal in comprehension and reading speed, and determined their preferences for these styles. International scientists (with English as a first, second, or third language) were tested. Results show scientists comprehend nominal style as well as active style but process nominal style more slowly. Scientists with lower levels of English experience have proportionately greater difficulty processing nominal style than active style. Scientists prefer active writing to nominal writing and rate scientists who write actively higher than those who write nominally. Scientists should use more active style and technical editors should apply a heavy hand to nominal style.

Technical periodicals and proceedings have been important instruments for transmitting news about scientific and technological discoveries for more than 300 years. The first such publications appeared amidst the birth of modem science when, for the first time, emphasis was placed on experiment as the basis for advancement of knowledge. Discussed in this article are the origin of the technical periodical and proceedings and their characteristics up to the end of the 18th century and the analysis of the writing style in an important technical paper written by Isaac Newton and published in 1672.

Scientists and engineers have to present technical information effectively. But when they do it, they face language difficulties which are beyond formal grammar as taught at school. To overcome this problem, we designed a systematic course for technical writing aimed at breaking such language barriers by planned channeling of the scientific message. The course was designed to improve the communication skills of scientists and engineers. In keeping with this goal effective writing criteria were defined and formal presentation conventions were described. Because Hebrew is the common language in Israel, problems of Hebrew structures were presented. The massive infiltration of vocabulary and syntactic elements from foreign languages into scientists' Hebrew style were addressed. An evaluation apparatus was also applied and future prospects of the course were discussed.

Although engineering departments were dissatisfied with early twentieth-century technical writing teaching methods, those methods were not simply a result of “anti-science” attitudes. In fact, late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century composition teachers tried to accommodate the influx of applied science students by teaching correctness and clarity of style and stressing the expository modes of writing. Emphasis on “clarity” was a legacy of rhetoricians like Hugh Blair of the eighteenth century. Emphasis on expository modes was a legacy of the nineteenth-century rhetoricians' interest in the inductive methodology of “pure” science, a method which implied invention by “observation” and made conclusions “self-evident”: argument was unnecessary since observations and methods only need to be explained to “convince.” Applied science departments were, in reality, dissatisfied with teaching methods based on “pure” rather than “applied” science methodology.

As a concept of rhetoric in technical writing, relevance involves an awareness of time. The report deals with the past; the manual, with the present; the proposal, with the future. To be considered relevant, however, all the modes of technical writing must relate to the present reality of the audience. Writers must recognize this need not only as it influences grammar and style but also as it affects larger concerns of organization and tone. Realizing that the temporal classification of modem reports, manuals, and proposals correlates with Aristotle's designation of forensic, epideictic, and deliberative discourse, technical writers can discover a body of rhetorical theory on which to base choices about selection, arrangement, and presentation of subject matter.

A study was undertaken both to evaluate how medical students are taught to write patient records and to examine the writing done by doctors. Typical medical records, written by medical doctors, were also evaluated. A single questionnaire was sent to eighty-four medical school professors, twenty law school faculty, and five practicing attorneys. The questionnaire asked how medical records were used and what the legal implications were in authoring a patient record. The medical professionals were also asked how their schools taught medical writing. The questionnaire pointed out that most medical schools teach less than ten hours of medical writing in their curricula and that patient records are not written with an understanding of the various audiences, purposes, and uses for medical documents. Two radiology reports are discussed in terms of their clarity and usefulness for medical and extra-medical readers. The study concludes that medical students should be taught a composing process so that they will understand the audience, purpose, and use for the patient records they write.

Some theoreticians and practitioners view editing as a superficial task, often no more than the mindless following of a set of prescriptive rules for grammar, syntax, and style. In addition, the editor-author relationship is typically perceived as an interaction between an editor and words. However, drawing upon rhetoric and cognitive psychology, I argue in this article for the complexity and importance of the editing process and the writer-editor relationship. This perspective is tentatively supported by a study of the revising and editing patterns of professional and experienced writers. The study suggests that revising and editing may be equally complex tasks. Further, the complexity increases if editors and authors discuss their changes as opposed to legislating them. Several methods for imparting this perspective and related knowledge to students are discussed.

Stylistic analysis of scientific and technical prose reveals that technical and non-technical expository prose share a number of common characteristics; consequently, common assumptions about a clear stylistic separation between scientific and literary writing are faulty. Technical prose, moreover, possesses a number of rhetorical features which further increase its likeness to literary writing. Both style and rhetoric of technical writing thus point toward non-referential functions in scientific discourse, including the operation of significant cultural codes.

