atw: Re: Is it just me ?[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
- From: "Terry Dowling" <Terrence.Dowling@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 18:03:49 +0800
Hi ya Neil,
All good points - as expected. One issue I would have with 'safing' a
firearm is knowing whether they mean place it in a gun safe or to apply
the safety catch. My policy is that if there's ambiguity, especially for
those whose first language might not be English, change it.
As you say, using known terminology, even though it might be jargon,
could be the best alternative for the target audience. However, when it
comes to aircraft safety, I'd much rather they broke a
sentence-length-rule if it made the instructions absolutely clear,
rather than ambiguous.
I do object to using ambiguous terms when there are much more plainly
understood alternatives available. How difficult would it be to say
'make safe' or 'secure' instead of using 'safety' as a verb?
I know your argument is that those in the industry know what it means,
but at some point they must have been told/trained in this special use
of a standard English term. A step not required if they use normal
language.
Cheers,
Terry
From: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Neil Maloney
Sent: Tuesday, 4 December 2012 10:03 AM
To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: atw: Re: Is it just me ?[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Terry,
It's always good when there's a bit of disagreement, that just helps me
make sure the thinking cap is on which isn't always the case (even
though I do my best to think first and write afterwards).
The method used to "safety" something needs to be part of the
instruction. Going back to the example I grabbed from a client
maintenance manual, it says "Safety the drain valve, on the reservoir,
with a lockwire." So we know to use a lockwire, but note that this
doesn't describe how to pass the lockwire through the valve to the
safety point and that the same thing is true in Peter's original post,
where the STE example given is "Safety the turnbuckle" (which appears to
also be by wire, although that's not specifically mentioned). By having
a very quick look in the Internet, I can see there are at least four
methods of safetying a turnbuckle: double wrap (spiral), double wrap,
single wrap (spiral) and single wrap. Fascinating stuff, eh?
So is the instruction to "safety the turnbuckle" adequate? I dunno, it
depends. If, in the maintenance organisation that our hypothetical
manual is for, they always and only use a double wrap (spiral), then
there is no need to add that in ... it all goes back to the first basics
of procedural writing, trust I'm making sense here.
So I reckon that "how to safety something" is separate from what has
been being discussed as to whether we should or should not be using the
word "safety" as a verb (certainly, to my way of thinking, not outside
of aerospace, although if it is a common term for making firearms safe,
fair enough but the examples I've seen use the word "safing"). "How to"
instructions always need to be added in as appropriate to the target
audience and the task.
I'm comfortable that you, and I'm sure others on the list, don't regard
"safety" (verb) as being industry terminology in aviation. My question,
however, is how long and how widely does a term need to be used before
it starts being "terminology" in our minds instead of "jargon", keeping
in mind that a quick definition of "jargon" that I've grabbed from
thefreedictionary.com is:
"The specialized or technical language of a trade, profession, or
similar group."
... by which definition, if you are writing procedures for a trade,
profession or similar group, why wouldn't you use their "technical
language"?
If Peter's information is correct that "the term has a history as a verb
going back to at least 1927" (surprised me it's been around so long,
thanks Peter), then we have 85 years of usage, and to my best
understanding the usage is currently worldwide. So is it "terminology"
or is it "jargon" and, indeed, does is the difference (if there is any
in this situation) of any significance?
I'm staying out of the question of "the number of words/letters
difference required to make the sentence clearer". While I posted STE
"rules" from Wikipedia, that was a feeble attempt to get any continuing
conversation onto the track of using the STE system, are there benefits
from using those rules or not, rather than focusing on the
aerospace-specific dictionary, which dictionary is not applicable to
other fields. I tend to write what I write and if I go back over it
later and it looks to long or unclear, I revise it, that's the "system"
I use. But if anyone ever wants to pay me by the word, I might suddenly
find that the clearest way to express "safety the drain valve" is to
write a 50-word sentence.
Neil.
On 4/12/2012 12:11 PM, Terry Dowling wrote:
Hi Neil and all,
Thanks Neil for pointing out that the site is specifically
aero-focussed. I'm still a little concerned that there might be such
phrases in the aero industry that appear fairly ambiguous.
How many methods of safetying are there? Just one? Then it's ok.
But if there are several such as a lanyard wire, safety clip, split
pins, locking grub screw, lock nut... then I'd prefer that be made clear
to people working on craft I fly on.
I see one of the original uses of safety as a verb is to safety
a rifle. Is a safety catch one of the methods available on aircraft?
safety
transitive verb
safe*tied, safe*ty*ing
Definition of SAFETY
: to protect against failure, breakage, or accident <safety a
rifle>
I have to disagree with you (an extremely rare occurrence) when
you say "it's specific terminology and not jargon". I would've thought
that making normal words industry-specific terminology is part of the
definition of jargon. 'Aileron' would be specific terminology.
BTW, I also disagree with you and Allan (also rare) on the
number of words/letters difference required to make the sentence
clearer. "Safety the fastener" doesn't need to become "the fastener must
be safety wired" but more simply "safety wire the fastener". Or, in
reverse, "the fastener must be safety wired" becomes "the fastener must
be safetied". Much smaller differences.
Cheers,
Terry
From: Neil Maloney
* Restrict the length of noun clusters to no more than 3 words
* Restrict sentence length to no more than 20 words (procedural
sentences) or 25 words (descriptive sentences)
* Restrict paragraphs to no more than 6 sentences (in
descriptive text)
* Avoid slang and jargon while allowing for specific terminology
... and it's the last one that the use of "safety" as a verb
falls into. In aerospace, it's specific terminology and not jargon.
Outside of aerospace, it's jargon and shouldn't be used.
************************************************** To view the
austechwriter archives, go to www.freelists.org/archives/austechwriter
To unsubscribe, send a message to austechwriter-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
with "unsubscribe" in the Subject field (without quotes). To manage your
subscription (e.g., set and unset DIGEST and VACATION modes) go to
www.freelists.org/list/austechwriter To contact the list administrator,
send a message to austechwriter-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
**************************************************
Other related posts:
