Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

What is "technical" writing? (Was: RE: What to do?)

1 view
Skip to first unread message

Hart, Geoff

unread,
Oct 28, 2003, 4:19:40 PM10/28/03
to TECHWR-L

Chuck Martin opined: <<What I'm saying--I've said it before--is that
Technical Communication is an engineering discipline.>>

Um... speaking as a recovering scientist (forestry) working with a batch of
foresters--only some of whom are engineers--and freelancing with a bunch of
scientists whose writing is moderately technical, I'd suggest that your
definition is too narrow.

Certainly engineering (applied science) is one of the larger and more
visible subsets of technical writing, but I'd broaden the definition to
include scientific communication (basic science), software development (an
art desperately striving to become a science), medical writing ("human
engineering"?), and a range of other genres.

<<Would you trust the information in an article about what to do if you run
out of avgas if it was written by someone who didn't have experience behind
a stick?>>

Here you're getting to the crux of the matter (imho): Technical
communication involves working with a variety of folks who are experts in a
technical discipline of some kind, including but not limited to engineering.
To succeed in this form of communication, you need to understand the subject
matter--and if you're not an expert, you must absolutely be able to identify
what parts you don't understand so you can ask one or more expert to approve
your interpretation. You also need to understand the vocabulary and needs of
your audience, who are often not experts. Last but not least, you need to be
able to translate between the expert and the audience.

--Geoff Hart, geoff-h@ mtl.feric.ca
(try ghart@ videotron.ca if you get no response)
Forest Engineering Research Institute of Canada
580 boul. St-Jean
Pointe-Claire, Que., H9R 3J9 Canada

"I don't read literary theory anymore; it makes my brain hurt... I have way
too much time on my hands and way too little to think about. In this
respect, the laundromat is not much different from the English department
office."--Tim Morris, U of Texas English professor ("Suds", in _The American
Scholar_)

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

ROBOHELP FOR FRAMEMAKER TRIAL NOW AVAILABLE!

RoboHelp for FrameMaker is a NEW online publishing tool for FrameMaker that
lets you easily single-source content to online Help, intranet, and Web.
The interface is designed for FrameMaker users, so there is little or no
learning curve and no macro language required! Call 800-718-4407 for
competitive pricing or download a trial at: http://www.ehelp.com/techwr-l4

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
tech...@gts.org
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-tech...@lists.raycomm.com
Send administrative questions to ej...@raycomm.com. Visit
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.


Bonnie Granat

unread,
Oct 28, 2003, 4:23:36 PM10/28/03
to TECHWR-L


|
| Chuck Martin opined: <<What I'm saying--I've said it before--is that
| Technical Communication is an engineering discipline.>>
|

Not to the technical communicator who is explaining technical matters to a
nontechnical audience!

Bonnie Granat
Granat Technical Editing and Writing
http://www.editors-writers.info

Goober Writer

unread,
Oct 28, 2003, 4:48:34 PM10/28/03
to TECHWR-L

Technically, it's writing.

Can we move on now? I think the archives already show
where we all stand on this issue, about 100 times over.

=====
Goober Writer
(because life is too short to be inept)

"As soon as you hear the phrase "studies show",
immediately put a hand on your wallet and cover your groin."
-- Geoff Hart

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears
http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/

Bonnie Granat

unread,
Oct 28, 2003, 4:55:20 PM10/28/03
to TECHWR-L


|
| Technically, it's writing.
|
| Can we move on now? I think the archives already show
| where we all stand on this issue, about 100 times over.
|

No, I will not shut up.

Bonnie Granat
Granat Technical Editing and Writing
http://www.editors-writers.info

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Chuck Martin

unread,
Oct 28, 2003, 5:00:36 PM10/28/03
to TECHWR-L

"Hart, Geoff" <Geo...@MTL.FERIC.CA> wrote in message
news:217927@techwr-l...


|
| Chuck Martin opined: <<What I'm saying--I've said it before--is that
| Technical Communication is an engineering discipline.>>
|

| Um... speaking as a recovering scientist (forestry) working with a batch
of
| foresters--only some of whom are engineers--and freelancing with a bunch
of
| scientists whose writing is moderately technical, I'd suggest that your
| definition is too narrow.
|
| Certainly engineering (applied science) is one of the larger and more
| visible subsets of technical writing, but I'd broaden the definition to
| include scientific communication (basic science), software development (an
| art desperately striving to become a science), medical writing ("human
| engineering"?), and a range of other genres.

