IEEE-USA E-Books
Writing For Success —
An Engineer’s Guide
vol
1
Volume 2
vol
vol
2
Designing for Success
3
he Road
T
to Excellence
The End Products of Engineering Writing
vol
4
Writing for Life
By Tom Moran
Published and Hosted by IEEE-USA.
Copyright © 2011 by IEEE-USA. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America
Edited by Georgia C. Stelluto, IEEE-USA Publishing Manager, [email protected]
Cover design and layout by Josie Thompson, Thompson Design
This IEEE-USA publication is made possible through funding provided by a special dues assessment of IEEE
members residing in the United States.
Copying this material in any form is not permitted without prior written approval from the IEEE.
Table Of Contents
3
Building with Words: The Task of Writing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Developing a Critical Eye . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Big Picture Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Is It Accurate? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Is It Complete? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Is it Logical? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Is It Clear? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Is It Compelling? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Is It Needed? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Words - Fine Tuning Our Building Blocks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Did We Use the Right Ones? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Did We Spell Them Correctly? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Did We Use Too Many? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Sentences: Troubleshooting Our Sub-Subsystems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Are the Sentences Complete? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Are the Subjects and Verbs in Agreement? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Are There Any Run-ons? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Are the Modifiers in the Right Places? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Are the Sentences in the Right Voice? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Are Any Sentences Too Long? Too Short? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Paragraphs: Making Sure Our Subsystems Are Effective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Do the Tenses Make Sense? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Are the Moods Mixed? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Does the Writing Flow? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Are the Road Signs in the Right Places? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Does It Read Well? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
The End Game . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Test and Retest: The Road to Excellence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Coming Up . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Writing For Success: An Engineer’s Guide – Volume 2
4
Building with Words: The Task of Writing
O
n the second week of my first job as an engineer, I excitedly climbed aboard a helicopter
that would sweep me across the Los Angeles basin to witness the acceptance testing
of a one megawatt power supply that had been designed and built for a project I would be
working on. Some years later, I found myself stretched out on the frost covered hillside of an
Army post, fumbling with icy wrenches, steel tubing, and gas cylinders, in a rush to ready a
prototype weapon system simulator for its performance test. A few years after that, inside
a huge hangar in the California desert, I downed cups of vending machine coffee to stay
awake as I awaited the 3:00 a.m. operational check of the main landing gear of a new Air
Force bomber.
Tests, like these, are part of the iterative process that develops new products and systems
and validates their performance. Whether they are new apps for the Android market, fuel cell
stacks for power system backup, or prototype PCBs for next generation avionics units, our
designs evolve through test and iteration. A conceptual design becomes preliminary, and is
modified as new input arrives from colleagues and clients, and new ideas and approaches
come to light in reviews and critiques. As the design evolves and solidifies, engineering
models and prototypes are assembled, inspected, tested and retested in Alpha and Beta
environments. Tests are run to verify performance standards and interface functionality.
When flaws are revealed, changes are made, and the design is hardened and retested. These
iterations continue, until the final trials validate the design, and it is released for production.
Writing, too, is an iterative process. It would be great, of course, if we were all so deft at using
words and language that we could just let our fingers fly across the keyboard to rough out a
report, run a quick spell check, and then send the result off to print or distribution. That may
actually work a few times but, like any product that originates from an incomplete process,
the quality of the writing will probably be inferior and the effectiveness of its performance
doubtful. Single draft writing saves time, of course, but it also leads to inaccuracies and readers who don’t get the clear, complete understandings that they need. Those results can prove
embarrassing and tremendously costly.
To avoid them, we apply an iterative process to our writing, cycles of testing and revision
that ensure it has the required quality and functionality. This process means examining it
as rigorously and thoroughly as we do our engineering products, unveiling any flaws, making
sure that the words we have written do their job effectively and efficiently. We must do this
dispassionately. No matter how long or hard we toiled developing the draft report or proposal,
we must review it with care, asking tough questions, demanding cuts and rewrites at every
place where they are needed, to ensure that the writing works and works well. To do this
successfully, one important tool is needed. A critical eye.
Writing For Success: An Engineer’s Guide – Volume 2
Developing a Critical Eye
I
like to think of it as a tool, but a “critical eye” is really an attribute. It describes our ability
to look at writing, especially our own writing, and analyze its effectiveness. All of us began
developing our critical eyes soon after we started writing sentences in elementary school.
We learned to spot misspelled and poorly arranged words. Gradually, as our writing skills grew,
we became better at reading sentences, paragraphs, pages, articles, or chapters, and sensing
whether they worked or didn’t, whether they were written well or not so well. The result was
our critical eye.
We are all critical beings and know what we like, as well as what we don’t. But we often find
it difficult to critically assess our own writing. We tend to be either a little hard on ourselves
– It’s terrible, I hate it! – or a bit too easy – Awfully damn good; once again I have outdone
myself! Neither approach serves us well. The overly critical eye stops us in our tracks. We
know our writing could be improved, but do nothing because we lack confidence in ourselves.
The same result occurs, if we are too easy on ourselves. Writing that could and should be
made more effective will be released to readers who may not concur with our assessment
of how good, how clear, how accurate, and how compelling it is. Not taking a good hard and
critical look at our writing before sending it on to its audience involves great risk. A request
for new equipment may be denied. An important development project can be delayed. A
competitive new business proposal may not make it to the short list. A time-saving innovation
will be ignored. A better use of our critical eye, and some careful and well directed rewriting,
could have avoided these undesirable results.
Reviewing our writing with a critical eye is a test of its quality. The test involves reading and
re-reading what we have written, and evaluating its quality, honestly answering questions
about how well it works. The questions fall into two categories. The first have to do with what
I call, the “big picture.”
Big Picture Tests
Big picture questions look at the overall effectiveness of the writing. Honestly answered,
they will guarantee that our writing will accomplish its objective. In many cases, we will
have asked similar questions as we developed the design, the flow chart, or outline for our
writing. Now we ask them again, and add some new ones. Following are some examples
of “big picture” questions.
Is It Accurate?
Accuracy is an important consideration. Of course, we want to make sure that we have
accurately presented the data. That we have not written $100 when we meant $1,000. Not
promised to complete a project in 30 days, instead of 300 days. Not specified a dielectric
strength of 1.5 kv/mm when we intended 15 kv/mm. Not written that Johnson represented
the customer at the design review, when the engineer’s name was John Stone?