By studying a selection of business and technical texts, one can determine the functions of and the interactions between passive voice, nominalizations, and expressions of agency. One discovers that the distinction between dynamic and stative uses of verbs is crucial for understanding the various functions of passive sentences and nominalizations in business and technical writing. Then the functions of passive sentences and nominalizations are enumerated and illustrated with sentences from business and technical texts before discussing the various devices for expressing agency in passive and nominalized sentences. Only by understanding the various functions of these sentence types can instructors of business and technical writing offer specific and practical advice.

Although George Orwell's “Politics and the English Language” offers good advice to writers, the technical writer's situation and use of language are more effectively discussed in 1984 and its Appendix, “The Principles of Newspeak.” The technical writer must make use of some Newspeak principles, such as limiting vocabulary and narrowing the definition of words; conversely, the writer must try to keep his expression of a corporate point of view and his limitations on wording from finally serving to limit the range of thought itself. Orwell considers these points much more important than “good prose style.”

Proponents of computerized text-analysis (CTA) systems like Bell Laboratories' Writer's Workbench contend that the computer's analysis of a text's surface features can help students become better writers and editors. Several colleges and universities have already integrated the new technology into their writing programs, and others will consider doing so in the future. Teachers of technical writing, however, ought to investigate carefully the capabilities and limitations of CTA before applying it to the technical writing classroom. Not even the most sophisticated of today's computers can detect the basic grammar and punctuation errors that bedevil student writers. Moreover, the computer's evaluation of a text's readability and style is untrustworthy and lacks a sound theoretical and pedagogical foundation; indeed, the machine's quantitative-based analysis of writing style might do some students more harm than good. Finally, there is no empirical evidence that CTA helps students become better writers.

The new technical editor, especially a journal editor, is faced with an immense task. He can consult a vast collection of reference books to help him master the mechanics of editing, learn the system of publication, and improve his writing skills. However, no reference book tells him the thing he needs most: how to master the art of successful communication and interaction with authors, many of whom he will meet only through letters or telephone calls. The technical editor almost always depends on authors for his livelihood, since they submit the original manuscripts and research reports which he turns into the final product. The interaction between writers and editors often leaves both with bad feelings. To help the new technical editor prevent this, eleven guidelines for developing a good style of communication are presented. The goal of these guidelines is to make the editorial process satisfying and pleasant for all concerned.

Medical and scientific writing have traditionally occasioned debate. The earliest critics of scientific language were harsh because they were promoting a plain style of writing free from rhetorical embellishment, not because they questioned the writing ability of those they censured. Writing and language were central parts of scientific inquiry. Modern critics are likewise frequently harsh and derisive, but they have lost sight of the integrated approach to language and science that their predecessors had. This article examines three texts published within the last ten years that seem to reverse some trends in medical writing. Tapping non-scientific fields from philology to aesthetics to composition theory, these texts suggest ways in which the humanities can be reintegrated with the study of medical and scientific writing.

An examination of the files of a scientific journal demonstrates a deep editorial concern for style and arrangement. Stylistic changes are invariably made either for the sake of clarity, simplicity, concision, or specificity. Changes in arrangement are of two kinds, each with its own purpose: between paragraphs within sections, these changes are made in the interest of sequential clarity; on the other hand, redistributions from section to section are designed clearly to demarcate section content: e.g., results only in Results. Several conclusions are reached: 1) traditional advice, especially on style, does not always reflect best editorial practice; 2) problems of arrangement call for different kinds of solution from those of style: the former having a “best,” the latter only a “better” solution; 3) stylistic changes are tactical choices made within the context of strategic presuppositions about the impersonal and descriptive nature of scientific prose.

Traditionally, technical writing has been characterized by impersonal, mechanical, objective prose. However, this attempt to deanthropomorphize reality must ultimately fail because science cannot escape metaphorical language. There is a move in technical writing today toward a personalized, sometimes called “friendly,” writing style which is strikingly evident in many computer textbooks and instructional manuals.

It has long been recognized that one man's problems are another man's opportunities. But, whether one thinks of solving problems or exploiting opportunities, one must still apply skills and competencies in a systematic and clear manner. How to develop student skills and competencies as these relate to thinking systematically as a prerequisite to clarity of self-expression is the topic of this paper. To succeed in this task, departments of business and English must work together to enhance business students' thinking and writing skills. The student studying courses in his major area needs the English professor to guide him through a systematic problem-solving approach to report writing. Here the College of Business and the College of Arts and Science can benefit by requiring business majors to complete a technical professional writing course through the English Department which uses experiential learning as the focal point in report writing. The result is that the student writes in and studies an area of interest, but learns to apply the problem-solving approach to writing as he concentrates on a typical problem in the field of business. Students place a high value on this type of learning, and the two disciplines work well together in accomplishing their goals.