Hm, I kinda saw it as the other way around: thinking of "engineering" as an
all-encompassing term. "Human engineering" makes that point well. I'll keep
trying to twist my brain to see it differently.

I met someone over the weekend who said he just got his degree
in"engineering." My first question is: What area? (In his case, turned out
to be chemical engineering.)

|
| <<Would you trust the information in an article about what to do if you
run
| out of avgas if it was written by someone who didn't have experience
behind
| a stick?>>
|
| Here you're getting to the crux of the matter (imho): Technical
| communication involves working with a variety of folks who are experts in
a
| technical discipline of some kind, including but not limited to
engineering.
| To succeed in this form of communication, you need to understand the
subject
| matter--and if you're not an expert, you must absolutely be able to
identify
| what parts you don't understand so you can ask one or more expert to
approve
| your interpretation. You also need to understand the vocabulary and needs
of
| your audience, who are often not experts. Last but not least, you need to
be
| able to translate between the expert and the audience.
|

You hit on some great points, all of which are part and parcel of this
discipline. But being an expert in any technical discipline almost never
equates with knowing everything about that discipline. It means only that
you know far, far more than average folk.

I tell anyone who'll listen that the smartest people aren't the ones who
think they know a lot, but are the ones who know how much they don't know.
(The really smart ones keep setting out to learn more.)

But if engineering is applied science, then what we do is definitely
engineering, because we apply the sciences of information gathering and
organization, communication, translation, and much more in what we do.

Chuck Martin

Chuck Martin

unread,
Oct 28, 2003, 5:02:13 PM10/28/03
to TECHWR-L

"Bonnie Granat" <bgr...@editors-writers.info> wrote in message
news:217930@techwr-l...


| > Chuck Martin opined: <<What I'm saying--I've said it before--is that
| > Technical Communication is an engineering discipline.>>
| >
|

| Not to the technical communicator who is explaining technical matters to a
| nontechnical audience!
|

I'm not sure I see how this process--which is neither easy nor something
that can be done well by most untrained--means that the discipline is not an
engineering one.

Chuck Martin

Bonnie Granat

unread,
Oct 28, 2003, 5:12:42 PM10/28/03
to

"Chuck Martin" <c...@writeforyou.com> wrote in message
news:E1AEbvK-...@czar.hostingserver.net...

>
>
> "Bonnie Granat" <bgr...@editors-writers.info> wrote in message
> news:217930@techwr-l...
> > > Chuck Martin opined: <<What I'm saying--I've said it before--is that
> > > Technical Communication is an engineering discipline.>>
> > >
> >
> > Not to the technical communicator who is explaining technical matters to
a
> > nontechnical audience!
> >
> I'm not sure I see how this process--which is neither easy nor something
> that can be done well by most untrained--means that the discipline is not
an
> engineering one.
>

When an engineer learns to write about engineering topics, he or she does
not study "engineering." He or she studies "writing." The skills that allow
an engineer to write about technical subjects are writing skills.

Technical writing is *taught* in engineering programs (such as Northeastern
University), but that doesn't mean that writing is an engineering
discipline.


--

k k

unread,
Oct 28, 2003, 5:23:56 PM10/28/03
to TECHWR-L

I'm enjoying watching all this come out. Lots of
people with lots of free time today.


| >
| What I'm saying--I've said it before--is that
| Technical Communication is an
| engineering discipline.
|

| Would you trust the information in an article about
| what to do if you run
| out of avgas if it was written by someone who didn't
| have experience behind
| a stick?
|

What kind of engineering? Civil, mechanical, chemical,
aerospace, marine, electrical, software, customer, or
structural? Or are you referring to driving a train?
:-)

"Technical communication" is a communications
discipline. "Communication" is a noun that in this
case expresses the point of the matter. "Technical" is
a modifying adjective that increases the granularity
of the definition. I don't see any form of the word
"engineering" in there.

Technical communication is an art form in which the
writer renders his audience knowledgeable, as opposed
to business communication, in which the writer makes
his audience (usually) misled and bamboozled. What
matters is imparting information clearly.