Writing For Success: An Engineer’s Guide – Volume 2
5
6
But there are other aspects of accuracy that we need to consider. Was our appraisal of the
new technology fair? Are our estimates of the effort required unbiased? Was credit given
where due? Blame? Did we present all the relevant data, not just that which supported
our premise? We have to examine each piece of writing carefully, to make sure it accurately
portrays the quantities, qualities and situations it describes.
Is It Complete?
Making sure that our writing is complete is an extension of the question about accuracy. As we
go over the writing, we must ensure that nothing that will be important to our readers has been
left out. We need to identify any questions that readers might have as they read. Is there anything missing that our readers will need to know before they can act on what we have written?
We need to put ourselves in those readers’ shoes, and make certain that we have given them
everything they need to make the best decisions and take the optimal actions, based on what
they will read.
Is It Logical?
Is the writing well organized? Will our readers be able to follow our reasoning? Are we presenting the information in a sequential order that helps those readers build their understanding
as they read? Will readers grasp how and why our recommendations, requests, or proposals
were made? Again, we must assume the role of our intended audience, and see if our writing
makes sense from that new perspective.
Is It Clear?
Are there any aspects of the message that are vague or difficult to comprehend? As writers,
we know our subject matter well. In many cases, we have experienced it. We write from that
perspective, choosing words and phrases whose meanings we understand, and describing
events and analyses that are perfectly clear to us because of what we know and remember.
When we read over what we have written, we understand it.
But what about our readers? They will approach what we have written from different
perspectives. Possibly very different ones. Lacking our familiarity with the subject, they may
find parts of what we have written unclear. We need to read our work closely, making sure that
the sentences and paragraphs, all of them, will be easily understood by our intended readers.
Is It Compelling?
Will our readers share our understanding and evaluation of the situation or topic that we
have written about? Will they see the value of our arguments? Will they concur with our
recommendations? Grant our requests? Accept our proposals? Again, we must look at the
writing from our intended readers’ perspectives, and ensure that we have provided everything
they will need to make smart, well-informed decisions.
Writing For Success: An Engineer’s Guide – Volume 2
Is It Needed?
7
Knowing when and where to cut our writing is an important skill. We often include far more
information than is needed to accomplish our goals. As experts on the subject at hand — we
are usually the ones who conducted the tests, or inspected the potential job site, or did the
feasibility study — we have experienced more, and have accumulated much more information
than our readers will ever need. Our critical eye must determine the facts and data our readers really do need to fully understand the situation at hand, and their responsibilities; and which
ones, if any, are not truly needed. It is difficult to be honest in these situations, especially as
we worked so hard to get some of those facts and data. But if they don’t need, really need, the
information, keeping it in our writing will just bog our readers down. We don’t want that. They
don’t either. The extra wording has to be cut.
Deleting portions of our text can be particularly hard in the later drafts of a document, because so much effort has already gone into the writing. We have moved our sentences and
paragraphs towards perfection with each draft. Now, we begin to question whether they are
needed to accomplish our goal. But they were such good words, some of our best writing,
we believe. Still, they must go. The key point to remember is, in the end, our readers will
appreciate what we have done.
An effective critical eye poses these types of questions, section by section, paragraph by
paragraph, as we review our writing. Honest answers, of course, can mean more work.
They may call for new data, or additional analyses, that will ensure our writing is complete
and accurate. Or they may tell us to completely reorganize what we have written, and do
time-consuming rewrites, possibly choosing brand new organizational schemes, adding new
sections, establishing new tones, generating new arguments and new approaches. It is more
effort, of course, but these changes will enhance our writing, making the final written products
more functional, and more likely to be successful in their mission. It’s exactly the same result
we expect from rigorously testing a new engineering design.
Writing For Success: An Engineer’s Guide – Volume 2
8
Words — Fine Tuning Our Building Blocks
I call the second level of questions that our critical eye must ask “fine turning.” These
questions are more specific than the “big picture”, holistic questions we have already looked
at. In most cases, this fine tuning will impact the “big picture” attributes of our writing,
ensuring that our messages are clear, logical and compelling. Making improvements through
this “fine tuning” is the true craft of writing. When we fine tune, we polish, refine, and push
our work towards perfection. Some typical “fine tuning” questions follow.
Did We Use the Right Ones?
Words are the building blocks of our writing. We may have thousands upon thousands of them
in a single piece of writing, but each one has a job to do. Each one is important. Poorly chosen
words will confuse our readers. Unknown words will stop them in their tracks. Deftly chosen
ones, on the other hand, will resonate with our readers, helping them quickly grasp the ideas
and facts we want to communicate.
Good writing requires that we select our words with precision. We often confuse a number
of words, because they sound alike, or have very similar spellings. Affect and effect. Appraise
and apprise. Formerly and formally. Explicitly and implicitly. Comprise and Compose.
When we make the wrong choice, our readers will be confused. Although many will recognize
our error and be able to understand our intention, the lapse will still cause their attention
to briefly jump from the possible complex and critical topic at hand, to assessing our poorly
chosen word, a diversion that undermines the quality and effectiveness of our communication.
To avoid derailing our message, we inspect our sentences, looking for words like further, imply
and proceed that might be confused with others, say farther, infer and precede. If we are
sure about the differences in meaning, we make the needed changes. If we are unsure of the
appropriate word, we consult a writing handbook or Internet resource, then make any needed
changes. This “wordsmithing” takes time, of course, but it is an important part of the process
of using our well-honed critical eye to make our writing successful.
We want to make sure that our readers share our vocabulary. A shared vocabulary is particularly important in the engineering world, where new technology spawns new technical terms,
and new meanings for old ones. Our reports, proposals, and other writing may travel between
technical staff and management who don’t necessarily use the same terminology and workplace jargon. As we work on increasingly interdisciplinary projects, members of a team may
have difficulty with terminology common to the different fields they must interact with.
When we deal with terms that a reader may not be familiar with, or that we think our reader
might confuse with other meanings, it is important that we provide clarity. We offer clarity by
providing definitions for any unfamiliar terms. In large documents, we might achieve clarity
with a glossary and formal definitions. But in most engineering writing, a simple informal
definition, threaded directly into the writing, will do the job.
Writing For Success: An Engineer’s Guide – Volume 2
Developing a long-haul network, one that spans distances longer than local area
networks, to support the Taiwanese market will be a major challenge.