Roman Jakobson's six-factored model of verbal communication provides the schema to generate formal definitions of business writing and technical writing. It also enables us to apply these definitions to communication in the world of work. The six factors—addresser, addressee, context, message, contact, and code—have six parallel functions—emotive, conative, referential, poetic, phatic, and metalingual. Each of these factor/function pairs is present to some degree in all types of writing, from technical writing to poetry. However, in certain types of written communication a few functions dominate the others. For instance, the referential or informational function is primary in technical and scientific writing. An examination of different binary functional relationships yields distinctions among various types of writing. For example, the inspection of the you versus it relationship yields the most substantive theoretical distinction between persuasive business writing and technical writing. From this single theoretical distinction emerge various practical aspects of communication, such as good will, the “you-attitude,” and the techniques of behavior modification applicable in business writing; and objectivity, clarity, and precision of meaning aimed for in technical writing.

A survey of technical communication students at North Carolina State University has revealed information about students' perceptions of their communication skills and abilities, their immediate and long-range career plans, and what should be offered in a technical communication course. This information complements information gathered from surveys of business and industrial employers and of technical graduates on the job. The results of the survey suggest the desirability of increased technical communication course emphasis on oral reports and simulating professional communication activities. The survey also suggests specific areas for emphasis in the teaching of organization, format, and style.

To determine whether there are different technical styles, syntactic structures at three audience levels in the published writing of three disciplines were analyzed. Our analysis discloses that different disciplines rely primarily on different types of subordinate clauses, sentence openers, and sentence types. It also discloses that paragraph length varies with audience level, as do the number of subject sentence openers and the kinds of verb constructions. Next, we compare our findings with standard textbook treatments of style and advocate a more flexible approach to the teaching of technical style, one that accounts for variations in subject matter and audience.

Tables and figures arc an integral part of the medium of communication of science and technology. An analysis of tables and figures, relying heavily on Euclidean terms (point, line and plane) explains something of their power–their ability to display with clarity large amounts of data, complex data relationships, and intricate three-dimensional configurations. Analysis also clarifies the mutual dependence of tables and figures and their accompanying texts. Additionally, analysis makes clear the semantic gap between tables and graphs, on the one hand, and illustrations, on the other. All are equally vital strategies in scientific and technical discourse. However, tables and graphs are paralinguistic extensions of scientific and technical dialects; illustrations, on the other hand, are a nonlinguistic supplement to these dialects. Finally, analysis provides clues for the teaching of proper graphic choice, good graphic ‘grammar,’ and the appropriate contextualization of graphs.

How do you communicate clearly to a reader without boring him? How do you prod his imagination without confusing him? The answer, I suppose, is to be a highly skilled writer and work very hard at your craft. But while there may be no simple and absolute rules for effective communication, there is an art called rhetoric that can help. I offer the following brief passage from Aristotle's words about rhetoric in the hope that some who are unfamiliar with that ancient art may be moved to read further. A good starting point would be Readings in Classical Rhetoric, edited by Thomas W. Benson and Michael H. Prosser (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1969). As you read, bear in mind that this is a translation from a Greek text thought by scholars to be lecture notes – perhaps those of Aristotle himself, perhaps those of one of his students. Consider whether notes from any lectures you have given or attended are likely to look this insightful and clear 2300 years hence. Then notice Aristotle's very subtle understanding of how verbal style can shape an audience's awareness of what is being communicated.

The relationship between the technical writer and his or her audience will directly dictate the format, style, and purpose of the information to be communicated. This paper explores the structures of that process and how these structures change as the technical processor's audience changes.

Requirements of accuracy in technical writing overwhelm considerations of stylistic grace. Analysis of the resulting technical style, however, often reveals a discrepancy between technical and verbal accuracy. The object of verbal form is an accommodation between grace and accuracy. Several avenues to achieve this accommodation are presented from Martin Buber's I and Thou to psycholinguist theorists such as George Miller and Walter Kintsch. Linguistic theory and literacy analysis can also provide means of reestablishing grace, not as replacement, but in contention with technical accuracy. The aims of technical discourse, like that of all other discourse, should include the gracefulness of one human being speaking to another.

Having students read selected portions of Benjamin Franklin's Autobiography provides unique and effective material for supplementing instruction in style and control of tone. Franklin's writing exemplifies the major style characteristics taught in technical writing: active voice, conciseness, common words, concrete language, sentences structured by clauses rather than phrases. The work clearly shows that good “technical” style is not an isolated type of writing, but a powerful means of controlling tone and meaning. Students can be shown that by skillfully using syntax and diction and by carefully selecting content, Franklin shrewdly and effectively achieved his goal in writing the Autobiography — a precisely drawn image of himself for posterity.