I would trust the information in an article about what
to do if I ran out of avgas if it were written by
someone who knew what he was talking about and was
able to tell me clearly. That could be a person who is
a pilot who knows how to write effectively. OR, that
could be a non-flying writer whose work has been
reviewed and passed for accuracy by someone who is
familiar with such situations.

Would you trust such an article written by someone who
knows exactly what to do but is so terribly bad at
writing that you can't understand what he means? Would
you trust such an article written by a man who has
100,000 hours on his log but he writes so poorly he
puts the steps in the wrong order?

You don't have to be a structural engineer to write
what is the tensile strength of T-12 aluminum. You
don't have to be a chemical engineer to describe a
benzene ring. To write an article on any subject and
have it be effective, you must have a clear
understanding of the subject. You can have that
understanding even if you are not a member of the
profession that deals with the subject most often, but
you can't impart that understanding effectively unless
you are a communicator.


|
| But if engineering is applied science, then what we
| do is definitely
| engineering, because we apply the sciences of
| information gathering and
| organization, communication, translation, and much
| more in what we do.
|

Sorry, but while "information gathering" may qualify,
there is no such thing as the "science" of
organization, communication, or translation.
Especially translation, which involves cultural
differences as well as linguistic differences.

If it can't be expressed in mathematical models and
formulas it isn't science, and what we do can't be
thus quantified. We deal with people - figuring out
how to make things clear to them. People can't be
quantified. (If they could be the advertising
companies would rule the world.) We deal with too many
variables. What we do isn't exactly juju but it sure
as the world isn't a science.


And, Gene: of course your insurance policy doesn't
mention things like torts or malpractice laws. But you
can bet your bottom dollar the people who write the
policies have to understand those subjects or the
insurance companies would have gone broke ages ago.


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears
http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Gene Kim-Eng

unread,
Oct 28, 2003, 5:33:27 PM10/28/03
to TECHWR-L

Well sure, the *insurance company* is *very* comfortable
with the way my policy is written, but that's not what
you asked me... :)

Gene Kim-Eng

------- Original Message -------
On


Tue, 28 Oct 2003 14:23:56 -0800 (PST) k k?wrote:


And, Gene: of course your insurance policy doesn't
mention things like torts or malpractice laws. But you
can bet your bottom dollar the people who write the
policies have to understand those subjects or the
insurance companies would have gone broke ages ago.

Bonnie Granat

unread,
Oct 28, 2003, 5:41:01 PM10/28/03
to TECHWR-L

"Chuck Martin" <c...@writeforyou.com> wrote in message
news:E1AEbvK-...@czar.hostingserver.net...
|
|
| "Bonnie Granat" <bgr...@editors-writers.info> wrote in message
| news:217930@techwr-l...
| > > Chuck Martin opined: <<What I'm saying--I've said it before--is that

| > > Technical Communication is an engineering discipline.>>
| > >
| >
| > Not to the technical communicator who is explaining technical matters to
a
| > nontechnical audience!
| >
| I'm not sure I see how this process--which is neither easy nor something
| that can be done well by most untrained--means that the discipline is not
an
| engineering one.
|

When an engineer learns to write about engineering topics, he or she does
not study "engineering." He or she studies "writing." The skills that allow
an engineer to write about technical subjects are writing skills.

Technical writing is *taught* in engineering programs (such as Northeastern
University), but that doesn't mean that writing is an engineering
discipline.


--
Bonnie Granat
Granat Technical Editing and Writing
http://www.editors-writers.info

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

David Neeley

unread,
Oct 28, 2003, 5:42:30 PM10/28/03
to TECHWR-L

Be still, my beating heart! You mean the advertising agencies *don't* rule the world???

"If it can't be expressed in mathematical models and
formulas it isn't science, and what we do can't be
thus quantified. We deal with people - figuring out
how to make things clear to them. People can't be
quantified. (If they could be the advertising
companies would rule the world.) We deal with too many
variables. What we do isn't exactly juju but it sure
as the world isn't a science."