The informal definition of long-haul network was inserted directly after its first appearance,
separated by commas. Parentheses or dashes could have also been used to insert it. The
beauty of a well-chosen, informal definition is that it gives readers the meaning of terms they
do not know, without slowing down or distracting those readers who already know its meaning.
The engineering workplace is also filled with a rich and often confusing array of acronyms.
Acronyms are shortcuts that allow us to substitute a simple sequence of letters for a much
longer and more complex name. Instead of silicone avalanche diode, we write SAD. We
use WDM to mean wavelength-division multiplexing. C3 indicates command, control and
communication.
For those who work with these terms, the understandings are instantaneous. The acronyms
help us communicate quickly and efficiently. But we will have readers who are unfamiliar
with some of the acronyms we use. They must guess at their meanings, obviously a risky
undertaking, or try to decode them by asking their colleagues or searching on the Internet.
That research is distracting and takes valuable time. And, as many acronyms have different
meanings in different contexts and workplaces, the result may still be confusing. OWF,
for example, will mean over wing fairing in the aircraft industry, one-way function in computer
science and cryptography, and optimum working frequency in telecommunications.
To avoid confusion, we define any acronyms or initializations that our readers might not
know when we first introduce them. Once introduced, we can safely assume our reader
now understands its meaning, and the acronym can be freely used throughout the remainder
of the document.
The key to fast and accurate position sensing is the infra-red emitting diode (IRED).
The IRED allows measurements between 10 and 60 centimeters.
Our word choices are important. They are the basic components of our writing. If we make
poor choices, our readers will be slowed down, possibly halted, as they strive to understand
the meaning and importance of our writing. Good writers, like good engineers, will choose
components that assure their systems will perform their missions.
Did We Spell Them Correctly?
Words are formed from the letters of the English alphabet, a few symbols and an occasional
number. These are the raw materials of our writing system. Spelling is simply a matter of
ensuring that these materials are chosen and ordered correctly. We need to take the same
care with our spelling that we would when choosing and combining the raw materials of our
engineering projects.
We all have spelling lapses, even with the simplest words. Our fingers dance across the
keyboard, and we omit letters, hit the wrong keys, omit spaces, and make a host of other
typographical errors. Luckily, contemporary software does an excellent job of alerting us to our
missteps, and making it relatively easy for us to locate and correct them. In many cases, it will
readily make the needed corrections for us.
Writing For Success: An Engineer’s Guide – Volume 2
9
10
For that to work, of course, we need to use the spell check function in the software. If it is
turned off or we fail to use it, the software can’t identify any of our errors. Even when we
do activate these checks and count on their assistance, our critical eye must still be alert.
Most computer spell checks will not recognize misspellings that form other words. Some
examples of this can be seen in Figure 1. Spell checks that automatically correct our typos
will sometimes offer a word that is not the one we intended. Figure 2 shows some situations
where this might occur.
Intended word
Misspelling
real
reel
see
sea
there
their
too
to
loose
lose
Figure 1
Common Spelling Errors Missed by Spell-Checking Applications
Intended Word(s)
Typographic Error
Correction Error
Definitely
definantly
defiantly
Surpassed
surpised
surprised
a lot al ot
allot
Figure 2 Examples of Correction Errors Made by Spell Checking Applications
It is particularly important that we spell the names of individuals correctly. My last name
is Moran, but mail will arrive on my desk addressed to Morgan, Morin, Moren, and Moron.
The latter, in particular, makes it quite clear that the sender gave little care when the
correspondence was being prepared. A mistake in the spelling of a name shows a lack of
respect, as well as a lack attention to quality. We must make every effort to spell the names
of individuals correctly.
Did We Use Too Many?
In engineering, we strive for elegant solutions and designs. The problem is resolved quickly
and efficiently. There are no unneeded parts or embellishments. Everything is functional and
integral to the end product.
We want our writing to have the same elegance. We strip away unneeded words and phrases
that add little or no value. And, we work to make the sentences efficient, giving our readers
the information they need in a clear, easy-to-understand flow.
Writing For Success: An Engineer’s Guide – Volume 2
Wordiness slows down our readers. It has many sources. Sometimes it comes from
repetition, unnecessarily expressing the same thought or information several times. Often, it is
caused by using nouns like “recommendation,” instead of active verbs like “to recommend.”
And it can arise from overusing articles and modifiers, and inserting unneeded qualifiers.
Whatever the cause, a discerning critical eye will test the words and phrases in our writing,
filtering out any that don’t bring true value to our readers. Figure 3 offers some examples of
how wordy phrases and sentences can be improved.
WORDYAt an early stage in the power supply’s development process, overheating was
considered to be a problem.
LESS WORDY
Early in the power supply’s development, overheating was a problem.
WORDYThe head of quality assurance kept urging our vendors to go and analyze their
inspection procedures.
LESS WORDY The head of quality assurance urged our vendors to analyze their inspection
procedures.
WORDYWe rechecked the unit’s resistance, due to the fact that the module was warm
to the touch.
LESS WORDY
We rechecked the unit’s resistance, because the module was warm to
the touch.
WORDY
The Integrated Test Unit (ITU) is, I believe, the most reliable device available.
LESS
WORDY
The Integrated Test Unit (ITU) is the most reliable device available.
WORDY
The voltage output was not in accordance with the specification.
LESS
WORDY
The unit failed the voltage output test.
WORDYOne of the key factors which were the cause of the recent malfunction is
the corrosion of the anodes.
LESS
WORDY
One of the key factors that caused the recent malfunction is anode corrosion.
LESS
WORDY (And more direct)
Anode corrosion is one of the key factors that caused the recent failure.
Figure 3
Examples of Wordy and Improved Sentences.
Writing For Success: An Engineer’s Guide – Volume 2
11
12
The great American humorist and writer Mark Twain is said to have suggested that whenever
a writer considers using the word very, that the word damn be inserted as a substitute. “Your
editor will delete it,” Twain asserted, “and the writing will be just as it should be.” Most of us
will do well by not following the famed author’s suggestion literally. Our editors and readers
might not understand. But the intent of Twain’s advice, that we strip away the subjective and
overused modifier very, will lead to writing that is less wordy and more direct.
Reducing the number of words in our writing can help our readers, but we should not cut
out words or phrases just to lower the word count. Qualifiers, modifiers, and negative
constructions will add to our word count, but they may also be needed to establish important
nuances, or ensure that our readers have a complete understanding of what is important to
them. Our goal is to eliminate those words that aren’t needed, to convey the information our
readers need. A critical eye will ensure that all of our words make important contributions to
the success of our writing.
Sentences: Troubleshooting Our Sub-Subsystems
I like to think of writing as the creation of a system. The basic elements of the system, the
building blocks, as I noted earlier, are words. As we write, we connect these words together
into sentences, which become sub-subsystems. Those sentences are then woven together
to form the subsystems we know as paragraphs. And our paragraphs are stacked one
atop another to form the final system. Larger writing tasks, of course, will have even more
complicated structures with chapters, sections, and volumes. No matter the size of our writing
project, all of its components must fit together and work flawlessly for the overall system to
do its job. Good writing equates to a well-designed system composed of well-matched and
deftly assembled parts.
Sentences, our sub-subsystems, are designed to impart information to our readers. They
provide facts, express needs, and offer opinions. Good writers are able to craft sentences
that are efficient and effective, and that conform to any specifications, especially the
grammar rules and writing maxims, that apply. As our critical eye scrutinizes our writing,
a number of questions will test how well our sentences conform to those specifications.
Let’s look at some of them.
Are They Complete?
Early in our studies, we learned that a sentence must have a subject, verb, and in many cases,
an object. All manner of phrases and clauses can be added to these basic elements, giving
readers additional information about the subject, verb, and object, and their relationships.
Every sentence needs a subject and a verb.
But, we often forget this simple rule. We get caught up in the details of our sentence, and
know the subject and verb in our mind but, we forget to write one of them down. We know
the subject. Our readers won’t.
Writing For Success: An Engineer’s Guide – Volume 2
The easiest way to catch this error is to read every sentence slowly, making sure that we can
identify both of these important elements, the subject and the verb. It can be tricky.
In the hydraulics lab, during the design review and after the morning break.
This phrase could easily be the answer to someone’s question — Where is the boundary layer
demonstration? — but it is not a complete sentence. In conversation, the response would be
perfectly acceptable, because the missing subject and verb are understood by all the parties
involved. But in writing, we need to be clearer, as some of our readers may lack the context
established in that conversation. To do that, we express ourselves in a complete sentence.
The boundary layer demonstration will be held in the hydraulics lab, during the design
review, and after the morning break.
Now, nothing is left to chance. It is clear what is happening, where it will take place, and when.
Working far into the night to isolate the fault.
Here, again, we have a sentence that is incomplete, what is called a fragment. We know what
we meant, but our readers will be lost. Who was working far into the night? The subject is
missing.
The contractors restored production by working far into the night to isolate the fault.
Or
The contractors worked far into the night to isolate the fault.
Whatever the events were, we use a complete sentence to ensure that our readers understand
exactly what happened.
Some of the technicians testing the emergency circuit.
Again, the sentence is incomplete. Our readers won’t be certain what was intended. There
could be several possibilities.
Some of the technicians tested the emergency circuit.
Some of the technicians testing the emergency circuit lacked certification.
Again, the use of complete sentences makes it easy for our readers to understand precisely
what we mean.
Step-by-step instructions are usually written with the subject implied.
Adjust the Speed Control dial until Meter 1 indicates 350 rpm.
In this case, the subject (you the reader) is understood, and the sentence is considered to be in
the imperative and complete.
In some situations, we might use incomplete sentences and fragments for emphasis.
Writing For Success: An Engineer’s Guide – Volume 2
13
14
The chemicals were stored without labels or markings of any kind. A very dangerous
practice.
The second of these two sentences lacks both a subject and verb. But the writer assumes
the reader will easily grasp what the missing parts are, and its very brevity stresses the danger
implied. In most cases, however, it will be less risky to write out the complete sentence.
The chemicals were stored without labels or markings of any kind. This practice is very
dangerous.
Some verbs require an object. They are called transitive verbs, and usually denote an action
that has to be imparted to something, or someone. Consider the verb, to calibrate. We might
write “The technician calibrated the test set.” If we just wrote “The technician calibrated,” we
would have a subject and a verb, but not the needed object. Readers would be left with the
question “calibrated what?”— and our sentence would be incomplete. So, we must make
sure that we have included objects for verbs that require them.
Are the Subjects and Verbs in Agreement?
A singular subject takes a singular verb. A plural subject requires a plural verb. These rules
sound simple, but getting it right isn’t always so. We often work with complicated systems,
made up of thousands of individual parts and components. No matter how complex it may be,
the word system is still singular. But several systems, when considered together, are plural.
The regenerator system is considered obsolete.
The fire control systems are scheduled for replacement.
Some words throw us off, as we are unsure of whether they should be considered singular or
plural.
Each of the technicians was given a personal demonstration.
Here, we can be confused because the word “technicians” is plural. But the subject of the
sentence is “Each”, a word that is always singular, and thus our verb choice is the singular
“was.”
Words like “some” are confusing subjects, because the choice between singular and plural
depends on what they refer to. If the word refers to something that is plural, that is countable,
it must be considered plural.
Some of the data points were not included in the visual display.
If what is being referred to is not countable, or is clearly single, then “some” must be treated
as singular.
Some of the insulation material was left over.
So, as I warned, interpreting the rules can be tricky.
Writing For Success: An Engineer’s Guide – Volume 2
Are There Any Run-ons?
15
We often have multiple thoughts that we try to include in a single sentence. When the
thoughts are expressed as independent clauses (clauses with their own subject and verb), we
must follow certain rules as we construct them. If we don’t, the result is a run-on sentence.
We had trouble getting the signal analyzer to work, the vendor was not supportive.
Three possible solutions are available to correct this sentence. First, all that is needed is to
present the two separate thoughts as two separate sentences.
We had trouble getting the signal analyzer to work. The vendor was not supportive.
Another possibility is to add a conjunction to help better link the thoughts. Conjunctions
are connecting words like yet, so, or, nor, but, and, and for, that ease the transition between the
independent clauses.
We had trouble getting the signal analyzer to work, and the vendor was not supportive.
And another approach calls for using a semi-colon to separate the two independent clauses.
The punctuation symbol cues readers that the two thoughts are closely related, but separate.
We had trouble getting the signal analyzer to work; the vendor was not supportive.
With the semi-colon there is a sense of close relationship between the clauses; in this case,
that the vendor’s lack of support may have caused much of the trouble. We need to make sure
that is the relationship we want our reader to feel.