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Gene Kim-Eng

unread,
Oct 28, 2003, 5:51:54 PM10/28/03
to TECHWR-L

I've had just enough experience with ad agencies to know
that they do indeed have methods of "quantifying people,"
at least in groups. Whether ad agencies rule the world, I don't know, but after watching some of those new TV spots
for McDonald's, I'd say the ability to persuade a
multinational company to pay millions for "I'm likin' it"
as a slogan represents *real power.*

Gene Kim-Eng


------- Original Message -------
On

Tue, 28 Oct 2003 14:42:30 -0800 (PST) David Neeley?wrote:


Be still, my beating heart! You mean the advertising agencies *don't* rule the world???

Sean Hower

unread,
Oct 29, 2003, 10:39:46 AM10/29/03
to TECHWR-L

<nitPicking>
------------------------------------
k k wrote


Sorry, but while "information gathering" may qualify,
there is no such thing as the "science" of
organization, communication, or translation.
Especially translation, which involves cultural
differences as well as linguistic differences.

------------------------------------


Ah, but kk (if that's your real name), cross-cultural studies is a science (a squishy one, granted) and so is linguistics (this is both squishy and non-squishy depending on teh flavor). And of course there is the entire field of cultural linguistics. :-) So, translation can be said to be based on science.

------------------------------------


People can't be quantified.

------------------------------------
Yes they can. Statistics, which by your definition of science (expressed in mathematical models and formulas) it a science, can do it nicely. And there is quantifiable observations that can be expressed as statsitics. Moreover, just about any science that can examine the human body, from basic biology to neurolinguistics, can also quantify people based on any of the factors those sciences study. If we can put a set of mathematical models on, say, plate techtonics, we can do it with people. We're all part of the same space stuff. :-) On the lighter side, games simulate people all of the time, with varying degrees of success, and that behavior must be quantified and expressed in mathematical formulas to make them work properly.

</nitPicking>

********************************************
Sean Hower - tech writer
http://hokum.freehomepage.com


_____________________________________________________________
Create your own web site for FREE at http://www.freehomepage.com

Goober Writer

unread,
Oct 29, 2003, 11:00:06 AM10/29/03
to TECHWR-L

| When an engineer learns to write about engineering
| topics, he or she does
| not study "engineering." He or she studies
| "writing." The skills that allow
| an engineer to write about technical subjects are
| writing skills.
|
| Technical writing is *taught* in engineering
| programs (such as Northeastern
| University), but that doesn't mean that writing is
| an engineering discipline.

In no way should the act of writing enter this
equation. This is all about core communication skills.


The "engineering" aspect (IOW, "technical") is
required for anything concerning a technical concept.
The "writing" aspect (IOW, "communication") is
required for anything being conveyed from one person
to another.

So what is "technical writing"?

It's the clear communication of technical information
and concepts to another person or party.

Whether an engineer learns to write or a writer learns
in-depth technical concetps is moot. The fact is that
someone needs BOTH to succeed in communicating
information about technical "stuff" to ANYONE else
(techie and luddite alike).

You gain NO advantage from ignorance when approaching
the task of communicating technical information. The
argument of "being on par with your audience" is pure
and utter crap. You need to know your stuff.

If you're writing about a UI that traps user input and
saves it to a database for later queries, you really
should know the ins and outs of how that entire system
works. That way you can clearly communicate the facts
to the audience at hand.

True, data entry people don't need to know about SSL,
encryption, why some things get hashed and others
don't, and so on. But, YOU knowing why is important so
you can make an intelligent call as to what to
communicate, to whom, how, when, and why.

A technical writer doesn't need to be the person who
developed the tool being documented, but that writer
should know all there is to know about that tool so
they have the knowledge and expertise to know what
info is important for whom, and how best to
communicate it.

THAT is technical writing.

=====
Goober Writer
(because life is too short to be inept)

"As soon as you hear the phrase "studies show",
immediately put a hand on your wallet and cover your groin."
-- Geoff Hart

__________________________________


Do you Yahoo!?
Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears
http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Chuck Martin

unread,
Oct 29, 2003, 1:32:07 PM10/29/03
to TECHWR-L

No, I'm doing indexing, and need frequent breaks from this tedious and
difficult task.

Chuck Martin
Who knows he's probably just barely competent in this particular Black Art.

"k k" <turnleft...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:217948@techwr-l...


|
| I'm enjoying watching all this come out. Lots of
| people with lots of free time today.
|

| __________________________________


| Do you Yahoo!?
| Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears
| http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/
|

This is truly scary. Appropos for Halowwen week. :)

0 new messages