Are the Modifiers in the Right Places?
We use adjectives, adverbs, and several different types of phrases to modify the nouns and
verbs in our sentences. But we must use care as to where we place these modifiers, making
sure that readers easily understand what is being modified. It is easy to misplace modifiers,
and the result can be confusing and, perhaps, embarrassing.
The sales engineer suggested an RF generator to our buyer with variable settings.
This sentence gives us the impression that the buyer has variable settings. Of course, it is the
RF generator that offers that variability. A simple rewrite makes that clear.
The sales engineer suggested an RF generator with variable settings to our buyer.
In the following sentence, it appears that the liquid is reversing direction by itself.
Reversing the flow through the filter circuit once every 24 hours, the cooling water
remained clear and free of contaminants.
But someone or something has caused the reversed flow. A simple rewrite will make that
clear.
Reversing the flow through the filter circuit every 24 hours, we were able to keep the
cooling water clear and free of contaminants.
And, in the sentence below, the placement of the modifier definitely confuses readers.
Writing For Success: An Engineer’s Guide – Volume 2
There is a fence around the transformer bank topped with barbed wire.
16
The barbed wire is on top of the fence, not the transformers. To make that clear, we simply
reposition the modifier.
There is a fence topped with barbed wire around the transformer bank.
It is easy to make mistakes with modifiers as we write, because we know exactly what we
mean. Because of our familiarity with the subject, our mind automatically adjusts the modifiers,
as it processes the words in the sentences we have written, applying them where they belong
rather than where they actually reside in the sentence. But the information is new to our
readers, and their minds will not make those adjustments. Instead, the sentence will leave
them scratching their heads as to our intent. To avoid that, we must carefully examine our
sentences, and make sure that all our modifying words and phrases are positioned so it is clear
to our readers what they apply to. It is another essential task for our critical eye.
Are the Sentences in the Right Voice?
Sentences can be written in either the active voice or the passive voice. Active voice
sentences are structured so that the subject acts, taking whatever action the verb describes.
In a passive sentence, the sentence’s subject is acted upon.
Active Voice
The technician adjusted the dosimeter’s sensitivity.
Passive Voice
The dosimeter’s sensitivity was adjusted by the technician.
Both sentences are perfectly acceptable from a grammatical standpoint. Many writers feel that
the active voice is a stronger and more effective approach. First, it requires less words. Note
that the active voice sentence above has six words and the passive one has eight. In addition,
the active voice has a very natural flow. Something did something. It is clear and unambiguous. It also provides a sense of responsibility. We know who did the action. With the passive
voice the sense of responsibility is sometimes lost.
The durability test requirements were not met.
But what didn’t meet them? We don’t know from the passive construction. An active voice
sentence will answer our questions.
The prototype connector did not meet the durability test requirements.
Or
The prototype connector failed the durability test.
Writing For Success: An Engineer’s Guide – Volume 2
There are, however, plenty of situations where the passive voice is exactly what is needed.
Take the sentence we looked at before. Do we care whether the technician, or even what
specific technician, performed the adjustment of the dosimeter’s sensitivity? All that is important may be whether it was adjusted or not. The fact that it was done by a technician, or by
Ms. Jones, the specific technican, is not important. The passive expresses that very clearly.
The dosimeter’s sensitivity was adjusted.
And in describing electronics circuitry, the passive construction offers a way to look at what
happens to a signal as it is processed.
Signal S1 is amplified, and then routed to thermal resistor TR1.
The passive construction focuses our attention on the signal and what happens to it. So, we
shouldn’t shun the passive. We need to understand the difference between the active and
passive and decide which voice does the best job for our readers.
Are Any Sentences Too Long? Too Short?
Long sentences are complicated. They usually involve multiple thoughts and employ a variety
of modifiers. Proper punctuation is challenging. They are difficult to write well and are difficult
for our readers to follow. If a sentence seems long, and especially if a number of them appear
to be that way, we need to consider replacing it with two or more shorter sentences that
convey the same overall information.
A single long sentence (29 words)
The forward avionics unit, housed in Auxiliary Bay 3, consists of a scanner; an amplification
unit; a signal ratio board, commonly known as a SRB; and a latching circuit.
Two shorter sentences (27 words)
The forward avionics unit is housed in Auxiliary Bay 3. It consists of a scanner, an amplification unit, a signal ratio board (SRB), and a latching circuit.
Good writing has a rhythm, and too many short and very short sentences will result in a choppiness that irritates readers and distracts them from the content in our writing. So as we
shorten our sentences, we must avoid giving our writing the cadence of a first grader’s reading
primer. A good strategy is to balance short and medium length sentences, using long ones only
when absolutely necessary.
Writing For Success: An Engineer’s Guide – Volume 2
17
18
Paragraphs: Making Sure Our Subsystems Are Effective
Let’s consider the subsystems of our writing, our paragraphs. Paragraphs are groupings of
sentences that share a thought or idea relative to the subject we are writing about. Paragraphs
can be as short as a single sentence. They can also be very long, and a few experimental
writers have even written entire novels composed of a single paragraph. Long paragraphs
appear on the page as huge blocks of text, and can be intimidating and difficult to read. Short
paragraphs will help our readers, offering them “bite size” information that can be easily read,
grasped, and absorbed before moving on to the next idea or step in the progression.
When we review our paragraphs, we want to ensure that the sub-subsystems are functioning
effectively within these subsystems. Again, we should ask ourselves certain questions, as we
review and test these larger elements of our writing.
Do the Tenses Make Sense?
As writers, we use three tenses: the past, the present, and the future. When we use them
correctly, we give our readers a clear picture of when the actions described took place, or will
take place. When we use them incorrectly, our readers will be lost in time, unsure of the order
of events past and future. We switch tenses when the times we are describing change. We
need to make sure that our readers recognize these switches. In most cases, we will find it
best to keep to one tense as we write sentences and paragraphs.
MIXED TENSE
The security office is working on changes to the rules so when engineering personnel left
classified documents on their computers, they lost log on privileges.
SINGLE TENSE
The security office is working on changes to the rules so that engineering personnel who
leave classified documents on their computers will lose their log on privileges.
MIXED TENSE
I went into the wind tunnel building, and the next thing that I see is smoke rising from the
control console.
SINGLE TENSE
I went into the wind tunnel building, and the next thing that I saw was smoke rising from
the control console.
Sometimes it will be necessary to change tense, even within a sentence. Our job will be to
include enough clues that our readers understand these changes.
The automatic shut down controls shorted out last week, so, currently, we are using extra
care while operating at high voltage levels.
Writing For Success: An Engineer’s Guide – Volume 2
Much engineering writing can be written in the present tense. As you will note in the examples
below, even future actions can be expressed using the present tense.
We plan to conduct field tests next year.
The project manager expects to have a kick off meeting in September.
Are the Moods Mixed?
We all experience moods, good ones and not-so-good ones. I try to stay keenly alert to the
moods of my spouse and our children, as well as those of my boss and co-workers. Good
moods make life easier. Bad moods spell trouble.
Writing has its own moods. Verbs are assigned three moods that we might remember from
our English classes long ago: the indicative, the imperative, and the subjunctive. Most of our
writing will be in the indicative. It signifies straight forward writing, statements of fact and
questions. If we write procedures and instructions, we may use the imperative. Sometimes
called the command form, it is very common in step-by-step instructions. The subjunctive
expresses wishes, suppositions and situations that are counter to fact. Most of us will seldom
use it in our engineering writing.
The following sentences are all written in the indicative mood.
Differential and common-mode filters are not used in the power management circuit.
How long will it take for the input capacitor to drain?
Digital RF circuits may create transient spectral phenomena over the bandwidth.
Note that positive sentences, negative sentences and questions are all written in the indicative
mood.
The following sentences are written in the imperative mood.
Touch the tip of the probe to the secondary winding of the transformer.
Securely attach the power supply base to the mounting pins on the side of the heat sink.
Note that the subject of each sentence is implied. In one case, it is the reader who will touch
the winding with the oscilloscope probe; and in the other, a technician who will attach the
power supply to the heat sink. Readers understand that sentences written this way are
directed at them, telling them what they must do. That is why the imperative mood is also
sometimes called the command form.
The following sentence is written in the subjunctive mood.
If I were managing this project, I would rely completely on automated testing.
But the writer is not managing the project, probably never will, and the sentence offers a
hypothetical situation; thus, it is written in the subjunctive.
Writing For Success: An Engineer’s Guide – Volume 2
19
20
The important thing to remember in our writing is to avoid switching between moods, unless
it is absolutely necessary to express our point. Readers will be challenged by the switch, and
find it jarring and confusing.
The paragraph below contains two sentences in the indicative, and two that are in the imperative mood. The jump between moods forces readers to change their focus, making them lose
the sense of a consistent point of view.
After four hours without a result, the test cycle must be terminated. This operation
requires a trained technician. Open the equipment doors. The RF generator controls
are visible on the right side of the panel. Push the red Emergency Stop button.
We can correct this by changing everything to the indicative mood.
After four hours without a result, the test cycle must be terminated. This operation
requires a trained technician who must open the equipment doors and locate the RF
generator controls which will be visible on the right side of the panel. The technician
then pushes the Emergency Stop button to end the cycle.
We may also correct it by switching everything to the imperative mood.
Terminate the test cycle after it has run for four hours with no result.
1. Open the equipment doors.
2. Locate the RF generator controls which should be visible on the right side of the panel.
3. Push the red Emergency Stop button.
4. Ensure that the test cycle has been terminated.
The point is, we can help our readers by maintaining a consistent mood.
Does the Writing Flow?
The sentences within a paragraph must have a flow, a sequencing that allows readers to
smoothly and seamlessly move from one thought to the next. Our paragraphs should also
flow smoothly, one after another, making it easy for our readers to understand our messages,
even the complex ones. We want our readers to absorb the information in each sentence and
then be propelled forward, into the next ones. That movement, in writing, is achieved through
Be Prepared.
transitions.
- Boy Scout Motto
The key to creating a smooth journey for our readers is to have a logical progression of ideas.
When our thoughts are closely related, one building on another, our readers should have little
difficulty following our writing. That movement is aided by our use of transitional words and
phrases to signal our readers, and to help them understand how the different ideas in our
writing are related, as they progress from sentence to sentence.
Writing For Success: An Engineer’s Guide – Volume 2
There are many words and phrases that can help readers understand these relationships and
establish smooth transitions. Here are some examples.
To denote the addition of information – additionally, furthermore, finally, as well
To denote comparison – similarly also, just as
To show contrast – nevertheless, however, even though
To indicate a connection in time – after, next, meanwhile, immediately
To show location relationships - beneath, beyond, alongside
There are many approaches that will result in smooth transitions between thoughts and ideas,
helping our readers move from sentence to sentence, and paragraph to paragraph. As we read
our drafts, we need to make sure that we have designed the writing well, and used transitional
words and phrases that bridge the gaps and help our readers move along.
Are the Road Signs in the Right Places?
Punctuation marks are visual cues that guide our readers as they wend their way through
our thinking. A period signals that a thought has concluded. A comma gives us the slightest
pause, time to digest the relationships of clauses, modifiers, and other sentence elements.
A colon lets us know that a list is on its way. A question mark makes sure we realize that
something is being asked. An exclamation mark tells us to sit up and take notice. A semi-colon
warns us that the relationships are complex and need to be understood. Apostrophes alert us
to contraction or possession.
When we have the right punctuation marks in the right places, our readers are given help as
they navigate through the complexities of our message. Good punctuation aids them in seeing
relationships and digesting thoughts and ideas. Like road signs that warn us of upcoming
hairpin curves and intersections, the small punctuation symbols will help our readers avoid
mishaps, and keep them on the road to understanding.
On the other hand, poor punctuation will confuse readers and lead them astray. Too many
commas will make the writing seem disjointed. Too few will force readers to work unnecessarily hard at deciphering our intent. A period placed where a question mark is needed will leave
readers lost, shaking their heads because of the confusing road sign.
We can ease the task of getting our punctuation correct by writing relatively simply and directly.
Using short sentences, and avoiding complex modifying phrases and clauses, will greatly
reduce the number of required punctuation marks, and eliminate the need for some of the
more troublesome ones.
I am not always absolutely sure about the punctuation in my own writing and, when I have
a question, I consult one of the quick reference and style books on my desk, or the many
resources available online. A list of some excellent references is included in the Notes section
of the book.
Writing For Success: An Engineer’s Guide – Volume 2
21
22
Does It Read Well?
One of the best ways to determine if our writing has a good flow is to read it aloud. Reading
what we have written, or parts of what we have written, tests the rhythm of the language.
If we find ourselves having trouble as we do this, if we stammer, get bogged down, or are
brought to a screeching halt by a word or sentence, it is a sign that something is not as well
written as it could be. There are many possible causes. Weak transitions, the words and links
that move our thoughts from one subject or idea to another, are often the culprits. Poor word
choices, overly long sentences, repetitiveness, and other writing maladies will also become
evident as we read the passages aloud. I sometimes feel silly doing this, recalling how hard I
struggled, as a child, to master the art of reading silently without moving my lips. But listening
to the sound of the language we have created is an excellent test, one that can reveal an array
of elusive problems, big and small.
Writing For Success: An Engineer’s Guide – Volume 2
The End Game
23
W
e have looked at a number of questions to ask ourselves as we review our writing, going
over it again and again to improve it by revising and rewriting. This iterative process is
work, have no doubt about that. It takes time and effort. But slowly we reform and reshape
the writing, revising what we have done, rewriting sentences, sections, even whole chapters,
adding new information, strengthening our arguments, providing needed detail, cutting the
chaff, and polishing the writing until it is as smooth and compelling as possible. Finally, the
end is in sight. We fine check everything, making sure that punctuation and spelling are correct, and prepare for others to read what we have written.
Second Eyes and More
Engineers know proof tests. Originally, they were used by firearms, makers to prove that their
pistols, revolvers, rifles and even cannons, would safely fire. A weapon that passed its proof
test was stamped with a proof mark. Now many products and systems are given proof tests.
Rocket propellant tanks are proofed at high pressures to ensure no flaws occurred during manufacture. Tensile tests are used on optical fiber used in communication systems to eliminate
any weak spots. These tests stress the product or system and seek to uncover any weakness.
We proof test our writing by asking others to read it, to use their critical eyes to uncover any
flaws and weak spots that our own have missed. Done informally, this simply means asking
a friend or colleague to read what we have written and give us an opinion. The best test is,
of course, readings by colleagues who are familiar with the subject matter and the intended
audience. They will be able to tell if our writing will engage that audience and provide them
with the needed information and insight. Their knowledge of the writing’s subject matter will
allow them to spot errors in fact, omission, and emphasis. There is no better test than having a
knowledgeable colleague look over our writing to ensure its effectiveness.
Even readers with little or no knowledge of our scientific and technical subject matter can
provide valuable assistance by reviewing what we have written. As writers, we go over the
material so many times that our eyes begin to see what our mind tells us is on the page, and
not necessarily what is really there. We may miss small errors, an omitted word, a misspelling,
a switch in verb tense. Reviewers, even non-technical ones, see the material freshly, and will
not be blinded by our familiarity. Although they may not understand the complex concepts that
reside in our content, they will recognize grammar errors, missing punctuation, repetitiveness,
overly long sentences, wordiness, lapses in logic, organizational flaws, and a host of other
problems we were unable to see.
Very often the process of proof testing our writing is formalized. Important correspondence
with clients or vendors may be routed to supervisors or managers for their review and approval.
Larger companies will have publications departments where external documents are carefully
edited and prepared for release. Proposals will have rigidly structured review cycles with
teams of readers who go through them page by page, offering criticism and suggestions.
Instructions and procedures are tested for their effectiveness and usability, ensuring they will
lead the intended readers to success. These documents undergo Beta Tests, validations, and
verifications, just as an electrical, mechanical or software products do.
Writing For Success: An Engineer’s Guide – Volume 2
24
Some writing receives specialized reviews. Instructions may be routed to safety engineers, to
ensure no readers are put in jeopardy by what has been written. Proposals may be reviewed
by legal specialists to be certain the organization isn’t at risk, if the terms are accepted and
become contractual obligations. Reports destined for readers outside an organization may
be reviewed to ensure that no intellectual property rights, proprietary information, or other
sensitive data is released or compromised. Organizations may have other reviews to ensure
that writing that represents the organization meets all of its standards and specifications.
As writers, we will get comments back from these reviewers. Our job is then to take the
good advice and incorporate it into the next or final draft of our writing. In many cases, these
revisions will be quite easy. A few misspellings and punctuation errors are corrected. Some
sentences are reworded, and several clarifying phrases are added. Sometimes it is more
difficult, and entire sections will need to be reorganized and rewritten. In almost every case,
the effort, whether small or large, will result in a much improved final draft, a piece of writing
that will be effective and successful.
Thanks (But No Thanks) for the Advice
Sometimes the advice we get may be off the mark. A reviewer might ask that a comma be
added where none is required; or that a semi-colon be removed, where it is really needed.
Another reviewer may find a section unclear, and ask that it be expanded with more data and
background information, when we know the intended audience will need none of that. It is
easy to fall into the trap of making every change that is suggested, especially in formalized
review processes, even though some of them may actually weaken the writing. As engineers
and writers, we have a commitment to creating products of the highest quality, ones that we
have every reason to believe will function successfully. If we know that a reviewer’s suggested change is not needed, or even wrong, we should not make that change. Obviously, if a
health and safety specialist asked that we add certain cautions and warning to a report or set of
instructions, we will include them, even if they may seem timid to us. However, if that same
safety engineer suggested that an apostrophe be added to show the possessive nature of
“its,” we will be on firm ground ignoring that advice.
Most editorial reviews, both formal and informal, are done online, using comments, notes and
“track changes” features to suggest changes and corrections. Many of these have “accept
change” and “reject change” features that allow us to control the final document. For significant changes, especially if the suggestions come from someone with expertise in that area,
or managers or executives responsible for our efforts, our best strategy is to contact those
reviewers and explain why we are concerned that their suggestions may not be appropriate
for the situation at hand. They may see our point, or be able to help us understand why their
suggestions are appropriate and necessary. Either way, the result will help ensure an effective
and successful document.
Writing For Success: An Engineer’s Guide – Volume 2
Test and Retest: The Road to Excellence
G
ood writing comes from hard, diligent work. Engineers understand what that means in
their profession. In writing, that effort means giving our writing a close reading and testing
it in every way. As in our engineering efforts, these tests are conducted to identify problems.
And when problems are found, we must then develop effective solutions. With writing, these
tests involve using our critical eye to detect any aspects of our writing that are unclear, wordy,
vague, inaccurate, missing, or unneeded. We understand the purpose of our writing and read
it, edit, rewrite and reread it, until we are sure it accomplishes that purpose as directly and effectively as possible.
Our critical eye also seeks to uncover any errors in punctuation, grammar and spelling. Small
errors in any of these areas will stand out for many of our readers. They can slow readers
down and cause them to think about some arcane grammar rule, rather than the point that
you are trying to make. We want our readers’ focus to remain on our content, not on our poor
spelling or word choices. And, even more important, lapses in these fundamental elements of
good writing will make our readers question the quality of our arguments, the attention to detail
in the recommendations we made, the commitment to high standards that can be expected in
our proposal. Correcting mistakes and honing our writing towards perfection will demonstrate
our commitment to the highest standards, and give increased credibility and persuasiveness to
the messages in our writing.
As we develop our critical eye, testing our writing, rewriting, and testing it again, we follow a
process that gradually improves our writing, and gives us confidence that it will perform its mission successfully. It is the road to writing excellence.
Writing For Success: An Engineer’s Guide – Volume 2
25
26
Coming Up
T
he third volume of this series, The End Products of Engineering Writing, looks at some
other aspects of engineering writing, and focuses on achieving success with reports,
specifications, proposals, procedures, and other documents that engineers routinely create.
Writing For Success: An Engineer’s Guide – Volume 2
Notes
27
The power supply acceptance test that was described was performed at International
Rectifier’s facility in El Segundo, California. The unit was slated for use in a test facility
described in “A Plasma Arc Jet Test Facility for Extra-Terrestrial Atmospheric Entry Studies,”
JPL TM 33-42, 1971. The simulator was used with the M1 Abrams tank and was part of
the Multiple Integrated Laser Engagement System (MILES) program developed by Xerox
Electro-Optical Systems. The landing gear test was performed on a B1 bomber aircraft,
and was conducted at the Palmdale facility of the North American Aviation division of the
Rockwell Corporation.
Diane E. Miller’s three part article, Communicating in Spite of TLAs (Three-Letter Acronyms),
provides a practical and insightful look at how we use and misuse abbreviations, symbols and
acronyms in engineering and technical communication (Intercom, January 1996 pp. 12-13, 37,
February 1996 pp. 10-12, and March 1996 pp 10-11. Thoughts on Curtailing Words, by David
Fredericks (Intercom April 2000 pp. 12-13), points out that rules about acronym usage are far
from absolute. Numerous online sites (examples include http://www.acronymfinder.com/,
http://askacronym.com/, and http://www.abbreviations.com/) allow visitors to look up the
meaning of acronyms and abbreviations from nearly any field.
There are a number of excellent online and print resources where we can quickly find answers
to our punctuation, grammar and usage questions. I keep a copy of Diane Hacker’s A Pocket
Style Manual (Bedford/St. Martins-2009) at my desk. It is spiral bound and allows me to very
rapidly find solutions to most of the writing mechanics problems that I run into. There are
several other similarly styled, and equally good, quick references on the market. I just like this
one because I am used to it.
I also can find answers quickly on the Internet and that path is often as fast, or faster, than
using a reference book. But I try to use only sites that I trust as some of the answers that pop
up as results of a quick search for writing questions can be off the mark. There are a number
of excellent online and print resources where we can quickly find answers to our punctuation,
grammar and usage questions.
One of the best online references is Purdue University’s Online Writing Lab (OWL). It is
designed for student use and is a rich trove of information on writing. Although it focuses on
academic writing and citation systems, it provides excellent insights on all aspects of good
writing.
Mechanics http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/section/1/4/
Grammar : http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/section/1/5/
Punctuation: http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/section/1/5/
Exercises: http://owl.english.purdue.edu/exercises/
Writing For Success: An Engineer’s Guide – Volume 2
28
At the National Punctuation Day website ( http://nationalpunctuationday.com), clicking on the
image of a punctuation mark brings up the rules for and examples of its use.
Another excellent online resource is the Blue Grammar Book: http://www.grammarbook.
com. The site offers information on grammar, punctuation, spelling, vocabulary, and confusing
words. It is also available as a book: The Blue Book of Grammar and Punctuation: An Easy-toUse Guide with Clear Rules, Real World Examples, and Reproducible Quizes, by Jane Strauss,
Jossey-Bass, 2007.
An amusing look at semicolons, what they term the most feared punctuation mark on earth, is
provided in a cartoon format online by The Oatmeal (http://theoatmeal.com/comics/apostrophe).
The site also offers equally humorous looks at spelling (Ten Words You Need to Stop
Misspelling - http://theoatmeal.com/comics/misspelling) and the apostrophe (How to Use an
Apostrophe - http://theoatmeal.com/comics/apostrophe).
There are many in depth reference books available. I like Merriam Webster’s Guide to
Punctuation and Style (Merriam-Webster -2002), Random House Webster’s Pocket Grammar,
Usage and Punctuation (Random House Reference – 2001), and The McGraw Hill Handbook
of Grammar and Usage (McGraw Hill -2004) are all excellent volumes.
As we looked at paragraphs and paragraph length, I noted that several contemporary novelists
have written entire books in a single paragraph. The 160 page novel Dancing Lessons for the
Advanced in Age, by Czech writer Bohamil Hrabal, (NYRB Classics -2011) unfolds in a single
sentence. Chilean writer Roberto Bolaño has received a great deal of acclaim. His 130 page
novel By Night in Chile (New Directions – 2003) is composed of only two sentences. A list
of other single paragraph and single sentence novels can be found at Conversational Reading
(http://conversationalreading.com/one-paragraph-andor-one-sentence-books-an-ongoing-list/).
I doubt that any of them make for easy reading.
In Designing an Effective Review Process (Intercom, July/August 2006 18-21), Geoffrey J.S.
Hart describes the various stages of document review and editing, starting with our own selfreview as authors and eventually to sign-off and release. He sees it as a process that is not
easy, but one that offers remarkable payback. Michelle Corbin, Pat Moell, and Mike Boyd’s
article Technical Editing as Quality Assurance: Adding Value to Content (Technical Communication, August 2002, pp. 286-297) looks at the value added during a review process.
Writing For Success: An Engineer’s Guide – Volume 2
2001 L Street, NW, Suite 700 • Washington, D.C. 20036-5104
+1 202 785 0017 • www.ieeeusa.org
www.ieeeusa.org/communications/ebooks